NAYta

FINITEELEMENTS
"
>.....-
~DE
1 Stv1fX:G'N
TABB
I

~
1.
'- ..../
A SIMPLE SUIDE TO FINITE ELEMENTS
bv D. R. J, OWEN and E. HINTON, Department of Civil Engineering, University
Col/ege, Swensee, U.K.
I~
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
~ 11
This book provides the absolute beginner with a brief introduction to the finite
':( element rnethod. Steady stats heat flow in a eylinder is eonsidered using linear Z !
'--" one and two dimensional elements. Ali eomputational details are ineluded and a
-l
cr useful FORTRAN program is provided. The further applications of the torsion of
prismatic bars and groundwater f,1?ware also considered. rn
:{ Approx. 150 pages, , 980, Q-906674-<l~2
rn
r-
a AN INTRDDUCTlON TO FINITE ELEMENT COMPUTATIONS
by E. HINTON end D. R. J. OWEN, õepertment of Civil Engineering, University
rn' ~J-i._-;'~
L-LJ -+ .i{).L.L_Ll_~_J~
t~1_LL1_~
Ci) Col/ege,Swensee, UX.
~ k~' P ~/' ,/ .\ , ~I
rn IT
~._-,:)---?- / b i I 1
C! This book oflers a basic introduction to the finite element method. Alter a
detailed Introduction into th~ numerical analysis of diserete systems, such as
Z ~
!3'''o,Z'
O -o., / \ . I

frameworks, consideration is given to the solution of some one-dimensional P"',"< ''O_..J'./'\ 'Q,
'-
.~,,-----
I
..__ .. -<:------_._ ..
.
_--)1I
r{ problems using variational and weighted residual finite element methods. Two
dimensional finite elements are Introdueed and used to solve problems
~ , tf' \ -:-.:Jo • !.
r· IY . 'b G·i·
~ •.•.... J. I ,j
\(
associated with heat and fluid flow. the torsion of prismatie bars and other stress
analysis applieations. Other to pies eonsidered Include : numerieally integrated z I '~'J)), T I )1
r >. isoparametrie elsrnents. the flnite strip method, advaneed equation solvers and
\otvJr~-<)-}--
\(
c
ç
mesh generation schemes. Computer programs, written in FORTRAN, and
worked examples are included for ali applieations.

This book, which treats a potentially difficult subjeet in a straightforward and

readable manner, should be of interest in the elessroom, for private study or as a
o.
C\ -I- -;~
($ "v-..... I
:ê''Q P
,-( " x; '9
Q O
:......}
-----v~
?
I;'
J
I'
I
i
I
~~"-----'-")~

I,
I
11
Ç'j

c,
professional refaranea. Engineering graduates and under-graduates as well as
Qu.II~.d .ngln •• ,. wlll flnd lhe Itlf·contaln.d IIXt I uaeful inlioductlon to finit.
~
rro·.. t\.,).:Y' }~F/ -~"__
7 -.- ....,,----
I
I
11
elernents espeelally as tha mathematies is kept to a falrly elementary leveI.
?\ .!l,'
.R.':.cr--G'
't,
»<!
I
I I ,)- .. _
.~-"-.
__.__ ,i
(
Approx. 400 pages, 1980, Q-906674-<l6-9
I h.
l}
\.
;-, /
}~
'\ Ç:.! -~--._~
FINITE ELEMENTS IN PLASTICITY: THEORY ANO PRACTICE Z W \ /iJ"à ! I li
( by D. R. J. OWEN and E. HINTON, Department of Civil Engineering, University n' :t":'--<:>---~'
1 \
.
"\.,'
/ I1

~
Col/ege, Swensee, U.K.

This text describes the application of the finite element method to the solution of
»
r-
!
.1
i~
!f
\
\
q
"\~'
/""
/
)i,
-.
-,
I
,
I .,. "~o
~,
elasto-plastic problems, The essentlal steps in the numerical solution of such
nonlinear problerns are introduced by the enalysis of one-dimensional axial bar rn .
11 \,/,j.
\ /''-
I

I I
& systems. The theory Is then generallsed to the case of a continuum and particular
expressions are derived for the two-dimensional situations of plane stres.s/strain
and axial svrnrnetrv, Elasto-plastie plate bending problems are also considered.
Z
C\
~.--..._-o----q
li \
I"
. '..

L The important topie otthe elasto-viscoplastie behaviour of solids is then treated

and detailed expressions provided for both explicit and impllcit time integration Z
I

~ schemes. Finally the dynamie translent analysis of solids in which plasticity rn

eflects are present is undertaken and special reference is made to seismic load
conditions. For each application complete FORTRAN computer codes are
rn
~ devalopad and doeumant.d In dll.lI, Th••• programa ar. both flaxlbla and /O
effieient and have potential usage in commercial as well as teaching and
rasaarch anvironrnents. Z
Approx. 600 pages, 1980, Q-906674-<l5-2 C\
D J NAYLOR
PINERIDGE PRESS LTD., 91 WESTCROSS LANE, SWANSEA, U.K.
G. N. PANDE
+
<[
{ B. SIM'PSON
f PlNERlfXjE
PRESS R. TABB
({
{(
,_ ..:!-.- I
!.
::;::::: > (, ,-~ ~ • ~'"" ,.:z40Ji:ê:a~iJ:tC::A i:tLJ..5;.:ua,d.t:t .. ~·.~;;:,l •.ii.C, I. ~!ft, ---;';i:-~

~
.(
(
'..J
(
',~
(
,( Finite Elements
.
:( zn
(
'~

Geotechnical Engineering
~
\{
i(
(f~ D. J. Naylor and G. N. Pande
\(
~U~-1<v(e- Department of Civil Engineering, University Col/ege 01Swansea, U.K.
v
\ NQ.STP~~moi.t. ~ with chapters contibuted by
B. Simpson and R. Tabb
\
\
''{

\
(
''-'
(
'J

~
.(
~,

( 1981
'-'
1\
'-'
J.
« PINERIDGE
Swansea. U.K.
PRESS

J
J.
.J
\.(
'-..(,

--{

'-\
--r-----'· -----.- ."-~------
(
("-. .:

(
lb
L PREFACE
é
~
,{
v
In January, 1978, a short course, titled as this book, was
~ First Published, 1981 by run under the auspices of the Institute for Numerical Methods
1. Pineridge Press Limited in Engineering in the Civil Engineering oepartment at Swansea.
91, West Cross Lane, West Cross, Swansea, U.K.
It was aimed at practising engineers, and these accounted for
({ most of its participants. It appeared that there was a clear
ISBN 0-906674-11-5
need for such courses to provide information to help engineers
Cê. Copyright C> 1981 by Pineridge Press Limited decide whether or not to use the method in geotechnical appli-
C{ cations, and if 50 how. It also became apparent that the scope
of the course had been too wide and that some of the theory had
({ British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data been presented at too advanced a leveI.
(j Naylor, O. J. A 100se bound book of lecture notes had been prepared for
C; Finite elements in geotechnical engineering
the 1978 course. In planning a repeat of the "FEGE" course in
July, 1981, we decided to up-grade ths notes and 50 produce
1. Mechanics, Applied
ç 2. Engineering mathematics
I. Title 11. Pande, G. N.
this book. The scope has besn narrowed by excluding consolid-
ation and dynamic analyses. The topics that are dealt with,
r= 620.101'51'7 TA350
'\ however, are covered more fully than previously. The notes
ISBN0-906674-11-5
\~ have been completely re-written.

This book is therefore aimed primarily at practising geo-

~:
technical engineers, particularly those in soil mechanics but
\.: with provision also for rock mechanicians. Unlike the 1978
,-\ No part of this book may be reporduced,stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or FEGE notes it does not assume attendance at the course. It is
\..':;
otherwise, without the prior written permission ofthe publishers. intended to stand on its own. More ground is covered in cer-
tain areas than could be covered in a short course. This
~
applies particularly in the treatment of non-linear material
G.~ laws where it proved difficult to provide a reasonably explicit
coverage of the relevant theory in a short space. The book has,
\J however, been structured so that the chapters dealing with non-
/-\ linearity (about half the book) can be omitted without preju-
\J
dice to ~he rest of it.
,,\
v
In an effort to keep "our feet on the ground" some out-
Printed and bound in Great Britain by siders were persuaded to assist in ths running of ths 1978 FEGE
Bell and Baln Ltd., C3lasgow course. Recognising the importance of this we are involving
1\
'-.:.- two in the 1981 course, and they have contributed the last two
II chapters to this book. one Df them helped us in 1978 and the
other attended the course. They are Roy Tabb, until recently
(1 a senior engineer with Soil Mechanics Ltd., who has contributed

« chapter 11, and Or. Brian S'impson, project'engineer with Ove

Arup and Partners, who has contributed chapter 12. These
chapters provide feed back from case histories, information
ci vital to a proper Bpplication of the thsories.
u
;{
.r-·,c.~.~
(

"
( .
\, .J (v í í )

(vil
l, We would lik.e to thank. Mr. Czechowsk.i of The Henderson
Busby Partnership (Consulting Engineers) for permission to
(0 include figure (3-10) which is tak.en from finite element
L: analysis'carried out by orie of us in connection with proposed
roadwork.s in north London. The client for this work. is the
CONTENTS
H.E.C.B. division of the Department of Transport. Separate
~oknowlBdgBmBnt! relating to ohapters 11 and 12 are givsn at Page
c the end of thoss chapters. 1. INTRODUCTION
{ Ws would also lik.e to thank Nancy, Ethel, Elisabeth and 1.1 Objectives 1
Felicity, who managed to do ths final t yp íng between t hern in 1.2 Scope 2
(
their "spare" time; also Mrs. Paul who typed the first draft 1.3 Invariants 4
r
r:
of almost the complete book.. Lastly.we must thank our families
for putt1ng up with the 1ntrus1on this book placed on our time
1.4 Rsfsrsncss 9

with them during the last six months. 2. FINITE ELEMENT BASICS 11
( 2.1 Introduction 11
D. J. NAYLOR 2.2 Elements 12
C' G. N. PANDE 2.3 Shape functions 15
2.4 Co-ordinats transformation 17
~
,-
May, 1981. 42.5 Strain-displacement relations 19
l, ~2.6 Strsss-strain relations 20
\
(
\. .,
, --'" 2.7
-'P 2.8
St1ffnessequatibns
Body forces
20
25
\ Preface to second printing
Cl 2.9 Surface tractions 25
( 2.10 Rsfersncss 27
(1 Inevitably a number of errors relating to po1nts of
detail were revealed after the first printing. These have
(: been corrected in the second, otherwise the text has not been 3. GEDTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS 29
( changed.
\....- .• 3.1 Introduction 29
--7> 3.2 Effective stress methods 29
.(
\:...." 3.3 Loadings 40
D. J. NAYLOR 3.4 Init1al stresses 42
Á
'C.;. G. N. PANDE 3.5 Excavation 46
Jan., 1984. 3.6 Fills 51
~ 3.7 References 58
~
,.;
l '* 4.
VARIABLE-ELASTIC STRESS-STRAIN LAWS
4.1 Introduction
59

59
~ 4.2 Si-linear elastic model 61
« 4.3
4.4
K-G model
Hyperbolic model
62
64
C{ 4.5 Comparison of models 65
4.6 Variable elastic or elasto-plast1city?
c{ 4.7 References
66

.,
r:
68

~
ç
\'1 .)

'{
(

\
(
'-.j <, (v í í í )

(ixJ
L Page Page
l ~ 5. ELASTO-PLASTIC ANO ELASTO-VISCO-PLASTIC 8. TECHNIQUES F.DR NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS 149

L STRESS-STRAIN LAWS
5.1 Introduction
69
69
8.1
8.2
Introduction
Classification of techniques
149
149
L 5.2 Basic concepts 71 8.3 Equivalent load methods 150
rl 5.3
5.4
Yield function - specific forms
Oilatancy
75
78
8.4
8.5
Variable st1ffness methods
Assessment of techniques
155
159
t 5.5 Hardening law - specific forms 82 8.6 Referenees 159

« 5.6 Formulation of elasto-plastic stress-

strain law 84
9. SEEPAGE ANALYSIS 161
rr 5.7
5.8
Elasto-visco-plasticity
References
86
91 9.1 Introduetion 161
f' 9.2 Seepage equations 161
9.3 F1nite element diseretization of
)::6. LIMIT THEDREMS ANO THEIR APPLICATION 93
fr- 6.1 Introduction 93 9.4
seepage equation
Computation of veloeities and f10ws
164
167
I( 6.2 Rigid-plastic material 93 9.5 Treatment of free surface boundary 169
(' 6.3
6.4
Corrollaries of the normality principIe
Stress and velocity discontinuities
95
99
9.6
9.7
Examples
Referenees
169
171
ç 6.5 Requirements of a solution to a boundary
value problem 100
ç 6.6 Statically and plastically admissible (SPA)
stress field 101
*10. ANALYSIS
10.1
DF JOINTEO
Introduction
ROCK MASSES 173
173
(í'
6.7 Lower bound theorem 101 10.2 Some characteristies of rocks 173
(- 6.8 Examples of application of the lower 10.3 Oiscontinuities in the rock masses 175
l bound thBorem 102 10.4 Some models of the behaviour of

[: 6.9

6.10
Kinematically admissiblB strain
rate field
Upper bound theorem
105
105
10.5
jointed rock
Generalized plane strain analysis
in rock mechanics
176

185
6.11 ExamplBs of application of the upper 10.6 Effective stress analysis of undrained
~
c 6.12
6.13
bound theorem
ImprovBd solutions
AppIication of the Iimit thBorems to
105
109 10.7
roek masses
References
189
190

~ strain hardening materiaIs 112

SOME CASE HISTORIES (by Roy Tabbl
11 • 193
6.14 References 112
~,
11 .1 Introductfon 193
cL 7. CRITICAL STATE MOOEL 113
11.2
11.3
Lined tunnel with ground freezing
Cantilever retaining wall analysis
193
196
cl 7.1 Introduction 113 11.4 Oil tank on normally eonsolidated deposits 199
7.2 The geometr1c model 114 11.5 Cavern analysis 207
(1 7.3 Hardening law 119 11.6 Aeknowledgements 211
7.4 YieId function 121 11 .7 Referenees 211 '
~ 7.5 Flow ruIe 123
(( 7.6 Streee-etre1n 1nver1ent relet10n 125
12. FINITE ELEMENTS IN OESIGN with particular
7.7 Stress-strain component relation 129
referenee to deep basements in London CIay
V 7.8 Parameter vaIues 132
(by Brian Simpson) 213
~- 7.9 Examples 134
7.10 Conclusions 145 12.1 Introduetion 213
\' 7.11 References 148 12.2 Baek-analysis 214

Q-' continued ••..•.

, .....
'I{

\
(
(
( '<,
(xl
í
\.....' Page

G 12. FINITE ELEMENT IN DESIGN (continued)

C 12.3 Underground car park at the Palace

of Westminster 219 CHAPTER 1
L 12.4
12.5
The work of St. John
A further development
223
226
L 12.6 Use of the finite element method in INTRODUCTION
the design of deep basements 232
l 12.7 Conclusions 239
1.1 Objectives

t 12.8
12.9
Acknowledgements
References
240
241
It must be commonplace now for engineers to find them-
selves in the invidious situation of having to choose between
powerful computing techniques which they do not understand and
conventional hand calculation methods. If they choose the
( former they feel at the mercy, if not of the computer, then of
f the distant figure who programmed it. If they choose the
latter they may be concerned that the analysis takes too long
r or else 1s inadequate. With the continuing reduction in
computing costs even the most conservative are being forced to
f rely on computer analyses. They must take advantage of this.
f How can they decide when to use the computer? And if they do
how can they be satisfied that the output is to be trusted?
f There are two ways. First, and perhaps most important,
(' the compute r analysis must be backed up by the proverbial
back-of-envslope calculation. No sxpsrienced engineer needs
f' telling this. Coupled with this will be his assessment of
ç the computer results against his experience (or perhaps his
prejudices!). The second way is to obtain some understanding
c of what the computer is doing, and this is where this book

L
comes in. A complete understanding will not be practicable
in the case of the more sophisticated analyses such as the
f.e.m., nonetheless a working knowledge which can go a long way
\ to bridging the divide between the "long haired" academic who
(2. writes the programs and the engineer, who is preoccupied with

L such different activities as writing specifications,

obtained. This gap can be bridged at different levels.
can be
The
li more mathamat1cal eho~ld ba abl~ to obte1n e fe1rly completa
understanding of the steps in an analysis such that they could
(~, follow and check (or even write if they had time) the computer
coding. For others the analys1s will be understood in a more
~ general manner. There will be "black boxes". But instead of
0..- the whole analysis being one big black box there will be a
number of small ones and the connections between them will be
understood.
~
l To prov1de eng1neers who have no specialized knowledge of
the mathematical techniques involved with an understanding of
the f.e.m. applied to geotechnical problems 1s therefore a
«- major objective of this book. This 1nvolves first covering
«::
some basics and then show1ng how the f.e.m. can be applied to
f problems which are peculiar to geotechnical applications.

f
(
 (

r 2 3

)
\..'
It is not perhaps widely realized that structural programs may
have been referred to above. These two chapters cover ideal-
izat10ns of the geometry (i.e. the finite elements) and the
be quite unsuitable for geotechnical analysis. Thus a struct- various processes (Chapter 3). They say nothing about tne
I ural program, while it might do for a linear elastic analysis material idealization. The formulations and technique3 apply
l.L
of a loaded footing, would be unable to model an excavation, equally [apart from some minor qualifications) whether the
,\(.:. or a layered fill, or predict excess pore pressures in an un- material is idealized as linear elastic ar non-linear.
drained analysis, or compute the effect of a known pore
( pressure change, or take into account initial stresses, to name The material idealization is central to the next four
the more important geotechnical requirements dealt with in this chapters on non-linear laws and behaviour. Variable elastic-
~ book. 1ty is covered in chapter 4, followed by an introduction to
ri. elasto-plasticity in chapter 5. This provides a foundation
Knowledge and understanding of the theories is not enough. for chapter 7 in which the critica 1 state elastic-plastic model
r[. The art lies in judging when it is appropriate to use them, is described in some detail. Chapter B describes techniques
and then in deciding what values should be assigned to para- for applying these non-linear laws. Chapter 6 is in some
t meters, particularly those defining the stress-strain law. respects a "cuckoo" in this family as it describes the clessica
Q. Skill in this art comes from experience of practical applic- upper and lower bound methods of limit analysis. It has been
eticns. in fliledbeok from case studies. 8aok enelysis of in- included because of the value of ~hese powerful and simple
lS. strumented prototypes is needed. The last two chapters by techniques in providing an independent check on f.e. analyses
practising engineers include some such experience. In them which attempt to simulate a failure condition. It follows
~ a number of case histories are described which illustrate the chapter 5 since it draws on ideas introduced in that chapter.
(j type of problem for which f.e. analysis is appropriate. They
also illustrate how parameter values can be assigned, The Chapter 9 is quite separate. It has been included since
final chapter by Dr. Simpson draws on the wealth of experience the neee for a steady seepage analysis 50 often crops up in
\(
of f.e. analysis of excavations in London clay. He shows how geotechnical work. Whereas hand-sketched flow nets are quite
~. feedback of the measured performance of the structures anal- adequate for homogeneous soil conditions the f.e.m. provides a
ysed has been used to enhance future predictions. Such use cheap and versat11e tool for the more usual mult1-1ayered soil
of the "observational method" (Peck 1969) must be central to configurations. Having only one degree of freedom per node
~
successful application of the f.e.m. in geotechnical engin- the f.e. formulation is one of the simplest. This chapter i9
I~ eering. restricted to steady seepage. It was decided that the rather
\- 1.2 Scope
large subject of transient flow shauld be outside the scope of
this book.
"I It is assumed that the reader 15 versed in conventional Chapter 10 likewise stands on its own as the chapter
'( soil mechanics theory (as taught in civil engineering degree dealing exclusively with rock mechanics applications. Unlike
\...
courses) but that he has only a hazy idea about finite elements. chapter 9. hawever. it does draw on thearies developed ~n the
This should be sufficient for him to recognize that a bar in a preceding chapters.
l
\....i pin-jointed frame is a simple finite elemento If, in addition,
.,\ he is familiar with matrix methods of analysis which would Chapters 11 and 12 have already been mentianed. They form
''--" allow him to set up the simultaneous equat10ns relating nodal the practical bias to balance the 1nevitable theoretical mat-
\
\.....
loads to displacement for the aforementioned pin-jointed frame erial which precedes them. Suffice it to say that withoLt
then he is alI set to make light work of chapter 2. Relatively them this book would be badly unbalanced.
~, recent graduates (within the last two decades?) will be
familiar with such methods. Their mone senior colleagues and The Mohr-Coulamb strength parameters c and ~ (or c' and
\
l_, those having different backgrounds should brush up on matrix ~') feature in much of sails analysis. They imply that if
algebra. [Dnly the basics are required.) yielding accurs it is in the plane containing the major ard
~ minor principal stress. The intermediate principal stress
( Chapter 2 deals with the basics of the f.e. methods. The has no effect, nor [if the material is ~igid plasticl is there
,~
approach has been necessarily selective the criterion being to strain in the intermediate stress directian during yielding.
~ provide the reader with the information needed for the later This candition suits the plane strain case since it would be a
chapters and little more. The more mathematical formulations nuisance to have ta calculate the out-of-plane stress sim~ly
~ have been avoided. Chapter 3 deals with the formulations and to provide infarmation for a yield criterion when it is nct
'.( techniques needed specially for geotechnical applications which atherwise needed. With a Mahr-Coulomb criterian alI pIare
strain analyses can be carried out in terms of the in-plane
1
(

\
(
~. 4 5
1.3.1 Plane strain group
L stresses and strains. Furthermore the general three-dimen-

L sional case can, when plastic yielding is involved, usefully ·be

viewed as a plane strain problem in the 01' 03 plane. "z" is the out of plane direction and suffixes 1 and 2
indicate the major and minor principal stresses. lt 15
(~
With this in mind, and to avoid certain algebraic jungles, assumed that ai ~ 0z ~ O2, and that dEi >, dE2 (dEZ = O).
~ virtually alI the theory has been set up for the plane strain
case. The simplification which this leads to is considered to Stress invariants
~ compensate for a few inconveniences, such as arise when dealing
.'!.. (a + o ) 1
a '2 ( 1-1 )
zL with, e.g. the triaxial testo lt might perhaps be mentioned
here (since it is not mentioned later) that the plane strain
s 2 x y (ai + O2)

~ formulations for the plasticity models (Mohr-Coulomb, critica 1

state, etc.) can be adapted for axi-symmetric and three-dim- od "(0
x
°Y ) 2 + 4.
xy
(ai - O2) ( 1-2)

([ ensional application. The derivations are therefore more

Strain increment invariants
« general than would appear at first sight.

This introduction ends on a technical note by defining dE dE + dE = dE + dE (1-3)

~ certain stress and strain invariants which are u6ed in a number
S X Y 1 2

li of the ensuing chapters. The plane-strain stress invariants dE • .'!.. fedE -dE )2 dy 1
in particular occur repeatedly throughout the book. d 2 x y
+
xy
2 '2 (dE1-dE2) (1-4 )

<i
v. 1.3 lnvariants Note that Ed = JdEd is not, in general, the same as

The components of stress and strain (strictly, the com- equation (1-4) with dE replaced by E.
\( ponents of the stress and strain tensor) depend on the chosen
direction of the coordinate axes. The principal stresses and 0d and dEd are always positive. They are respectively
~ strains on the other hand are invariants. Their values are the diameter and rad1us of the Mohr's circle. See figure (1-1)
'{ unaffected by the choice of reference axes. Other invariants a and 1 dE are the abscissae values of the centres of the
may be defined as functions of the principal values. ln general 5 - s
2
() three independent stress or strain invariants may be defined. Mohr circles.

1 For materiaIs which are isotropic, i.e. whose properties

are the same in alI directions, the stress state and sometimes
~-
also the strain state can usefully be described in terms of
L invariants. By suitable choice of them'simplifications be- t
come possible. Thus in the "K-G" model of chapter 4 very dY;2
~ simple expressions for the elastic moduli are possible by
~ expressing them in terms of two invariants. Even better ex-
"-..'
amples are the Tresca and Von Mises yield criteria each of
,\
'--' which can be expressed in terms of only one invariant (a diff-
erent one in each case, see chapter 5). By contrast these
,~\ same yield cri teria coul~ be expresBed in terms of the 6 in-
J. dependent components of the 3-D stress tensor. I I r I. o I ! r.. I. de:
02 Os O,
Q The invariants defined here are divided into two groups:
the "plane strain" and the "general". lt should be emphas- (a) Stress ( b) Strain increment
J ized that the former are not restricted to plane strain although
they areparticularlyconvenient for that condition. Conversely
~ the latter may be used for the plane strain condition.
J,
Note that compression is positive throughout.
(-.1
Figure 1-1 Mohr's circle repressntation of plane strain
\.(
invariants
V,
(

\
\
(
(
6 7
?
\ The invariants have-been chosen 50 that the work increment
o,
C term dW is given as fo110ws:

L,\ dW = S
T
d! = 01dc1 + 02dc2 °sdcs+Oddcd (1-5 )
,/
0.(
0"0.,,
t

~
L
L 1.3.2 General Group JL--~ ~ •.°2
01 ~ 02 ~ 03 and dE1 ~ dE2 ~ dE3
~
Stress invariants OJ
~
~ o
m
= 1
3
(o +0
xyz
+0 ) = 1 (o
3123
+0 +0 ) (1-6)
Figure 1-2 Invariants as cylindrica1 coordinates in
« o 2 .1[(0 -o )2+(0 -a )2+(0 -o )2+6(, 2+, 2+, 2)J (1-7aJ
stress space
(f q 2 x Y Y z z x xy yz zx
Note that for the triaxia1 stress state (01 > 02 = 03)
(j 1 [I.c -a )2+(0 -a )2+(0 -o )2] (1-7b) 0q=01-03 (and becomes the same as 0d) and e = 30°. 0m and Oq
2122331 are the same as the Cambridge p and q respectively. They are
v: 1 .-1 27J 3)
simp1y related~to certain other invariants which appear in the
technical literature. These are the first stress invariant,
(( 8 = 3' Sln [20 3
(1-8à 11, the second deviatoric stress invariant, J2, the octahedral

q q
mean stress. 0oct, and the octahedral shear stress 'oct.
The relations are as follows:

~.
ç-'

(
t-
where

J
3
c -o

sym.
x m T

c -o
y
xy

o -o
z m
T

r
xz

yz
°m = -

°
q
= 13J2
1
3' I1 = °oct

=
12
~ Toct

The minus sign in equation (1-9l reflects thet 11 is conven-

tional1y defined as the sum of the direct stress components
(1-9 )

(1-10)

20
,( 1 2+03]- using a tension positive convention.
'-..,. or 8 Tan -1 [° - (1-8bl
13
cl (°1-03) A useful relationship exists
principal stresses, as follows:
between em' ° , 8 and the
q
~ ° - 3.3 ° Sin(8 + ~ (i-211T] (1-11 )
0m and 0q' suitably scaled, together with the angle 8, ai m q
~ form cylindrical coordinates in principal stress space. This
is i11ustrated in figure(1-2l. The axis is the 1ine equally (i = 1,2,3l
~ inclined to the 01' 02' 03, axes points on which represent
(l states of equal-all-round stress (01=02=03)' 0q measures Strain increment invariants
the deviation from this and 8 - sometimes referred to as the
ri Lode angle - measures the orientation in the normal or "Pi" dE
V
dE
X
+ dE
Y
+ dE
z
dE
1
+ dE
2
+ dE
3
(1 -12)

« plane.
2
de 2 = - [I de -dE ) + ••• + -2
3
(dy 2 + ••• )] (1-13a)
CI q 9 x Y xy

indicates that the terms repeat with x.y,z cycling, as in

CI equation (1-7a).
([
(
(
C" 8
9
í 1.4 References
Alternatively
~)
LAMBE. T.W. and WHITMAN. R.V. (1969). "Soil Mechanics".
lJ dE:2 =
q9
3. [( de -de )2 + (de: -de: )2 + ( de -de: )2 1
122331
o (1-13b)
Wiley.
r
L PECK. R.B. (1969). Ninth Rankine lecture: "Advantages and
l As with the plane strain group crq and dEq are always
positive. Also the work increment is given by the product of
Limitations of the observational method in applied soil
mechanics". Geotechnique. 19. No.2. 171-187.
the invariants as follows:

L dW = cr T de
-v '\,
= cr de: +o' de: +o oc
112233
= a oc
mv
+ cr de:
qq
(1-14)
C
The Lode angle i9 not involved. This. however. implies that a
C Lode angle defined for the strain increment is the same as
L that defined by equation (1-8).

l Again. note that E:q = r

dEq is not, in general. the same
as equation (1-13) with de: ~eplaced by e:.
(
( 1.3.3 Further comment on invariants

f It will be noted that 0s and 0m are both measures of mean

stress and that 0d and 0q are both measures of deviator stress.
Ít°
( Indeed the numerical va1ues of each pair are ver{ much the
'--0 same. differing by perhaps 10% in a typical case i). This
'( can be useful. For example it may a1low the same parameters
(_ ..
to be used for a mode1 defined 1n terms of 0s and 0d as for
'( e cerraspendina medal dafinad in terms ef 0m end a~.
y
{"o It 1s very helpfu1 to think of stress as cons1sting of
two dominant components: the mean or spher1cal component
~ measured by Os or amo and the dev1ator component measured by
~o

0d or 0g' The third component. e. is of lesser significance.

l; Two welI known properties of soil il1ustrate this: the
strength of soi1 can be expressed as a linear function of
(o these two components (see chapter 5). 50 also can the stiff-

L ness. It will increase with the mean (effective) stress and

reduce with the deviator.
L( F1nally, 1et not the reader be bothered by the rather
G daunting a1gebra associated with e (equation 1-8). It wi1l
not be needed in what follows. It is given here for com-
l plataneaa, end for tha banaf1t ef thoea whe 11Ke te dalve inte
\
\....
these matters.

l
l
l (i)
This was the main reason for depart1ng from certain pre-
( cedents. Thus 0d is preferred to the "q" of Lambe and
Whitman (1969) which is ~ 0d' 5imilarly 0q (the Cambridge
( "q") 1s preferred to Toct.
r
(
(

r'
(,
r
11

~;
H
G CHAPTER 2

L FINITE ELEMENT BASICS

L 2.1 Introduction
L The finite element method now has a very wide range of
L applications. These in addition to structural engineering
include the fields of fluid flow, electricity and magnetismo
l It started with structural applications, and it is ~ith the
([ formulations for relating loads to the displacement of a struc-
ture that we are concerned here. A different formulation is
c required for seepage analysis. This is covered in Chapter 9.
((' The reader familiar with matrix methods for anaIysing
~ structures such as a pin-jDinted frame is half-way to under-
\(
standing the f.e.m. Perhaps more than half-way, because the
~ members Df a pin-jointed frame are simple finite elements.
''('

c The procedure for assembling the stiffness contributions from

the individual members to obtain the coefficients Df the over-
alI stiffness matrix [~) is in principIe the same as when the
\' elements represent an arbitrary subdivision Df a continuum.
r The only difference is that in the latter case (which is the
case Df interest to geotechnical engineers) the stiffness
> matrix cannot be set up by inspection. More formal procedures
are required.
~)

( j
This chapter sets out to explain these procedures. The
;1. conventional 'stiffness' approach is used. (Alternative deri-
vations based on variational caIculus or, e.g., the Galerkin
'-
,( method, are not given both because of the mathematics involved
L and because they are better suited to formulations where the
starting point is a governing differential equation. This is
~ not the case with load-deformation problems, although it is
~ with seepage.)
Q,
Geometric considerations - elements. shape (or interpola-
tion) functions and certain geometric co-ordinate transforma-
'\'- tions - are treated first. The virtual work method is then
used to set up the stiffness equations, and to determine nodal
~
forces equivalent to body forces and surface tractions.
\L
For a more complete treatment of finite element basics the
([ reader is referred in the first instance to two books from the
([ same stable as the principal authors of this volume: the classic
text by Zienkiewicz (1977) now in its third edition, and the
«
(

\,
(
(

( 12 13
ventional elements (there is a compatibility problem at common
~ text by Hinton and Owen (1979). The notation used herein is nodes). They have, however, a role in soil:structure inter-
( much the same as fn these texts. The second of them devotes a action applications. 3-D elements are used when the cost
( chapter to a review Df the literature. In it there is a use~ (which lies as much or more in data preparation and output
L fuI list Df 31 other books on the subject, with short comments handling as in the actual computing) is justified.
(
x, on each. It is noteworthy that not one in this list is aimed
f primarily at geotechnical engineers. An earlier text by Higher order elements with more than one midside node are
L Hinton and Owen (1977) deals specifically with programming available but although they give better accuracy per element
aspects of the f.e.m. . it is doubtful if they offer any advantage on a 'per nade'
,~,
basis. It seems to be widely accepted that the so-called
2.2 Elements 'parabolic' elements which have one midside node offer the best
c value per nade. The bottom row of elements illustrated in
I( The starting point of an analysis is the division Df the figure (2-1) are therefore widely used, especially the 8 noded
'- structure into elements. Eight basic element types are illus- quadrilateral. Recent work has drawn attention to the
l trated in figure (2-1), Some of these shapes represent a 'Lagrangian' quadrilateral and brick elements which have,
number of different types. Thus a 2 or 3 noded line element respectively, 9 and 27 nades. The ninth node is at the centre
{ can represent a bar having no bending sti~fness in 1, 2, or of the quadrilaterial, and the seven extra nodes in the 3-D
r{ 3 dimensions. For these applications it will have respectively element are at the element centre and the centres of the six
1, 2, or 3 degrees of freedom per node. Alternatively it may faces. These elements may give even better value than the
\f be a bending element in which case an extra rotational degree more commonly used type of parabolic elemento
of freedom per node is added for 2-0 applications and three
ri: extra rotational degrees Df freedom (making a total Df 6) are With the exception Df the beam and plate bending elements,
~'
added for 3-0 applications. Similarly, the triangular and the elements considered here are 'isoparametric'. That is, the
quadrilateral elements may represent membranes or plates in 3-0. equations describing the shape of their boundaries are of the
,-
In the former case their bending stiffness is neglected and
'{ they have 3 degrees of freedom per nade. Plate bending ele-
same arder as those describing the variation of the nodal
ç- ments may have 6 d ,of f , per node.
unknown (e.g. displacement) across the elemento
quadratic in the case of 'parabolic' elements.
Thus both are

':ç Selection of the size and shape of elements is a matter

of experience and intuition. Generally, elements ~hould ·be
\
~DC] ®
smaller where the 'action' is coneentrated, i.e. wherethere

1 --
,I,
.J_
---
are rapid changes in stress and strain.
trates this for a footing.
Figure (2-2 a) illus-
The smallest elements are at the

"
~
( corner of the footing. Figure (2-2 b) illustrates a 'spider
web' type of mesh. This efficiently increases the element size
( with distance from the highly stressed region.
'-(,
1,-,

(~
( /60 Remarkably high accuraey can be achieved with a coarse
.mesh when parabolie elements are used. It is good praetiee to
carry out a preliminary analysis using a very coarse mesh,
e.g. 6 soil and one footing element would eonstitute a suitable
coarse mesh for a preliminary analysis of the footing of
( Figure 2-1 Some basie finite elements figure (2-2 a). Substantial agreement of displacements with
~ those obtained from a fine mesh analysis would be expected
,) (say 20% difference in the maximum valuesl. .
'--
For geotechnical work the triangular and quadrilateral
~ elements applied in a plane strain analysis are most eommonly
used. (They then represent a solid bloekof material with an
.~
out of plane thickness which is usually one.) Sometimes the
([ plane elements will represent an axisymmetric geometry. Line
elements can represent ties or props, or flexible linings to
(~ tunnels. Bending elements are seldom used, perhaps beeause
there are not many programs available which mix them with con-
i(

(
('
''-. 14 15
l 2.3 Shape functions

L lhese define the'variation of quantities across elements.

l
•
lhe quantities comprise the nodal unknowns in the first inst-
ance, but include any quantity which is rEquired to vary
l smoothly across the element between fixed (known, or to be
determined) values at the nodes. Let O stand for the value
t of the quantity at some point x,y (~e restrict to 2-D for
.( simplicity), and suffix i indicate the value at node i,
then
n
( (2-1 )
O L -.
0i
« i=1

f in which N. is the shape function of x , y for node i and

is the numb~r of nodes in the elemento Clearly, if the n
n

~ w values of 0i are known, O may be dat.armíned at any point

(a) Footing inside the elemento .
'(

I( If the finite elements are restricted to straight-sided

triangles or rectangles, it is perf3ctly satisfactory to def-
"< ttttttttt ine the shape functions directly in terms of x and y. lhis
is restrictive. Modern pr.actice defines the shape functions
t in terms of curvilinear co-ordinates, ~,n, in 2-D which rel-
(
ate to a mapped elemento lhe transformation from ~,n to x,y
t E
E is explained in section 2.4 below. (lhe reader who has a
o distaste for partia 1 derivatives can skim this section. An
Y -o
adequate - if incomplete - understanding of the f.e.m. may'be
obtained with only a hazy grasp o~ the transformation theory.)
~
, Definition of shape functions in terms of ~,n makes a single

"--
t simple expression applicable to a particular mapped shape.
lhis can represent a wide range of actual slement shapes.
Figure (2-3) illustrates the mapped and parent elements for
\..~
l
the 6 noded triangle and 8 noded quadrilatsral.
,(
'-' lhe shape functions must have a +cr-n such that when the
< ~.n values corresponding to the same noda, 1.e. node i Tor
'-.. Ni• are substituted the function assumes t1e value 1. Also
~ it must be zero for the ~,n values corresoonding to alI the
other nodes. lhus the three-noded bar having ~ = -1 for node
J 1, ~ = O for node 2, and ~ = +1 for nade 3 (n does not apply
,1 here) has the following shape function for node 1 :

i.l N
1
-~~(1 -~) (2-2 a)

T lhis has the value 1 at node 1 for which ~ = -1 and zero at

the other two nodes. lhe other two shape functions are:
((
Ib l Model tunnel
1-( N (1 _ ~2) (2-2 b )
2
~ N 1 ~(1 +~) (2-2 c)
Figure 2-2 lypical meshes 3
,
\
Ir
(
(
ri
(
1S
2.4 Co-ordinate transformation
17

\l' The transformation from local U;,n) to global co-

Li,( ordinatss [x,y) is achieved by relations between their deri-

vatives. Explieit expressions of x,y in terms of s,n ar vice

l4
11
versa, are not required o All that is required Ls an expr'ess-
~; 1 ion for the area increment dA = dx.dy in terms of ds and dn,
é 1~6
5
4
_ç
and a means of finding the eartesian shape funetion deri-
vatives, i.e. aNi/ax and aNi/ay, given âNi/as and âNi/ân.
x
~. o
'2 3
1
(
\.::..c
11

~LQ
~ 1
« 7 6 5 / g const
'C -1 8 4 1 ~.d1] //
1]

---.~~-
Q ,
(-
~
((
2
-1
3
x I
Yi
a
~,d1]1

P
"tJ!r:/
r-
d

...J~a
Q _-1]

dt:
const

Mapped elemenl Parenl elemenl

/' /
/j ,à-;;;
a~ .d~
a~' ~
~
C{ Id~
I

Figure 2-3 Element transformations. I _ X

~
r ~
'\ The S noded triangle with ~,11 defined as in figure (2-3) Mapped Parent
C( has shape funetions:
2
"(cí N
1
= 1 - 3 [~ + n) + 2(~ + 11)

N = 4~[1 - ~ - n)
2
~., N = ~[2~ - 1)
Figure 2-4 Area transformation
3
(2-3)
N4
(
,( N
=

=
4 ~n Let dA represent the area in the aetual element corr-
s n(2n - 1) esponding to d~.dn in the mapped elemento Let! and ~ be

'r
\..::."
NS = 4n(1 - ~ - 11)
veetors representing the sides PO and PR of theinfinitesimal
area dA as shown in figure (2-4)0
d~,dn as follows:
The veetors are related to

:( and the 8 noded quadrilateral has shape funetions:

l~'
N =-!;(1-~)[1-11)(1+~+11)
(
L
lf N
N
1

2
=

=
H1-11)(1-~2)

-I; (1 + ~) (1 - 11)[1 - ~ + 11) 2

~'ds
â~
1 and b = 1 ~~.dn 1
3 {
(
\2.,
~ !l'dn
N = H1+~)(1-112) ~~'d~ ân
4 (2-4)
(i N
S
= -!;(1 + ~)(1 + 11)(1 - ~ - 11)
N = H1 + 11)(1 _ ~2) These expressions are a eonsequence of PO being an
~ 6 n = constant line so that variations of X and y along it
N = -!;(1 - ~)(1 + 11)(1 + ~ - 11) depend only on s (therefore dx = (ax/a~)d~, ete.) and PR,
7
being a s = constant line, so that variat~ons of x and y along
«-
« N
8
= H1-~)(1-n2)

Oerivation of the simpler shape funetions for the 2 noded bar,

it depend only on n.
CI 3 noded triangle and 4 noded quadrilateral is left to the reader The area dA is then the magnitude of the cross produet
as an exereiseo
a of ~ and b. Multiplying this out, one obtains

(
\
(" .
~. 18
19
(.) with the columns and rows increased by one termo Zienkiewicz
( dA 1JI dE;d n (2- 5) (1977) and Hinton and Owen (1979) include the 3-D case in their
c) coverage of transformations. Hinton and Owen (1977) provide
f'-..' in which rJ 1 is the determinant of the Jacobian matrix FORTRAN codings.

l
,<
~ aE; ay
élE; 2.5 Strain-displaeement relations
,~; J r (2-6)

l'-..'
{
\~
l l'5.
an

The partial derivatives (lx/élE;, ete. may be related to

Jl
éln
Let u and v be the x and y displacements
sma~t strains Ex,Ey' and Y.
two dimensions, we 'have:
which cause
Then, restricting attention to

( the shape funetion E;,n derivatives and nodal eo-ordinates by Plane stress and strain
~ differentiating equation (2-1). This gives
I( EX = - a u/a x (2-9 a)
n aN
f
ax I _i
Xi and ete. E = - avia y (2-9 b l
~ i=1 aE; Y
(2-9 e)
Y = - (élu/ay + élv/ax)
C(
Explieit expressions for a~ laE;, élNi/Cln are readily obtained (E
z
= O for plane strain)
f,-, by differentiating the formulae for N
i
(e.g. equations (2-2)
to (2-4)). Axi-symmetric
i(
(~ To obtain the cartesian shape function derivatives we
{ The r~lations are the same as equations (2-9) with x , u
first note that they are functions of x,y so that applying standing for radial and y,v for axial. The hoop tangential
(:(' the chain rule one obtains strain Ez 1s given by :
({ aNi ClNi
u/x
dN
i ãX dx + ay dy (2-7) E
z
= -

'r The minus sign is a consequence of our compression positive

\: n
Partial differentiation of (2-7) with respeet to
in turn gives the matrix equation:
E; and notation. The strain equations are eonveniently represented

l~~lI::'}
I' by a veetor (or column matrix), ~, having 3, 4, or 6 eomponents
aeeordingly as the problem is plane, aXi-symmetrie, or three-
r ax dimensional.

{ :;' }
~,
( , ClE;
c ClNi
=
ClNi
For finite element applications it is neeessary to relate

6, dT)
ax
ãTl
El.
Cln ay
strain to the displaeements at element nodes. Let these be
represented by <3 vector §e whieh in 2-D is (u1' v1' u2' v2 ...•
GJ u , v )T. Using eque t í.on (2-1) to express
n8dalndisplacements one obtains
u , v in terms of

Note that the Jaeob1an matr1x appears on the r1ght-hand side

~

:-~~
of this equation. Invers10n g1ves explieit expressions for the e
,( cartesian derivatives, 1.e. E B 6 (2-10)
\.1-
.~
~,
N Ths matrix B compr1ses a row of n (the number of nodes in
1
-~ I ar- the elementl- submatriees ~i wh1ch for plane problems take the

l
C1 Cly-: { -. }
aélx } ( 2-8) form:

<L dN1 IJ I ~ I' dN -,

(1,'

Ci
{
ãY - em
dX
aE; J
i
ar)
B.
-1
= - [N/" O
O

ClN/Cly
I
I (2-11 a)

I{'
Th1s completes the transformat1ons
cations.
needed for 2-D appli-
The matr1x equations der1ved above also apply in 3-D
ClNi/dy ClN/Clx j
r
\-l
\.
 (

~ 20 21
(; J and for axi-symmetric problems 2.7.1 Element relations

C o Consider a typical element in isolation (Figure 2-5). It

f _l-'aNi~'aX is in equilibrium under a set of nodal forces
L' dNi/dy T
I,
'-J ~i - N/X O
(2-11b) F
e
(Fx1' FY1' Fx2' Fy2, ....Fxn, Fyn)

'l---- 'aN/dY dN.ldx

J. -
:
associated with displacements
ll....:- Note that for the axi-symmetric case the hoop strain, Ez' is in e T
ó (u1, v '
1
u2, "z:: .. · .. u '
n
v )
n
the third position in E.
~
(1- The need for the shape function cartesian derivatives,
expressions for which were obtained in the previous section,
Any external loadings such as gravity or a surface pressure are
assumed applied at the nodes. If there is no external force at
tC is now apparent. a particular node (and this includes reactions if the node is
'- on a fixed boundary) then the vector sum of the forces from alI
Q the elements sharing that node will be zero.
2.6 Stress-strain relations
(( We now use the rrinciple of virtual work. A set of vir-

«
(
Generally

/:0,0
these can be expressed

= 9 /:o,f (2-12)
tual displacements (i , ó', 1s appl1ed to the nodes. Let the
stress at a point in the-element be a and the strain corres-
ponding to the virtual displacements be ~'. Equating the work
done externally (at the nodes) to that done internally gives

«
q
Where a contains the 3, 4, or 6 stress components corr-
esponding to ~ (see preceding section) and '/:o,' indicates
"cheng a 1n' which may or may not be small. is the corres- 'º' (Ó*)T Fe = J (~.)T ~dV (2-13)

r: ponding square modulus matrix. Its components are constant for the integral being taken over the volume of the elemento Now
'{ linear (elastic) applications. For non-linear they are deform-
F
by (2-10)
ation or stress dependent. O is usually symmetric. An excep-
\ tion occurs with non-associative elasto-plastic formulations E* = e s'
as will be illustrated in Chapters 5 and 7. Explicit forms Df
Q are given later, e.g. for elastic formulations in section (E') T (B ó*) T (Ó*)T BT
3.2.1 and for non-linear formulations in Chapters 4, 5. and 7.
~ T he foro Df O is not needed jus t yet.
~- Substituting this in [2-13) and using the fact that the
( coefficients Df ~. are independent Cwhich allows ô' to be
C; 2.7 Stiffness equations effectively cancelledi we obtain
(!
X The global stiffness matrix equation which relates nodal
forces to displacements 1s best considered in two stages: the
E
e
= JêT
Q dV (2-14)

''-'
/{ setting-up of the element stiffness matrices, then their assem-
'-.:.1 Th1s 1s an important relation. It is used whenever a set of
bly to form the global matrix.
nodal forces is required which are to be equivalent to - or in
~

-I ,I .~
(
\~'

~ Noda! forces_
te ) n Stiffness
~e 4 I __ Noda! disp!acements
Qe
[i) If virtual displacements must be interpreted physically,
then the implication is that they must be such as to cause
~ negligible change in the nodal forces. This implies either
C.c' ," _
« /' I 3
<,
that the displacements are very small, or cause rig1d body
motions, or if the body is plastic, cause plastic flow.
({ An essential feature is the independence of the displace-
ment components.
(( Figure 2-5 An elemento

CI
(
(
 "--"
(
I
'..•... 22 23

',-", an overall sense to be in equilibrium with li) - the interna 1

( element stresses. For example, in geotechnical applications it
,-J is used to determine the nodal forces equivalent to the initial
stresses.
L
(
o{
'commonly in geotechnical problems strains are zero at the
start of loading so that ÓE = E. The corresponding stress
2-0
---e1
00 = 20
2
.~ 2-0
.--.
10 1
Eo=O-Ol
-----
2 l-O

changes are óo= a - ao (Q- being the initial stresses).

- - - o
Strains can, however, occur due to causes other than load appli- Bar properties Area = 0-1
~ Youngsmod. = 1000
cation, e.g. by temperature change in structures, or by creep
!( or saturation in soils. Let such strains be denoted by E •
They can be viewed as 'initial' strains which are subsequ~~tly
increased by the load-induced strains. ,Consequently, the Ó~ Figure 2-6 Forces to prevent bar movement.
'(
for use in the constitutive law (equation 2-12) is more gener-
'( ally defined as ~ -~o : Figure (2-6) illustrates a two-noded bar. In the left-hand
diagram it has an initial (compressive) stress of 20. Forces
( equal to 20 x 0.1 acting 1nwards must therefore exist to equi-
(~- ~o) o_ (E_ <. o
- ~ ) ( 2-15) librate this stress. CWithout them the bar would expand and
« the stress become zero.) With the bar aligned in the x direc-
Re-arranging, eliminating E by (2-10) and substituting in tion and x increasing from left to right one obtains the x
~ (2-14): -
components of F ao for nodes 1 and 2 as F01 = 2, F 02 = -2.
'r E
e
= JêT ºêé dV + fêT Ç!o dV - JêT º:o dV (2-16a)
(We drop the superposed 'e' in this example as there is only
one element.) The right-hand diagram shows the forces requir5d
to prevent an initial Ccompressive) strain of 0.01. CThis
\ Note that é is now the actual not the virtual set of displace- might be due for example to cooling - although such a large
ments. Oenoting the last two terms of(2-16a) by Fe and Fe thermal strain is hardly credible - or to soil shrinkage due to
~ respectively, we have -a -E
( saturation - much more credible.) ~o' however. is the force
J that would cause these stra1ns 1n Iieu of the actual cause
e
- Fe
e (e.g. temperature or shrinkage) so it is in the opposite direc-
.;
F Ke Ó e + Eoo _ C2-16b)
,( -E-o tion to the arrows shown 1n figure (2-6). Consequently F 1='
G
C Here ~e = J êT ºê dV is the eIement stiffness matrix.
and F 2 = -1.
E
E

Consider now an anaIysis in which the bar of figure (2-6)

e e e e ,
,(
,~- Writing B = E - EcrD + E ° equation (2-16) 15 expressed con- is prevented from moving but starts with the 1nitial stress of
cisely as E
20 and initial strain of 0.01. Since the displacements are
(~ zero the forces which cause them must also be zero, i.e.
~e ée se (2-17) R1 = R2 = O. AppIying the relation ~ = B + Eao - EEO we
~ obtain
se - the 'right-hand side' - represents the set of nodal forces
~ responsible for the displacements. F 2 - 1 = 1
0.- 1
=

It is appropriate at this stage to consider a simple

« exemple to consider the physical meaning of Eoo end rEO'
particularly the directions in which the forces act.
F
2
= -2 - (-1) = -1

That this is correct can be seen by inspection of this simple

CI case. The final stress a is 10.
cr
G 2,7.2 Assembly
.{ (i) Nodal forces will not balance the internal stresses in a
í- locel sense as can be seen by isolating a small zone close
i,( The overall, or global stiffness equations are obtained
to a node. The stresses do not get bigger and bigger as by adding the element stiffness, displacement and force
C( the zone is reduced, which is what equilibrium would
matrices derived above into matrices of order corresponding to
require. The concept of equilibrium is not useful here. the total number of degrees of freedom in the whole mesh, e.g.
C; It might be better to talk about a 'virtual work,equivalence'. twice the number of nodes for 2-0 problems. For forces the
I
-\ B

(.

<
y
( 24 25
components at common nodes are simply added, e.g. if a node is a basic treatment which includes computsr codings. Hinton and
\'( at the corner of four slements there will be four force compo- Owen (1977) describe in detail a version of the 'FRONT' equation
( nents to bs added for a particular direction. With displace- solver, a form of Gauss elimination widely used in finite ele-
? ments, of course, no addition is required, the nodal value is ment programs.
the same for each shared elemento The assembly of the elsment
'( stiffnsss matrices i5 not 50 obvious. It is best explained by
~~ an example. 2.8 Body forces
(
'--( 2 3 4 5 6 These forces, which are distribu:sd over the volume of
, elements, must be converted to equivalent nodal forces. They
'- a a ;a a will then form part or alI of the righ:-hand side vector B.
(
2 a i ab , b a ab !
I
Let Bb denote the body force contribu:ion to B. Dsnoting the
body force intensity (force per unit volume) at x,y by the
3 bi b I b vector e= (Px,py)T, and using ths vir:ual work principIe with
~- I I
( 4 a a I I a c a c c an asterisk to denote the virtLal di3placements, ws havs:
'----
5 a ab b a c abc c
t 6 c c c
(cS.)T Rbe J (u· Px + v' Py) d'/
,(
Numbers inside are the local;
.( Using equation (2-10) to expreEs u· and v' in terms of the
those outsids the global.
nodal values, and expanding thE left-hand side:
/(

(
Figure 2-7 Stiffness assembly
Ln
i=1
b b')
[ R, e u ~ + R, e v i
1X 1 ay
= J (P nL N; U
x i=1 - i
•+ P Ln N. v, ") dV
Y i=1 1 1
( For simplicity, suppose that there is only one variable

'r
per node. (This actually is the case with seepage problems,
see Chapter 9.) The example of figure (2-7) thersfore has a
Again, s nce the components of §',
í e, u
independent we can equate their coefficients,
í •

1, vi.s.
1' e t c , are
total of 6 degrees of freedom and the overall stiffness matrix
l(
is 6 x6. The letters represent element stiffness coefficients. R~e
, =JPXNidV (2-19a)
Thus 'a' in row 4,column 5, identifies the local stiffness coef- 1X
ficient Kr3 for element 'a'. Where more than one letter appears
> in a box the stiffness contributions are added. Thus from row R
be
= J PY N. dV (2-19b)
( 1y 1
5, column 2, we obtain the global coefficient
{ with i=1,2, ...n.
Ke(a) Ke(b)
KS2 +
'( 30 21
Equations (2-19) ar:bused to dat errní.na the 2n equivalsnt
-;

Note that only Kss receives contributions from alI three ele- nodal forces comprising R e. These e Larnerit vectors are then
(
ments. Note also that symmetrical element stiffnsss matrices assembled to form Rb. -
\ .. ,-
( result in a symmetrical global matrix.
'-.( If there were more than one degree of freedom per node 3.3.2.
Some applications of thi5 theory are given in section
\.:...
the boxes in figure (2-7) would each represent a submatrix,
( e.g. 2 x2 for 2-0 problems. The assembly procedure is the same.
"-- 2.9 Surface tractions

:~ The global matrices K and R having been assembled from

These can be divided into prassures (p) acting normal to
their elemsnt counterparts (identified by the supsrposed e)
( an element side and shear stresses (:::j) acting along a side. The
~ the overall stiffness equation
sign convention adopted here i5 that ~ is positive when it acts
;( on the element, and q is positive when it i5 acting anti-clock-
'-.- K cS R (2-18)
wise around the elemento
(
'-- can be solved for §. The reader is referred to other texts
.~- for descriptions of solution techniques. Fenner (1974) provides

!t
l
(
( 26 27
S se
( R is obtained by assembling the edge contributions R from
;11 the loaded edges iQ the f.e. mesh.
~
c Some applications of this theory are given in section

l
(
3.3.3.

~,

2.10 References
l'-..'
L FENNER, R.T. (1974), "Computing for Enqineere ", MacMillan.

L HINTON, E. and OWEN, O.R.]. (1977), "Finite El.ement: Proqranmi.nq",

c HINTON,
Academic Press.

E. and OWEN, O.R.]. (1979), "An Intiroduct ion to Finite

EZement Computations", Pineridge Press, Swansea.
:(
ZIENKIEWICZ, O, C. (1977), "The Finite El.emeni: Method", McGraw-
( Hill, 3rd ed ,

(
f
~ Figure 2-8 Tractions on element side.

Y Applying the principIe of virtual work,this time to an

f element edge hav1ng k nodes, using superposed s to indicate
'surface' ('e' can now stand for 'edge' rather than 'element'),
(' . and referring to figure (2-8), we obtain

~
J1
k [se
Rix ui• + Riy
se vi.] = J '.
[p(v . ·
Cose -u Sine)+ q(vSine ·
+u Cose) J' dA
~
~ Integration is over the side area, i.e. length times out-of-
C. plane thickness. Again using equation (2-10) to relate u·,v·
~i to nodal values, and using the independence of the latter we
obtain
c-> R
se
-f
(p Sine - q Cos e) N
i dA
(2-20)
L
,(
ix

(:, Rse
iy f (p Coa 6- q Sin6) N
i
dA (.2-21)

l
Note that for a horizontal surface with e =1800 (i.e. leveI
L ground, e =0 would represent a ceiling).

L
iL R
se
ix
-J q N dA
i
(2-20 a)

( se
Riy -f P Ni dA (2-21 a)

([
(

(
c'
(
\.....-
29
(
'-"-
l, CHAPTER3

l GEOTECHNICAL CONSIOERATIONS
(

{
3.1 Introduction
f
The principIe of effective stress underlies much of geo-
f technical analysis. Techniques for applying effectiv~ stress
'( methods of analysis using the f.e.m. are therefore dealt with
first in this chapter. They are followed by an explanation of
f how the various forms of loading likely to be encountered (i.e
c
(
discrete, distributed body forces, or surface tractionsl can
be implsmentsd. Ths important qusstion of how to deal with
r· initial stresses (i.e. the stresses and pore pressures which
X
(-
are there at the start of the analysisl 15 next considered, and
finally procedures for using the f.e.m. to model excavations
{
and fills are described.
~"

The scope of the analysis to which these techniques apply

~ ) is limited to time independent situations. Thus the undrained
I.'
and fully drained limits of a situation involving consolidation
can be analysed butthe in·between situation cannot. To cope
(. with the time dependent consolidation process more sophis-

t
,(
ticated techniques involving the Biot consolidation equations
are required (see e.g. chapter 12 of Oesai and Christian,1977l.
Similarly the time dependency due to creep (ar "Secondary
l..;
Consolidation"l is outside our scope. Some account of this can,
L however, be taken by an appropriats rsduction of stiffness.

L The use of effectivs stress msthods widens the scope con-

siderably. As will be shown, it allows a unified approach to
t drained and undrained analysis. It allows excess pore pressure
to be determined explicitly for the undrained case, and,
~' perhaps most importantly, it allows the effects of known pore
1. prsssurs changss to be analysed. This last facility can in
soms casss replacs a consolidation analysis. For instance, if
~ the pore pressure distribution is known on two separate

« occasions, the associated deformations and stress changes may

be calculated.
« 3.2 Effective stress methods
(
3.2.1 Undrained analysis
(
T~e principIe of effective stress is expressed by:
(
( a a' + mu (3-1 1
r' '" '" '"
\
r
l{
,
(
(

~
( ;
30
in which m 1s a column matrix with "1"5 in the direct comp- Substitution of (3-3), (3-4) and [3-7) into the principal
31
.
( onent pos1tions and "0"5 in the shear, e.g, for plane strain of effective stress equation [3-2) 1ntroduces ll~ 1nto each of
L, the three terms. Since the components of ll~ are independent
m = (1,1,0)T. For stress changes (3-1) becomes:
G
'V
of each other: we can effectively "cancelo them to obtain
!l~ !lf + ~!lu (3-2) T
L The soil skeleton and pore fluid constituents can be con-
R n'
'C
+ m m K
'V'V f
(3-8)

sidered as separate elements [not necessarily "finite elements"
L although we shall shortly consider them as such) which share
the same physical space. If conditions are fully undrained
t there will be no movement of pore fluid relative to the skele-
ton, consequently the skeleton and pore fluid elements undergo
l precisely the same de+ormet.d cns , Their strains (!l~) can be
equated. (The objection that this is a physically unreasonable
( assumption, since flow w111 start as soon as 10ad is applied,
No restriction has been placed on O, ~' 01' Kf' They can
represent linear elastic properties, in'Vwh~ch case their comp-
onents are constants, 01' virtually any form of non-linear
relation. The derivation of the foregoing in 'terms of
I
incremental relationships allows ths important class of
I' differential stress-strain laws to be incorporated. These
include the variable elastic laws considersd in chapter 4,
I and the plastic1ty laws (including the critical stats model)

« ~an be refuted by allowing a diminishingly small amount of

!'alllt1vi movement to ooou!'. Tha tll!'m"p!'Bo1ss1y" ehould be
described in chaptérs 5 and 7.

(( qualified by "in the limit as the time for consolidation For elastic isotropic applications and involve only R R'
approaches zero". This becomes a definition of "undrained",) two parameters, These are conventionally Young's modulus and
f Total stress changes are related to strain changes by a
Poisson's ratio, but a variety of alternatives are possibls of
which the bulk modulus, K (01' K'), and the shear modulus, G
C(' modulus matrix R
[this approaches a tangential modulus matrix (01' G'), are particularly useful. Equat10n (3-8) then takes
(( as the changes become small), i.e. the following form for plane strain

!la R!l~ (3-3)

CC' 'V
!G !G,
K+
3
K- à;
3
O K'+
3
K'- à;,
3 O I I Kf Kf O
Y Identifying the soil skeleton modulus matrix by o',
effective stress changes are related to strain changes by: !G
ç' K- à; K+
3 3
O = K'- à;, K'+~'
3 3
+
jKf Kf 01
[3-9)

ç'
G:
ll~' R'll~

6~ relates to the s011 skeleton.

(3-4)

Suppose $he pore flu1d

O O G O O
:' j
O O O

Equating the bottom right hand elements in the matrices of

C element undergoes a volumetr1c strain
pressure changes by lu, then
change !lgv as the pore
equation (3-9) we obtain

~ f
!lu Kf!lgv (3-5) G = G' (3-10)

G where Kf is the bulk modulus of the pore fluid elemento We This is an important resulto Using it in the four upper
~ shall call it the equivalent pore fluid modulus. It is not left hand elements of the matrices givss
simply the bulk modulus of the pore fluid (K ) as the pore
~ fluid occup1es only the voids, but is a comp~site of the pore K+ ~
3
=K'+~+K
3 f
fluid and the particle (not skeleton) st Ff'nass, Ks.' (5 for
~
í

"solid"). They are related by the porosity, n, according to and K- à; =K,-à;+K

3 3 f
1 n 1-n
(l Kf Kw
+ --
K
(3-6) from either of which
s
ct K K' + Kf (3-11)
When conditions are undrained the soil skeleton and pore
Q fluid strains become the same, 50 that !lEf =!lE = mTllE. The relations (3-10) and (3-11) provids a convenient means
v v 'V 'V
Equation (3-5) may therefore be written of converting between total and effective strsss parameters for
(( el~stic isotropic undrained analysis. They permit either a
T
G- !lu KfR) !l~ (3-7) total 01' an effective stress analysis to bs carried out for

CT
( ,
c
{
,--,!
32
the undrained case. The only difference as far as the results
.
The advantages of the effective stress method are its
33

( are concerned i9 that the latter gives explicitly the effect- flexibility and its ability to provide explicit predictions of
U ive stress and pore pressure components, [the "prosO and "cons" the "excesso (i.e. load induced) pore pressure, 6u, in un-
l of the two approaches are discussed later in this section). drained enalysis. It is flexible in that since the soil skele-
0'
An example will illustrate the conversion. ton stiffness (R') is defined the method is not restricted to
C Example
undrained analysis. Thus a drained analysis is implemented
simply by putting Kf = O. In this case as far as stress
(
"--' changes are concerned, and provided there is no change in pore
í A clay soil is assumed to have an elastic soil skeleton pressure during loading, there becomes no distinction between
'- heving E' = 30 MPa and v' = 0.25. It is saturated. The effective and total stress analysis = A~' = A~). [R' R,
1 equivalent pore fluid bulk modulus Kf 1s taken as 2000 MPa.
(This approximates the bulk modulus of water, actually about For undrained analysis there is no coupling between direct
~ 2200 MPa. Choice of K is not critical when it is much larger and shear terms as in isotropic elasticity [i.e. where a hydro-
than K'.) The corresp6nding total stress parameters for un- static stress change causes no distortion and pure shear
~ drained analysis, E and v, are required. stress causes no volume changel, and provided the soil is sat-
urated (i.e. virtually incompressible), then Au can be obtained
~( We first obtain G = G' using the standard relation bet- from a total stress analysis. It is given simply by
:;- ween G, E and V (most elasticity texts, e.g. Jaeger, 1962, or
,~, Timoshenko and Goodier, 1951) Au % Acrm [3-12)
~ E' 30
r G G'
2 (1 +v' ) 2 X 1.25
12 MPa where ócr
m
2
3
[Acr
x
+ ócr
Y
+ ócr )
z
'-<.
~ The effective stress procedure described above~could be
'~ then using the stanaard relation between K, E' and V
dispensed with in this case. But where there is coupling
.:
~
K' = 3(1-2v'
E'
l
. 30
3 X 0.5
~ 20 MPa
between spear and direct stresses as in plasticity form-
ulations~ or where the soil has significant compressibility
"(' (Kf not very much greater than K'), the total stress method
r:
Using (3-111 K = K' + Kf = 20 + 2000 = 2020 MPa.
cannot be used directly, and the effective stress method comes
) So far we have corresponding total and effective stress into its own.
parameters in terms of K and G, i.e.
) It is still possible, however, to use 'a total stress
analysis to estimate pore pressures. They are calculated from
Effective: G' 12, K' 20, Kf 2020 }
~ the total stress changes by means of pore pressure parameters.
'--.J All in MPa
Total: G 12, K This approach can be linked to the effective stress method as
,( 2020
there is a relation between Kf and the pore pressure parameter
<: B.
-( To obtain E, v we again use the standard relations which
'-' express them in terms of K and G, i.e.
.( The pore pressure parameters A and B, proposed by
'-' Skempton (1954), are widely used. They relate specifically
9KG 9 x 2020 x 12
( E =
3i<:+G = = 35.9 MPa to triaxial test conditions (Acr1 > Acr2 = Acr3). For general
--..c..' 3 x 2020 + 12
applications the alternative parameters Ah' B are more
"( 3K - 2G
rational. [These have been attributed to HenRel, hence the
'-' 3 x 2020 - 2 x 12
,,{
V = 6K + 2G = 6 x 2020 + 2 x 12 = 0.497 suffix h.) Using these the excess pore pressure is given by
"--
Au Bhócrm + AhAcrq (3-13)
J This example illustrates how an effective stres5 un-
drained analysis of a saturated soil is equivalent to a ,total
J stress analysis with Poisson's ratio close to 0.5. Note that
an approximate value for E (quite good enough for practical (jJ Dilatant 50115 such as dense sands, or negatively dilatant
j purposes) could have been obtained by assuming v = 0.5 and soils such as 50ft clay, exhibit this coupling. The former
using G = G', 50 that by expanding under shear (or developing negative excess pore
J pressures if prevented from expanding), and the latter by
o E 2(1 + v)G ~)E'
(1 +v '
1.5
1.25 x 30 36 MPa. contracting (or developing positive excess pore pressures).

~
l
(
 r
1" ••

! , i
34
3.2.2 Known-pore-pressure-change analysis
35

,) Where âa is the change in mean total stress and âa the change

in devia~or stress (see section 1.3 for definition q of a and The object1ve is to determine the deformations and effect-
u
.r o). For the triaxial test condition a simplifies to m ive stress changes resulting from a specif1ed pore pressure
o~ - a3• Restricting attention to hydr8static stress oniy, change. This app1ies a loading to the s011 skeleton. We show
'"-'
( i.e. âo = O, we have how in the program the 10ading is obtained from the pore
q
'-' pressure change.
{ 6u B 60 (3-14)
h m
'-' oeterm1nation of the change is a separate consideration •
.( \
Now, by definition of bulk modulus, K, It may be the difference between an initial measured pore
'-'
pressure field and a final field determined from a steady
'1 M. = 60 IK
'- v m seepage analysis as in a clay core dam between the end of
construction and the development of steady seepage. Alter-
1 Substituting this in equation
f
(3-5) with 6E ' = 6E we have natively, the 1n1tial pore pressure may be calculated in an
K v v
I 6u = ~K âo
m
(3-15)
undrained finite element analysis. The change may be from one
assumed pore pressure field to another, as 1n the raising of
~ a water leveI in a sandy soil from one leveI to another.
Equating (3-14) and (3-15), and noting that K = K' + Kf·we
J' have Let âu represent the specified increase of pore pressure
/--

--1 Kf Kf at a point x, y (1n 2-D), then the body force (un1tsl forcei
Bh (3-16) volume) to be applied to the soi1 skeleton is the gradient
r-. K K' + Kf
vector
~ K'Bh
r ar, conversely
'-( Kf = ""1=Ei (3-17J R, - 'í/ 6u (3-17)-
/"
h
'-{ This has components -a(âu)/ax, -a(âu)/<ly.
/"' Note that for the triaxial case 6a (the cell pressure) Px Py
3
'i. equals 60m 50 that Bh can be replaced by Skempton's B. The physica1 validity of (3-17) is 11lustrated by con-
s1dering a 3 m rise in a water t~ble in a coarse sand or
''( Note further that as Bb (or B) varies between O and 1,
r', graveI (figure 3-1). The body force vector p is zero
Kf varies between O and infinity. everywhere except in the 3 m high flooded zo~e
).
Finally, what are the disadvantages of the effective
) stress method applied to undrained situations?
'--) ,',', .\/"
A It is unnecessarily complicated if there is no interest ".
~ y
in the division of stress into effective stress and pore
A Final
pressure. A total stress anal~sis would be perfectly suitable

~I
'-"
,..-{ for the prediction of short term sett1ements of a footing on
'-' clay or, if undrained strengths are avai1ab1e (as they often
/'( are), the prediction of over-stress in the c1ay. . .....

"-'-" " Initial

/"(
A possibly valid objection to the method when applied
'-' to obtain drained and undrained bounds is that use of the same
,-( Initial Py:·.l.ôu
soi1 skeleton stiffness, O', ignores any change in this st1ff- u
'-' o
.••.• ay
ness due, for example, to the passage of time. 10
8 Pore prsssure
KPo

Body force
KN/m3

J Bas1cally, however, it widens the scope of analysis con-

siderably at the price of a quite minor increase in comp-
J lexity.
Figure 3-1 Body force loading due to rise in water table
J
r.-
d
\,
'-"
(
u 36 37
where it has components p = O and p = -(-30/31 = 10 KN/m. An alternative procedure for numerically integrated
L (The unit weight of'waterXhas been t~ken as 10 kN/m3.1 This finite elements is.to specify pore pressures at the integrating
points (usually Gaus~ pointsl within the elements. The writers
L body force acts upwards (positive in y directionl and would
cause a heave of the soil surface if this was free. In this have found it convenient to specify the initial pore pressures
L particular example, the story is not quite complete as the in this way when they have been stored on a file from a pre-
weight of water added to the voids must be added as a down- ceding finite element analysis. The final values are, however,
(
wards (negative) body force. If n represents the porosity of read in at nodes and the Gauss point values calculated from
the flooded voids, then the net upwards body force to be these. The initial values are then subtracted to give ôu.
f applied is (1-n) x 10 KN/m. This could have been derived
f directly using Archimedes principIe. A qualification about the accuracy of the method is
needed. The method is rigorous for linear stress-strain laws
C
~ For impIementation by f.e.m. the user could work out the but involves an approximation when O' is stress path dependent
gradient vector at a sufficient number of points and then since the path assumed in the analy~is will usually be incor-
f appIy it as a body force (as he would gravityl letting the rect. Thus in analysing the effects of the dissipation of
r. computer convert this to nodal forces. This, however, is an excess pore pressures an incremental non-linear analysis (see
~ unsatisfactory procedure except for very simpIe exampIes such chapter 81 will assume the same proportionate change in pore
C[. as the above. It is both time consuming and inaccurate. It pressure over the region for each increment whereas in prac-
r, is particularl~ iIIogical as the hand-derived differentials of tice the pressure will dissipate much more quickly near
~ ÔU are integrated again by the computer when it works out the drainage boundaries.
nodal forces! It is much better to input directIy the
\' specified pore pressure change and let the computer work out
the corresponding nodal forces which must be appIied to the 3.2.3 Incorporation in finite element program
~\
soil skeleton.
ç) The element contributions of these forces can be derived
Adaptation o~ finite element programs for undrained
analysis is straightforward since only the beginning and end of
() the program is involved. The formulation of the element stiff-
;:t,
"-!
by means of virtual work along the lines used in chapter 2
to obtain the nodal forces equivalent to stress. If o in ness matrices, their assembly, and the solution of the equations
equet10n (2-14) ia repleced by [-ÓU, -óu, o]T the follow1ng thus formed follow standard lines.
)
J expression for the x component of force for node i is obtained
At the input stage ~f and the components of ~. are read
G aNo
I
instead of~. Equation (3-8) is then used to compute~. This
,.(
pe
ix
- --d'- ôu d(vol) (3-18) is the alteration at the beginning of the programo
'-../
Integration is over the element and the total force to be The alteration at the end comes after the strain
~ applied to the node is obtained as the sum of the contributions changes(i) have been calculated. This is done element by
.,( elemento The program can then offer ~ choice. Insteed of only
from alI the elements which share it. x is replace~ by y for
"-" the y component. being able to calculate the total stress change, ô~, by means
~ of equation (3-3), it can in addition, or alternat1vely, cal-
As with other forms of distributed loads Ôu is conven- culate Ô~' and ôu using equations (3-4) and (3-71 respectively.
iently specified at nodes. If ôUi represents the value of the
"-'
J pore pressure increase at node i of the n nodes in an element, If a drained analysis is to· be carried out, as has alread:
then ôu at point. (x,y) in an eIement can be evaluated (in the been mentioned, Kf is simply set zero. This is valid for both
J program) 85 linear and non-linaar constitut1va lawa providad loading ia
sufficiently slow that excess pore pressures dissipate as the
.J. n load is applied. If, however, dissipation occurs after the load
.~ t.u L Niôu. (3-19)
i=1 1
has been applied (as is very often the caseI analysis using a
~
r-,
'-( With this scheme provision should be made to Iink the nodal
___ o

value to eIement numbers so that the value can, if necessary, (i) The choice of a datum for strain is somewhat arbitrary for
'-( be applied to the eIement on one side of the node and not to
.- that on the other side•
soil. A normally consolidated caly for example, undergoes
very large strains during the process of its deposition.
'i Strains are usually, however, taken as zero at the start
") of the analysis.

'\
~,
3~ 39
~(
, J
stress or strain d~pendent constitutive law (R' = R'(o', ~))
;
\...'
will not be rigorous. The error will depend on the extent of
the non-linearity and may or may not be significant. This
J stress path dependency is similar to that already referred to
u in the known-pore-pressure-change class of analysis. 8713~I- ------,- - .
\
I ------..-
G
_o~o4

For known-pore-pressure-change analysis the finite element

;{ procedure is the same as for drained analysis (i.e. Kf = O)
\...I

,r{ except that the load input section must be altered to read the
\.J

(l,
known-pore-pressure-change and compute the corresponding nodal
forces according to equation (3-18l. .,
\
,
3.2.4 Examples .. .1 _ot ;
Cl ~7\"OJ )~ __ -7'
~--+_._-p
I '
CI Figures (3-2land(3-31illustrate the use of the effective
stress method applied to the construction of a central clay
'3 ,J»

Cl •
1;:
80re damo (Actually hypothetical although representative of a

J
common type of dam section.J Figure(3-21shows computed pore
pressure distribution at the end of undrained construction
z
~-o~_
9/

- - - - - •• r'
1/01'
---..,
!-'l
J. ,J4::t>
4-

expressed as contours (ru = u/yhJ. The distributions are

ª0"
C7
compared for two different non-linear idealizations (described
in chapters 4 and 7). Figure(3-~ shows displacement vectors
for two sets of analysis. The full lines and solid circles
assume complete drainage as the fill is built up in layers.
J +

(a)
ee

Displacements K-C model

o
'-------'
Disp.
, m.

ac a Le

r' (Four were chosen - see section 3.6 below for explanation of
''-( layered analysis.l The broken lines assume no drainage until
r: construction is complete (points "4"). Then a known-pore- <t
ir: pressure-change analysis models the dissipation of the pore
pressure and computes the movement vector "4-0". The analyses La~er4, __\'!..__ ~
'i
r-

),
were repeated for linear and non-linear constitutive laws.
Note that the drained points "4" (full linesl are close to
t.4
\4
<h
I
I 5
97

l'
I.",
1\

"
31 _\4.7
2.i--·-----
f ~~TnJJJ""
I
_>'00
4"--- --- - ---_ .•
•••'7) 7:•• "
.•.

~ 4. n-2,3,4 I a ye r n complete
,~
-...;)
u=ccr e d i s s i pe t i on complete

ri
,---,' ':~.J!I"',:~, G '0-' -

_-
Und r a in ed
Dr e ined
40111)'8.'

ana l y s e s

,--{
000°00
o'~.'..!.. i 1'-\0
~,,~Jr:-
) o'~)04
fll /-·,,-\S
\...-" 47~
,--i
'-.--' u ,,-'300
i f II , o

,1. o
KtJjm'
~
/
.-.
_,I
I

'-'-'" -e- F~t," 3-h"'/-~,.; "tl"l.~~

'i
'-
~'o/~
o /0"
I'
I_~"'" O

,~t.~
...':-~"~
"1_ -'-
o 0 ...\.,
.......•.
Yh
~9~'",
, ,•
,
•
n-o
'o
"r o
<---------'
Di sp.
, m.
sC'.11e

'J o , o
",1
/.0 0· .....0
1
o '~7

~TT7T7 -~,,)) rr+r- "))m

(b) p.isplacen~_~j::..:.. ..('-.!.a.2..~c:.._f!l~d~.!.
x-e rrodel Critical state rrodel
CI
Figure 3-2 Computed pore pressure ratios (ru)
CI at end of undrained construction
Figure 3-3 Oisplacement vectors of points in fiII dam
\J.
r
\.\
'(
(' 41
;; )
40
points "O" for the linsar analysis bu~ ars widely separated in
'-..
,( the non-linear. This illustrates the stress path dependency
\....' of the latter. The same R' was used in the drained, undrained
) and known-pore-pressure-changs analysis. Kf was zero in alI
'----.) except ths undrainsd analysis.
(

C1
~G~'~
Total lood on element: 1
,{
"-,,,'
I,-{
"-""
3.3 Loadings

These may consist of discrete nodal forces, body forces,

'1,.0'1,. -'1,20'/3.-'tí2
'/3 '/3 ~ 09 ~ ~
r( or surface tract10ns. The f1rst of these can be directly
V assigned to the right-hand-side vector ~ (sse chapter 21.
Body forcss and surface tractions must first be converted to '/, '/, _'/12 _'/12
~ ~ ~6
(( '/3
'-' equivalent nodal forces (see sections 2~ô and 2.9 respectivelyl.
1 Specified nodel dieplecemente compries en elternetivB form of
loading. Lood unilormly distributed

« -'I"
aGI. .
'/6 '/3 -'/9 '13 '/9 '/'8

«
0 "·D"·
In geotechnical applications gravity is the commonest
form of body force loading. With the y direction vertically 2/.
o o 9

a upwards Px = O, Py = - y. Other forms of body force 10ading

ars centrifugal, such as would arise from a centrifuge test, '/6 '/3 -';" '/3 -'I" o '/. 'I,.
(j (in this case it may be desirable to allow for the variation in
intensity with radiusl, and the body force loading expressed
o by the vector ~ in known-~ore-pressure-change
3.2.21. These forces alI contribute to R.
~
analysis (sectian

({
Surface tractions arise when it is desired to simulate, Lood~ Iram lelt to righl but u.d Irom top to battom
c{ say, an embankment loading by ths direct application of a
normal and shear stress to the ground surface. A probably
~( mors common epplicetion occurs when excev~tion is simulated Figure 3-4 Equivalent nodal forces for body forces
using ths first of the two stratsgies described in section 3.5
)' below. The need to convert both normal and shear surfacs
'-.i tractions into equivalsnt nodal forces is an unlikely require-
/,
<;»
ment outside of gsotechnical applications. Structural f.e.
programs will generally be set up to deal with pressures only.
,A
'--' Another facility sei dom provided in structural programs Total lood on element side:1
A
\--) and commonly needed in geotechnical work is provision for the
~
<;»

'\
variation of distributed quantities across elements or along
their sides. Thus in excavation analysis (by Strategy 11
linearly varying tractions along element sides must be applied.
,/.ITITD'I
2 . 2 '/6
OTIJIII]
2/3 '/6

~.

,'\
'..-' An alternative to automatic calculation is hand calcul-
,i ation using equation [2-191 for body forces, and equations
.~,
(2-201 and (2-211 for surface tractions. This has been done "'~,,, O~'/3
:1 here for some commonly used elements and the rssults presented
in figures(3-~ and 8-5). These results may be used to obtain
2/3

:'(
\..- the equivalent nodal forces when in the case of body forces
the elements are rectangular ar in the case of surface trac-
Figure 3-5 Equivalent nodal forces for
Ci tions the edges are straight. Non-corner nodes must also be
pressures on element sides
central. If these conditions are not met automatic calcul-
\J ation within the program 1s virtually a necessity.
\.j

'J
é 42
43
3.4 Initial st~esses
~ will according to judgement within the extreme limits K and
K where "a" and "pU refer to active and passive respec~ively.
~ 3.4.1 Introduction FBr loosesands and lightly over-consolidated clays K' less
than 1 would be appropriate. (K' = 1-sin.' is a Wid81y used
~ The state Df stress in the ground existing before load is empirical assumption.) For dens~ sands and stiff clays K' is
c applied or excavation carried out is usually significant.
though it will not directly affect deformation calculation for
Al- typically greater than 1 and may approach K' at low stres~
levels. T will be zero. p
an assumed linear e1astic soi1 it wi1l for non-1inear analysis xyo
CL when stiffness is stress leveI dependent. In failure pre- For effective stress analysis the ~nitial pore pressure,
d dictions the collapse load (or unload) will only be unaffected u , must also be specified. This will often be y h where h
w
by the initial stress state when the soil is treated as purely i~ the depth below a water table. For c:ays Uo w~l~ be thus
u cohesive (as in the undrained analysis Df a saturated clay in defined for negative as well as ~ositive hw' The effective
(j terms of total stress). Even in this case the displacements initial stress components in this case w:ll be
prior to collapse will depend on the initial stress state.
({ ,
a = K'a
o yo
For linear analysis it is not necessary, although it may xo
\( be convenient, to incorporate the initial stress in the f.e. ,
a = yh - u
o
, program as they can be added later. The principIe of super- yo (3-21)
"< position applies. In the analysis Df excavations the initia1 T = O
>
stress va1ues are used to determine the unloading forces (see xyo
'-i section 3.5). Consequently in this case the initia1 stresses u = Ywhw
affect the deformations even in the e1astic case. o
\(
How then should 1nitial stresses be incorporated in a The initial stresses may bE read in sets and the sets
\ f.e. analysis? They may be generated by applying a gravity assigned to rows of nodes from wrich Gauss point values can
loading to unstressed ground or may be specified direct:y. be computed. More conveniently y, K and the y values corres-
f The first is unsatisfactory as will now be explained. The ponding to h = O and hw = O can te igpuc and the Gauss point
<,
,-( second leads to two alternative strategies (section 3.4.3). values automatically calculated by equation (3-21). At this
~,
point one of the two strategies ~entioned above is se1ected.
,( 3.4.2 Gravity generation of initial stresses They are as follows:
'-../
-( A vertical body force of intensity Y is applied over the Strategy 1.
'---' whole region. In the case of meshes with a box shaped bound-
( ary having smooth sides, this wi11 produce a vertical stress' The applied loads are read in to form a vector ~ which
',-, becomes the right hand side Df the stiffness equations. These
ayo = yh (h = depth below surface), which is what is required,
and a horizontal stress a = K yh which may, or more likely are solved in the usual way to give displacements from which
may not, be what is requi~~d. °K wi11 be contro11ed by the strains and load induced stresses. õ~, are calculated. Final
~~ material law. If this is isotrop~c elasticity then stresses are then obtained as Z = Zo + õZ·
(
v
'-" K (3-20) This is sufficient if non-linear computing schemes (see
o h chapter B) such as the "tangential" are used. The correct Z
J serves to define the tangential modulus. With the constant
A further drawback is the unwanted downwards deformations
J resulting from the gravity 10ading. They cannot be separated stiffness matrix schemes, however, it is necessary to have a
measure Df "force residuaIs" 50 that fictitious Ioads can be
from the load induced stresses, at least not in one analysis.
'J applied to deform an elastic body (defined by the constant
stiffness matrix) to the shape of the actual body under the
'--! 3.4.3 Specification Df initia1 stresses
actua1 10ad. To determine these f~rce residuaIs it is first
,.
\J
The ana1yst chooses se1f equi1ibrating initia1 necessary to obtain forces ~9uiva18nt to the initia1 stresses.
stresses. This will in practice limit him to an initially Denoting these forces by ~(l and the residuaIs by ~ we have
o ~
''-{ horizontal ground surface. (Otherwise a preliminary analysis
must be carried out - see section 3.4 below). a Will be ~This assumes that there are no initial strains. If there are
'" chosen to equilibrate gravity by making it equalYo yh. then following the notation of section 2.7
K o (or Ko ' in terms of effective stressesl can be selected at - F
''-(
~ ~a
o
~e:o
'-\
1:
'-' 45
o (
44
part of a coarse mesh such as might be used for the problem of
figure (3-6). y here is 18 KN/m3. Note that with Strategy 2
G ~ ~ + ~o - ~ (3-22) each upward force of 72 KN will be cancelled by y acting down-
wards ave r an area of 4 sq. m. AIso note that the net horiz-
~,
when ~ is made up from element contributions ontal ~ forces are zero at inside nades. At the boundaries
they are in overall equilibrium with crxo' i.e. crxo integrated
over the 6 m height equals the sum of the horizontal forces.
'1 (= J ~TR;dv (3-23)
This is 216 KN.
'-,
Q.. (notation as in chapter 2).
and similarly for ~

Ci The forces Ia are stored separately from the applied

C!.. loads~. ~ is subsequently added to to
in readiness for the
calculation of residuaIs by equation (3-22)
C Strategy 2. 0,0·12h
Ali elemenls 2m· 2 m (·1ml

({ O'yo·lah
']5 Ia 8~8
J6
The forces ~ equivalent to the initial stresses go
C; directly into the ~oad array and the applied loads are added
8
®
to them. With this strategy the applied loads must include ~
~.
the gravity body force which is the source of the vertical
hl 7~ ® 7~ '1)6 16~16

ç initial stress, otherwise the forces ~o,which now appear on

the right hand side of the stiffness matrix equation, will
;i. 4 8

%
18

5L.
lB

51.
ç
(-
cause the mesh to expand upwards. 6m
n® 7~ 36
5'6
3~ ~---Q--tO- 32

;, ©
:

40~40
®
j
"
5·1. 51.
z' 64
#///#////,; 1"'/,'////,'/$ r/////////.t: z,..
o

a
90
\...; 56 56
,''--',
~. .
90
180 180
©
(,
,-\.
\..-,
T
h ~
Assembled lorces I Sol 64
90 90
64

'{ Unassembled lorcos IS~I

'\
'"-"
(~ '~~
~ srnoo,:
'~'
~. t. Figure 3-7 Nodal forces equivalent to initial stresses

"
slrclogy 1 slralegy 2
'-o For the example of the footing Strategy 1 is clearly
more convenient than Strategy 2. However, for problems
Q Oyo.'Yh in bclh slralogies
involving excavation, particularly if the boundaries are
<l complex, Strategy 2 has advantages.
in section 3.5.
This will be made clear

C1 Figure 3-6 Applied loads for the two initial

stress strategies 3.4.4 Sloping ground surface
({
Figure (3-6) illustrates the different loading require- If the ground surface is not horizontal it will usually
G- ments for the two strategies for a plane strain footing prob- not be practical to select a self equilibrating set of initial
ç lemo
y, in
The need for the additional downward body force loading,
strategy 2 is illustrated by reference to figure (3-7)
stresses which are also in equilibrium with gravity forces.
In this case a preliminary finite element analysis simulating
C' which shows the forces ~o calculated by equation (3-23) on excavation from a horizontal surface above the actual one must
 "<

r: .

~ 46 47
r·
be carried out. The procedure is given in section 3.5. The
\ height of the horizontal surface will be chosen in conjunction
j with'the assumed Ko value to give horizontal stresses approp-
riate to the main analysis.
~.
,
.
(,
3.5 Excavation
G
~
3.5.1 Single stage

The finite element mesh reletes to the geometry after

excavation.
KOYhSl~
-.~t yh C:s e
~ The procedure differs according to whether Strategy
or 2 in 3.4.2 above 1s used. With Strategy 1 distributed ',',
~ h
forces are applied to the boundaries of the excavation to
Cl reduce the initial total stresses to zero. With Strategy 2 no
H
forces are applied to the boundary since the computer auto-
<l maticaIIy 1nterprets the out-of-balance initial stresses as
these forces. (Note that with this Strategy a gravity body
<I force must be applied to the whole region. This is not
(j required with Strategy 1.)
(j With Strategy 1 the forces to be applied to the bound-
r aries will in general comprise both normal and shear trac- Figure 3-8 Stress-cancelling tractions
'.{
tione. See figure (3-8). By considaring the equilibrium of an for excavation boundary
,'T,
elemental wedge (or by using Mohr's circle of stress to trans-
'(
form the stresses) one readily obtains
ç' o = (K Sin'e + Cos'e) yh
3.5.2 Multi-stage

n o It may sometimes be considered that a single stage

(3-24) analysis is too crude. In this case two or more sequential
~, Tn = (1 - Ko) Sine cose yh analyses are carried out. The first is the same as for the
single stage except that the final stresses(i) must be stored
l to become the initial stresses for the next analysis.
,) The forces to be applied to the boundaries therefore comprise
\...'
apressure p = -on and shear force q = -T. Note that if Ko = 1, As with the single stage procedure Strategy 2 is the most
,'\ , or if the slope is vertical or horizontal (e =90° or 0°) q is
<:» straightforward. With this strategy the elements in the
zero. This is often the case.
(I, region to be excavated in Stage 2 are removed from the mesh.
'-" The final stresses (or the equivaIent element nodal forces)
ri from Stage 1 are read as initial stresses. They will be zero
\..J
(or nearly zero - there will be some discretisation error)
~ along the free boundaries except the boundary of the Stage 2
r\ excavation. The program will convert these unbaIanced stresses
G' into a loading which will simulate the second stage excavation.
(l.
With Strategy 1 the user must determine the unbalanced
~ loading from the first analysis and include it as the loading
data for the second. This is best done by taking the unassem-
II bled nodal forces (which can be printed at end of analysis 1)
~
r
I.J (i) For linear analysis it is sufficient to store the element
equivalent nodal forces. These must be unassembLed.
CI
 '"
r».
'-{ 48 49
,r-, and assembling them by hand to obtain theforces whi~h will
'-{' The Strategy 1 procedure is not, however, to be recom-
reduce the stresses on the new boundary to zero. Figure (3-9) mended as it introduces a subtle errar (overlooked by some
ç illustrate6 the procedure. The out-of-balance forces, some of
wh1ch are the sum of contributions from two elements, are
earlier wcr ker-s ) in th'evertical nodal forces. This is due to
the effect of discretising the gravity field. Referring to
(J listed on the right of the figure. It is tedious f~r fine
'7 figure (3-71, and supposing element "A" was to be excavated,
meshes and unsatisfactory in that the correct nodal forces are
C not necessarily in accordance with intuition - especially with
the correct vertical force to be applied to excavated boundary
nodes should be ~(18+541.2=72 and not 18+18=36 as would result
v higher order elements. (Note the surpr1sing nodal force dist- from the procedure described above~d illustrated in figure
,-\ ribution equivalent to constant and uniformly varying dist- (3-9). The errar reduces as the mesh is refined.
V ributed loads in figures (3-4) and (3-5).)
.. ( As an alternative to removing the excavated elements they
"-J
may be retained as "ghost" elements. Their stiffness is simply
(1 reduced to a negligible (but finite) value. This removes res-
v
((
trictions on element numbering or in the matching of element
\..../ numbers between analyses. With Strategy 2, however, the use
(l ~'t--r-~-i-- of ghost elements requires coding to be introduced to prevent

ê. U3
au~~ __•
I J o
thê assembly of the nodal forces from the ghost elements. This
probably outweighs the advantages of ghost elements.
s....,. :2
G I II ~p.c~~••..
\~ The procedure for subsequent stages is identical to that
~"'/~j for the second.
(j \l.!9l : I
, ,
2.S'~ 2'$ I
\.(
I
3.5.3 Example

:7 Figure (3-101 shows the deformed mesh resulting from the

single stage analysis of an excavation behind a propped
'""
(\.( Part of t .•.••• h retaining wall. Conditions were assumed undrained. The soil
(7 õã'Y
o o. 5l9Zar~l
is London clay. The wall was formed from contiguous bored
piles which were analysed as an equivalent wall of constant
~
{ /I
v- 165
. -O.6S6t.21-(.t
(i.l6770r-Cl
-O.10U4E
-C.5S43H 00
00 thickness having the same flexural rigidity. From the point
of view of the analysis it could equally well have been a
r: " 2S0
2'.9
O.6Cv1)E-CI
q.l211U ce;
-O.1162H
-0.11)22)(
00
00
diaphragm wall.
.:
'"( flUI!ltr
IIIOOl
ISO
'-0.
NO.
110
I CO",. , COM'.
~ li: co.p
~
)
1,;,.'
11.
117
", .~:nn~::~~g:!~~n:gg,---
"O.U1721-Cl O.t2HH 00 .
__ 2S0
0.058 0.124
In this instance a water table below ground eurfece was
assumed and Ko' was taken as 2 (appropriate to a heavily over-
-C.H637r DO ;).21.CHt-01,, 2S1

':>'~7:2"
i7e -C.H9'Ct-Cl -0.29791(-01 -, ./ 0.291 -0.140
(.I. eU r..H~<!.H-Ol -O.370r,9('OO
consolidated clayl. The unloading pressures to be applied to
0.011 -0.186
15 ~ C.ll171f ce
-0.139'91' ao--,::=- the excavation boundaries (using Strategy 1) were obtained as
'-" 1" . (I.H0571 CO .•o. U04l[ 00.... " /2&3 0.115 O.OUI
follows. On the side of the wall:
A EUr~fl:t 1(0. 111 /,,/ /'.I26~ 0.1V2 -0.22"
Li HOill ~ .c • J CO~,. Y (OriP. ' "" '285
LS2 i/' -0.037 0.411

6
-O.H'SZE-C1 "G.466!OE-01 ~
~o•• -e ..74Cl H-Cl (I.•l2709. 00 // -p = O = U + O
iH -O.:UUCE-C1 C .• 131021-01 XO O xo
cS
i;'"
Hr
;''''1
:~:~~~~:~.~~
":;:H~~::~:
-ç.eCOZ1I-1C
.;/ -O .•17l0iJi-01,.;7
and ao 011tor oth.r nad••
01\excavated bo\ll\dar,
Introducing 0xo " = Ko 'a yo ' = K
, (O - u 1
U4
;:>H
P.1t2CU CC "v.l;:~:l. DO:; o yo o
C .• 1147U CQ C.1tUj[-01 Lo.d. to b. applhd In
~ tu r.;-;IH :.0. 112 • ta,. 2 (Trpe LD data) and u
o
= Ywhw' a
yo
= yh we obtain
'.Ct'f t.::J. J tO"'.. Y CO"'.
'i z~.; C.•J7UH cr. 1'.4CúH[ 00
v ~~;,-~
:~!i~
~~
-~~~"1~~ ..V
~!~l~- _o' -p = (1-Ko')Ywhw + Ko'yh (3-25)
/\/~o.2.~:"_._--:----
Supl. trOIlStua 1 output On the base of the excavation:
~
G. -p = yH (3-261

CI Figure 3-9 Example of determination of nodal

(l loads for excavation stage

\
 '--,
i
\':..-i 51
50
lhe soil was treated as linear elastic with Young's Nontheless, data preparation for programs incorporating
~ Strategy 1 is perfectly straight forward for single stage
(( modulus increasing with depth (considerable information 1s now
'.....• available on appropriate E values for London clay: St. John, analysis where the excavation sides are vertical and horizontal
or sloping if Ko = 1. lhe example Df figure (3-10) used a
r 1975, Simpson, 1979).
~ Strategy 1 programo
lhe analysis enables predictions to be made Df the
~ Single stage analysis will be adequate for many purposes.
expected deformations and the bending moments in the wall.
ri Multi-stage will be necessary where distinct construction
'- stages occur such as the incorporation Df struts at different
3.5.4 Sum up
ti levels as an excavation is deepened. When non-linearity is
incorporated in the soil constitutive law a multi-stage
(I In general, programs incorporating Strategy 2, since they
do not require the user to specify unloading forces to de- analysis should give a more rigorous solution which may differ
(j stress the excavated boundaries, lend themselves to excavation significantly from a single stage analysis. (lhe difference
analysis. lhe user must, however, apply gravity to alI between single and multi-stage analysis for non-linear soils
((, remaining elements. lhis is not required with Strategy 1. in the parallel problem Df fills is considered more fully in
the next section.)
~ ;- - - - - - -,- - - - - _.~--- ._--
(\

t' --.-
3.6 Fills
r=:

(i
~.
I
,'
-------.-- ! -,~--;'-+\-~---,-,,---:
- - - - -j -
3.6.1 General

I.:.::
'
" . Most fills are constructed in layers which are thin
\ :::::: ::}; Cr-=::~:'·-I,~''---.l--~·-·~~';-+-,...y"1''J ;
compared with the finished fill depth. It is usually
necessary, therefore, to use much thicker layers in numerical
'1 modelling Df fil1 placement. lhe number needed depends on the
___._ ___ _ .---i.-t--
-·----rr--- - -.- - -- --- information required. If the interest lies in the soil under-
1 ----.-------1'-! lying the fill very few layers are required since both stresses
and displacements are insensitive to the number. Indeed it i5
'{ I

.mm.mm:-"ur-u \ .-u:r···um
i often adequate to assume the fil1 is placed in a single layer.
\..-' However, if the interest lies in the fill itself, more layers
r ,
",,-, are required, relatively few - or even one - if only stresses
i are required. (Clough and Woodward, 1967), more if displace-
~ ments are needed. About 10 layers have typically been used in
I I \ t
analysis of major dams (Clough and Woodward, 1967) Kulhawy
i - - - - - - -.---- - - -' - --- -- -'-
,,
I
- - -.- -- - 't- - - - -- --- - - ---
and Ouncan, 1972; Penman, Burland an~ Charles, 1971; Penman
'\ and Charles, 1973). lhis number could probably be reduced
'-'-' considerably with little effect on the results. Naylor and
~- Jones (1973) have shown that for fills which are wide compared
I with their depth (i,e. the one dimensional case) five layers
(l, ,
,
I will produce an acceptable approximation to an infinity Df
I
layer5 for quite severely non-linear soi15.
C\ ,
I

CI A separate analysi5 is required for each layer. The cost

clearly depends on the number of layers although is not
({ necessarily proportional to the number. lhis is elaborated in
3.6.3 below. lwo points are worth making here. First, that
Q- I' //,
'/ / /
with non-linear analysis the cost per layer can be reducêd' as
r: the number of layers is increased. This particularly applies
'Z S ca Ie s : /' tOm,
~eome,..~ I
5" D'ISp I e ce me nt5 o( em,
I •
2. I
with incremental schemes. A logical criterion is ta decide
r>
the total number of increments for the f1ll. Suppose this is
\ 50, then 5 layers would have 10 increments in each layer, 10
({' Figure 3-10 Propped cantilever, undrained, Ko = 2 layers, 5,and so on. lhe second point 1s that a non-linear
í'
I..(
''{

52 53
)
'-(. analysis of the fill as a whole can be achieved using linear

s
(

'-V(
I
analysis for sach laysr. Ths slastic constants ars simply
altsrsd bstwssn layers to suit ths changed stress (and/or
strainl state.
matically.
This may be done crudely by hand, or auto-
The former has the attraction that the analyst
ia forced into e dBteilBd ewereness of the computed results.
\'0./
I
o 3.6.2 Single lift ~]U

{
v Gravity loading is simply applied to alI the fill elements.
'( The idealization is that of the fill being brought down to
'- sarth from outer space, or more realistically in the case of
r(
\...... a model, being spun up to speed in a centrifugs.

( Displacsmsnts computed within ths fill bear no relation

'-
to any which could be measured on the prototype. The maximum
~ predictsd settlement will bs the crest whereas maximum (.' \0°0

,J observsd settlements occur at about the centrs.

therefore be ignored.
These must
Oisplacements at and below the base of (e l S1ngle 11ft - non+Lí.neer-
',~ the fill (whsn this is not rigidl can, however, be conpared
with measurements.
V.
The vertical stress component in the fill approximatss
~ that obtained from a multilayer analysis. The agreement for
."\
the other strsss componsnts although to a first approximation
reasonable is likely to bs lsss good than for ths vertical
'oo{ strsss. Figurss 8-11l and 8-1~ show a three way comparison
between the major and minar principal effective stresses in a
'{ central clay core dam, analysed as single lift non-linear
(Mohr-Coulombl, singls lift linear elastic, and thrse layer
C linear elastic(il. , ..
\ ("" ,
"'.
)' If ths fill lies on a rigid base the stiffness assumsd is f oJ Single 11ft - l rteer-
í

v of no significance as long as its distribution within the fill

( is appropriate. This is because the absolute value of the
\"-:,.'
stiffness affects not the stresses. The displacsments, which
are affected, are meaningless anyway. If the base is not
'-
.\
rigid it is most realistic to reduce the stiffness of the fill
\...... elements. Hów much is not critical. In the extreme it may be
(
made negligible, e.g. reduced by a factor of 1000. (See
\......' chapter 16 of Oesai and Christian, 1977l. This seems high to
the writers who suggest a facto r between 2 and 5 as more
~
:~,
appropriate. A much more important consideration,
is the selection of Poisson's ratio in the fill.
however,
.>: o:>;:~t%~
t;c' \0'- \~"

J Figure ~-1~compares two analyses of a 15 m high fill

placed on a stiff clay. The concern here was the stability
(I Qf the foundation at the snd of construction. Over-stress
(c) ,ThrS8 layers - linear

(l (i) Ths analysis was a simplified coarse mssh analysis of

G Llyn Brianne
purposes.
dam in Wales, carried out for teaching
Figure 3-11 Major principal ef~ective stressss
(-
i.J
.s
(

\
 \(
-
"-( 54 55

I
) I
\.j
I
\

r'.
I
I ..-/
."........-----
----.
'(
'-'
',---,
(
+
\~~~-.'
,~",-/~,~"C=õ",
\- '.,:.,'

'S"
'e'
/ .• I·O'S'"
'--:~::::::"'/
.J"
,?;] (! ; ) 1
~ ,+
'S"
/ :t \ •

,( (e) "5tH.,,, fill - Tr-aace

\..0..,

"'-(
(
'-'- ~"
~
t,~
(e J Sfng l e 11ft - oon-Lír-ee r-
I
,I
I:
'

(J
(b) "So+t " f111 - r r-aece
'.I
'~

'-1
,-( /,./", . .,../ / I
/' /. / jt
\' -r .> ...../ /
'\ <,o ".
"1
fb) Single 1ift - lineor Figure 3-13 Overstress ratios
(
ratios have been used to show the predicted development of
~ yielding. In (a) a fill stiffness ajout one quarter of that
'- of the underlying clay (the fill was the same clay type re-
~
I
'~'
compacted) was assumed with Poisson's ratio (v) = 0.35. In
( (b) the fill was given negligible stiffness and v = D. The
'-, analyses were in terms of total stress. The foundation was
,\ idealised as a Tresca material (cu increasing with depth),
1..../

,(
\.!.--
-",
...... .~
-,
the fill as linear elastic. The much greater devslopment
overstress in the foundation in analysis (a) is due to the
of

non-zero Poisson's ratio which ceused e trenefer of shear

'I
'--'
<'
force from the fill tending to spread the foundation. Analysis
,( t c l Three layers - linear (b) effectively transmitted a vertical pressure to the found-
\.~
ation with no horizontal shear. Indeed, identical results to
(b) would have been obtained had the fill elements been omitted
C~ and a vertical pressure of intensity yh (h being the fill
Figure 3-12 Minor principal effective stresses
'J height) applied to the foundation. This example is salutary
as the role of Poisson's ratio in this context is in danger of
d. being overlooked.
J
(

\
\_j
!
1-..lJ
57
56
--./ A further point arising from the example of figure (3-13l surveyed. Satisfactory interpretation becomss difficult when
concerns the prsdiction of a failure in the foundation. If a datum is not establishsd until the fill has been raised
é failure is to be simulated completely (e.g. by reducing Cu by
a iactor, or increasing the fill unit weightl either the fill
ssveral metres above t,he device.
d
'--' must be assumed non-linsar and capabls of y1elding (or crackingl Displacements within a fill can be obtained bY adding
vectorally the movements at the base of each layer from each
l or if elastic must be assigned negligible stiffness. The
solution (al which indicatss'a low safety factor, as evidenced analysis. This is illustrated for a three layer analysis in,
1 figure(3-14l. The displacement at ths crest is zero. If the
'- by theextensive
istic.
overstress, may thsrefore bs a little optim-
Complete collapse may result if the stiffness were analysis incorporated the effects of consolidation or crsep the
Q rsducsd to that of analysis (bl but with v = 0.35 retained. procedurs would still apply (albeit with some approximationl,
an appropriate time interval being allowsd betwsen layers. The
C1 3.6.3 Layered analysis resulting deformation would relate to the point in time when
construction had just finished. In this case there would, of
C? course, be further movement.
Each new layer is treated as for a single lift analysis.
(( Gravity may bs applisd to the elements of the new layer or,
alternatively, a pressurs distribution of intensity yóH (óH =
\í layer thicknessl applied to its base. The differences referred
CJ to above betwsen theôe two approaches become less as the number
of layers is increased. So also is the effect of the new layer
'\..( stiffness assumption.
Scol es

'-( As in a single lift analysis the displacement within the uo s t r-eem T-----:= Geom:
o .to
l...-.-.I..----
m.

new layer must be ignored. Settlements at and below the base

01sp: ~m,
~ of each new layer have msaning. Their interpretation is

~
l
1
explained in the next section. The selection of the stiffness
of complete layers is clsarly important for settlement pre-
diction, and should relate to the stress leveI as has been ~"+'-'l-
'+-)--
mentioned.
)

l
There is a choiçe with the f.e.mesh. Either the same x • MeesurBd at end of
l· mesh may be retained throughout, or elements can be added as
construct1on

C the new layers are placed. In the former the elements above
ths new layer are assigned neg11g1ble st1ffness to become Leye r ' '<'
-~~>,."..,.f..-->:. ~
~ "ghost" elements. Th1s has ths advantags of simplicity but

L, costs more in computing. The latter introduces complexity

particularly for non-linsar soil laws where it is necessary
6 to carry stress over from one analysis to ths next. The file
storage sys tarn w111 relate the data to element numbers and if
0· these change from one analys18 to the next the syetem must Figurs 3-14 Displacsments from layered analysis
lS, necessar11y take this into account.

3.6.4 Oisplacement in fills

~
<l It is necessary to have a clear understanding of what is
meant by "displacement" in a fill which is being raissd. This
cl is achieved by defining displacement as:

« The movement of a marker placed in the fill when the

fill reaches the level of the marker.
U
G This is approximated in dams when settlement devices
(e.g. the cross-arm settlsment devicsl are placsd either as,
(( or shortly after, the fill buries them, and are promptly

G
(
y
ç 58 59
c 3.7 References

( CATHIE, o.N. and oUNGAR, R. (1978). "Evaluation of finite

( element predictions for constructional behaviour of
rockfill dama, Proc.Instn.Civ.Engrs., Part 2, 65,
551-568.
CHAPTER 4
~
-I
G CLoUGH, R.W. and WoooWARo, R.J. (1967). "Analysis of
Embankment Stres·ses and oeformations", Proc.Am.Soc.
VARIABLE-ELASTIC STRESS-STRAIN LAWS
cl Civ.Engrs •• 93, No. SM4, 529-549.
Q, 4.1 Introduction
UESAI, C.S. and CHRISTIAN, J.T. (1977) (editors). Numerical
Q, methods in Geotechnical Engineering,. McGraw Hill.
A stress-strain law may relate increments of stress and
Q.. JAEGER, J.C. (1962). Elasticity, Fracture and Flow,
strain in which case it is a differential law, or it may relate
the accumulated values. The 'bi-linear' and 'K-G' modele
Methuen (London), Wiley (New York).
\l described below are differential, whereas the 'hyperbolic'
model ~s noto The plasticity laws in the ensuing chapters are
KULHAWY, F .H. and oUNCAN, J .M. (1972). "Stress and Movements
(] alI differential. Since with non-linear analysis it is more
on oroville Oam", Proc.Am.Soc.Civ.Engrs., 98, No. SM7,
often than not desirable to apply loads (or specified displace-
G 653-665.
ments) incrementally, the stress-strain law is usually required
(? NAYLoR, O.J. and JoNES, O.B. (1973). "The prediction of
in differential (or incremental) formo
settlement within broad layered fills", GeotechniqueJ
C7 23, No. 4, 589.
The laws may relate total stresses or effective stresses
to strains, depending on the type of analysis selected. The
primes have been left off the stress symbol, it being under-
~ PENMAN, A.o.M., BURLANO, J.B. and CHARLES, J.A. (1971).
stood that they should be added if the analysis is in terms of
~-: "Observed and predicted deformations in a large
effective ~tress.
embankment dam during construction", Proc.Instn.Civ.
ç' Engrs., 49, 1-21.
Attention is restricted here to isotropic laws. This
means that two elastic parameters are required which vary with

f( PENMAN, A.o.M. and CHARLES, J.A. (1973). "Constructional

deformation in rockfill dama, Proc.Am.Soc.Civ.Engrs.,
99, No. SM2, 139-163.
stress and/or strain. This pai r can be chosen arbitrarily out
of E, v , K, or G. It Ls convenient and logical in meny
instances to use the bulk modulus, K, and shAar modulus, G.
The reason for this is that the behaviour of soil under chang-
SIMPSoN, B., O'RIoRoAN, N.J. and CROFT, 0.0. (1979).
ing confining stress measured by K is quite different from
~ "A computer model for the behaviour of London Clay",
that under distortion measured by G. Furthermore, in iso-
Geotechnique, 29, No. 2; 149-175.
tropic elastic models these two modes are decoupled, i.e.
,\
.c SKEMPToN, A.W. (1954). "The Pore-pressure Coefficients
changes in mean stress do not cause distortion nor does devia-
tor stress (pure shear) cause volume change.
A and B", Geotechnique, 4, No. 4, 143-147.
'\
G A stress-stra1n law should model as far as possible the
ST. JOHN, H.o. (1975). "Field and theoretical studies of the
following observed propert1es of soil:
~ behaviour of ground around deep excavations in London
Clay", Ph.D. Thesis, University of Cambridge. 1. The bulk stiffness (K) increases as the particles are
~ pressed closer together, i.e. as vs,Gm increases or the
C!. TIMoSHENKO, S. and GOOOIER, J.N. (1951). Theory of Elast- voids ratio (e) decreases. (Gs,Gm will be effective
icity, McGraw Hill. since with undrained saturated solls a change in the
total confining stress will have no effect on the soil
stiffness; it will simply increase the pore pressure.)
CI
2. The shear stiffness (G) also increases with tighter pack-
G ing, but more significantly, reduces with distortion. Th1s
may be measured by the deviator stresses G or G , or
d q

Ci

. (
'('
,"
(..1
61
). 60
by strains Ed' Eq' General do = K dE (4-3)
m v
~, 3. A Mohr-Coulomb or similar type of failure criterion 'do = 3 G de (4- 4)
.ri q q
should be satisfied. This implies that the tangential
,--,' shear modulus tends to zero when yielding occurs (see
í( below). These two equations are of general validity (they include
'-...I the plane strain case) except that equation (4-4) is subject to
ri 4. On unloading, there is an abrupt increase in stiffness. the same qualification as equation (4-2).
'-..V
, (
'--' 5. Over-consolidated clay soils experience an abrupt reduc-
tion in stiffness when the pre-consolidation stress is o, Od Bi-lineor
~ reached.
í(
~K,
1 , K-G'
"--' 6. Stiff clays and dense sands tend to be dilatant (i.e.
J expand on shearing), whereas 50ft clays and loose sands
tend to be negatively dilatant. The dilatancy depends on
,
K,+,G,D
1

Q confining stress as well as density becoming suppressed

as this stress increases. (A sand near the surface will
8 typically be dilatant whereas at depth, sand of the same
E,

density will be negatively dilatant.)

G (o) Mohr Coulomb version in terms of plone -stroin invarianls

Q As will be seen, variable elastic models can incorporáte

some or alI of the first three pf these requirementsJ can -
C(, but at some expense in analysis - incorporate the fourth) but
Om 'K -G' Oq Bi-linear

Q- cennot rsadily incorporate the last t,wo.

q
r:
The advantage of \Iorking in invariants has been pointed
out in chapter 1 (section 1.3). The elastic relations in
1
K,f/ ~K
terms of invariants are as follows. The reIations are in 1
'\'
differential formo The moduli are tangential. implying linear-
)1 ity over the small incremento Ev EQ

2~
(~
Plane-strain

do
s
(K +
I
/3 G) dE
S
(4-1)
Figure 4-1
(b) "Conical" yield surfoce

Stress-strain
version in terms of generol invarionts

curves for bi-linear and K-G models.

u
,Á dOd 4G dEd (4-2)
V
r\ These equations can readily be derived from the basic 4.2 Si-linear elastic model
V
stress-strain laws for the plane-strain case. They ~re not
í( valid other than for plane-strain. The model assumes linear elasticity for alI stress states
V
below that corresponding to yie1d. If a yield stress state 1s
6 There is a rathar subtle rsstriction on equation (4-2). reached the tangential shear modulus is set to a very small
(1 It was noted in section 1.3.1 that dOd is not in general equal va1ue. (It must not be zero or even too small, otherwise
'--' to the right-hand side of equation (1-2) with 0x,Oy' TXY repl- numerica1 condition1ng problems ariss in the equat10n solving
C!. aced by dOx, d 0y' d Txy• For this to be true 1t woulo be part of the f1n1te element analysis.) The bulk"modulus is
necessary for the stress 1ncrement vector to be parallel to kept constant.
(1 the total stress vector, i.e. dQ = da Q where da is a scalar
parameter. Th1s cond1t10n 1s satisf1ed 1f there 1s no rotation Stress-stra1n curves produced by "th1s mods1 are illustra-
CI of principIe stresses. It ha~ be8n common pract1ce to ignore tsd in Figure (4-1). It does not incorporate requ1rement 1
this effect 1n anaIys1s although recent research is concentra- above, crudely 1ncorporates 2, but - and this is its strength
J ting on it. Thg~e 15 some approximation in equation (4-2) - fully incorporates 3. AIso, it lends itself well to unload-
Cl except when there 15 no principal stres6 rotation. ing (requirement 4) since the rre-yield modulus can be used

J
l
(
 y
y 62 • 63
,
'-K should this occur. 0m' 0q version
(' (4-9)
Four constants need to be defined: two Rlastic, and two K K1m + c Km o m
j
defining the yield criterion. The former are K ,G o r , if
G prsferred, E
í

and \! r from which K and G c~n 5e ce lcu let edl .

( G [4-10)
G1m + Cl.Gm°m + BGq ° q
~ lf a MOhr-CoÔlomb crIterion is adopt~d the l~tter constants are
{ c and~. This criterion is concise1y written:
C The second suffix has beeo added to the constants K1' G1,
[4-5 )
~ °d ~ So
<
5
+ T Cl.K'Cl.G'BG simp1y to distinguish between the two versions.
They wi11 now be dropped as it will be clear from the context
~ which is implied. Values must be assigned to the five const-
where S = 2 Sin ~ and T 2c Cos ~. ants, Although not as straightfoward as assigning the four
~ lf the yield criterion is of the 'conica1' type in which
values for the bi-linear model, this is not as difficult as it
might appear. First, K1 and G can usually be given fairly
( the yield surface is a cone in principal stress space, then
small values representing the flct that soil - especially clay
parameters M and N must be speci fied. f Th s surface invol ves
í

soil - has little stiffness when unstressed. Secondly, two

~ the intermediate principal stress but not the Lode angle 8.1
conditions must be satisfied to make the model incorporate the
The yield condition is then
cr chosen failure criterion. We shall demonstrate this for the
05' 0d var-s cr, end show how i t incorporetss the MOhr-Cou Lemo
(j (4-6)
í

0q~MOm+N criterion.
(j
If M and N are made identical to S and T, respectively, the At yisld, G must tend to zero, 50 that equation [4-8)
C( 'compromise cone' yield surface results. They may be made lss5
or greater than this to suit a variety of possible yield sur-
becomes

~- faces of which the 'extended Von Mises' and 'Orucksr-Prager'

o G1 + Cl.G°5 + BG °d (4-11 )
are perhaps the best known. [Ses Bishop [1966) concerning the
~- formsr and Humpheson and Naylor (1976) for a summary of the Rearranging the Mohr-Coulomb yield equation [4-5) [with ' ~'
c;- different types.) replaced by '=', since yielding is implied),

\- lf unloading is to be simulated it is necessary in each

increment of loading to first carry out an analysis using K
o T + S °s - °d [4-12)

ç and G. Generally, the resu1ting stresses will violate thee

yield ~riterion in some regions and the analysis must be repea-
Oividing [4-11) by -BG and comparing with [4-12) we find
that the M.C. criterion will be incorporated provided
C ted with G reduced to near zero in the sress sffected. This
.( wi1l automatically look after un10ading. The analysis will
l, make no distinction between regions which had not previously
Cl.
G
.(
l;, yielded and those which had unloaded from a yielding condition.
- = S = 2 Sin ~ [4-13)
-SG

6 4.3 K-G model and G1

~ - = T = 2c Cos ~ [4-14)
ln this model the tangentia1 K and G moduli are explicitly -SG
cS defined in terms of stress. It is a variant on the differential
.( model proposed by Nelson and Baron (1971) who made K depend on Knowing c and ~, equations [4-13) and [4-14) are used to
v volumetric strain. The mode1 can be expressed in terms of ° narrow the selection of the three parameters G , a , BG to one.
0.. and 0d in which case it incorporates the Mohr-Cou1omb yield 5 This will typically be BG'
1 G
Note that it is a1ways ..negati ve.
criterion, or in terms of 0m and 0q' in which case it incor- The procedure is particu1ar1y straightforward if c is zero,as
Q.. porates a 'conica1' yie1d criterion. The moduli are defined as in an effective stress ana1ysis of sand or soft c1ay. G then
follows: 1
d is zero and only equation [4-13) needs to be satisfied. Con-
'- 0g,Od version verse1y, for a ~ =0 total stress ana1ysis Cl.G=0 and equa-
CL K K1s + [4-7) tion (4-14) must be satisfied.
Ks Os
Cl.

« G G1s + Cl.GsOs + BGd °d [4-8) The procedure incorporating a conica1 yie1d criterion is
the same. S and T in equations[4-13) and [4-14) are replaced
(j
 '-
{ 64 65
.i by M and N, respectiveIy. This imposes the two constraints
The model is unsatisfactory compared with the first two
on the three constants in equation (4-10).
models described here in that it requires up to twice as many
J constants to define it. Its strength ~ies in the extent to
K and CXK in equation (4-7) or (4-9) do not affect the
1 which it has been used. It has evolved over several years with
\~ yieId criterion and must be specified separateIy.
feedback from instrumented prototypes (e.g. Oroville Dam).
li The model can be used for unloading in much the same way
Those experienced in using it can expect to make good predic-
tions. A beginner would be well advised to choose a simpIer
as with the bi-linear modelo Selection of the unIoading stiff-
~ modelo
ness is not, however, 50 obvious. A simple way to do this is
J to set SG to zero on unloading. K is unaffected (as with the
bi-linear model) and G abruptly assumes a higher vaIue. If 4.5 Comparison of models
'J the yieId condition is again approached(i) SG assumes its
<J former value. The bi-linear and K-G models are preferred to the hyper-
bolic on the grounds that they are simpler and involve less
:j 4.4 Hyperbolic model constants in their definition. Which Df these two is to be
preferred will depend on a number Df factors, including the
~ objectives of the analysis. An attempt will now be made to
This model relates accumulated stress to strain, 50 is
clarify the issues.
i,( not a differential modelo It is attributed to Kondner (1963).
It has, however, been extensively developed by Ouncan and his
The bi-linear model requires only four constants (Ke, Ge,
~( associates in the U.S.A., and is sometimes called the Duncan-
c, Ijl) to be defined as against the five (K1' G1, CXK,CXG' BG)
(- Chang model (after Duncan and Chang, 1970). It was originally
-, formulated to fit undrained triaxial test stress-strain curves,
required for the K-G modelo The choice of these five is not
as arbitrary as may seem at first sight since, as has been
and in that role had a simple form with two constants to ne
\1 defined. It subsequently grew in complication as it came to be
shown above, incorporation of the chosen yieId criterion
restricts the choice to three. and of these in many cases only
applied to realistic boundary value problems, both drained and
':r undrained. The two basic parameters ceased to be constants and
one (e.g. SG) will be important. Nonetheless. the task is
\.. more demanding than the choice of the four bi-linear model
were defined by equations which required the definition of up
J constants.
to 9 constants. This formulation is described by Seed et al
l~ (1975). In the analysis of Oroville dam Kulhawy and Ouncan
(~

\u (1972), 8 constants were used.

(
The basic model suitable for representing the undrained
Ud I
/, l-L9
\,,-4
L

(I behaviour of saturated clay has the hyperbolic form,

'- E
1 / 1-7/
LI
(4-15) ()
i (
° 1 - °3
'- a + b E
1
\ -o ().,
'- where a and b are the parameters referred to above, constants
o-(
;
in the simplest case. In terms of total stress the model
impIies Pois80n's ratio (V) = 0.5, (slightly less than 0.5 is -
z
E
500
Foilure ,/0/
/
0-8
I~
/

6y
0"
"o::,

0,>
'--' used in practice). It can be shown that if 02 = 03 the reci- .x:

G
procal of "a"is the initial (1.e. when 01 - 03 = E1 = O) tangen-
tiel Young'9 ModuluB, Eo' which i8 equel to 3GQ [for plene .OL /
3t}' 9-8 .'l:
()
strain condition 1/a = 4 G ). The reciprocal o+ ('b"would be ,0-7 / 0'
J the failure deviator stress~ 0df' approached assymptotically /'\I{I 56 /
J (as with the K-G model) were it not for a refinement. This is / 30 / ./ o

slress po í hs
to select b so that a failure stress in excess of 0df is o~--,,--_~~_-;,!:-_-=z:::==:::::::;~EI!~leeel ive
i-J approached, the stress being cut off when 0df is reached. 500 1000 as
kN/m2
~ Conlours are of be st lil surlaee G, 0-5.270.- 270d MN/m'

~ Spol votoes are G in MN1m'

(- (i) This i8 determined by finding whether a yield function, F,
"-( is increasing or decreasing. See chapter S.
Figure 4-2 _~t;J~Ld_e!.._clay
shear modulus from triaxial tests.
'-{
\{

Cr' 66 67
the same yield criteria. Since in this case the plasticity is
ç' A pay-off is that the 'K-G' model can better approximate
the abserved behaviour of soil, in particular properties 1 and
'perfect' (see chapter 5 for an explanation of thisl, the sa~e
q 2 Df section 4.1. This is illustrated in Figure (4-1) and
also in Figure (4-2), which shows the results of consolidated
collapse load ror unload in the case of an excavationl
obtained from the two models. 'The only differences
will be
occur in

S'e drained triaxial tests on a boulder clay plotted in a 0s,od

stress space. The three lines inclined at 2:1 are the shear
load-displacement relations prior to failure, and these will
only occur between the onset of yield and final collapse, (in
the case of a flexible footing after about 40% of the collapse
stage stress paths. The spot values marked on them are tangen-
G,( tial G values obtained from the slope of the stre9s-strain
curves. The chain dotted lines are contours of the surface
load). These d1fferences are unlikely to be significant.

Li If, however, the analysis involves a frictional material

defined by equation [4-8) with the three constants having the
then the collapse lo~d will be stress path-dependent 9?d the
values shown in the figure. This surface wa9 fitted by trial.
~ The remarkably good agreement with the spot measured values
two models will not necessarily give the same answer~1 .. Little
cS will be noted. [Agreement with triaxial test data should be
treated with suspicion, since they often under-e9timate in situ
seems to be known about the extent of the difference.
depend very much on the problem under study.
It will

~ stiffness values. Boulder clay, however, is less prone to

The differences between the variabIe eIastic and eIasti~-
this than many other 90i19.)
~ plastic models are attributable to the differences in the
stress-strain law when yielding is under way. A full discus5ion
Cl Another pay-off is that the K-G model will generally cost
less in computing time than the bi-linear. This is because the
of this would anticipate chapters 5 and 6, and will not be
(1 continuous stress-strain curves allow the use of either largsr
attempted. A simple example will serve to iIlustrate
essential diffsrsnce.
the
1ncrements of fewer 1terat1ons for a given accuracy.
G
(j The bi-linear model offers an advantage if the purpose of
the analysis is to investigate the extent of y~elded zones. p + 2c p + 2c

(( These are clearly defined in this modelo It i5 good practice

j tlq
to start an investigation with a linear elastic analysis before ~q
CJ doing a non-linear analysis. The zones of potential yield
from the linear analysis can be compared with the yield zone / 7
~' from the bilinear analysis. Its spread can be assessed. This I /
p p p
C( cannot be done with the K-G model since the yield stress condi- I
tion is never reachedl it is approached assymptotically. An I
ç' a9sessment can be made, however, by plotting contours of the
over-stress ratio, defined as actual deviator stress over yield -,Rh
" ':7AV@

C
« deviator stress. An arbitrary contour, say 0.9, may be taken
as the boundary of a yielded zone. Ia) Si-linear Ib) Elastic- plaslic
)
~ 4.6 Variable eIesticity or elasto-plasticity? Figure 4-3 Comparison of yieIding.
6 To answer this it is necessary to understand the differ-
ci ences between purportedly equivalent variable elastic and
elastic-plastic models. First, in what way can they be equi-
Figure (4-3l shows a pIane-strain prism of Tresca mater~al
on a smooth table, but anchored at the centre of the base. :t
6
,..(
valent? Consider a bi-linear variable elastic model incorpor-
ating a Tresca yield criter1on. Th1s would be appropriate for
is loaded by apressure p on its sides and p + 2 c on its tup ,
so that it is on the point of collapse. A very small latera:
\......
a total stress plane strain undrained analysis of a saturated load lIq is then applied. The separate deformed shepe s pred~c-
clay. The Tresca 1s the special case of the Mohr-Coulomb ted by the two models are shown by the dotted lines. [ActuaLy
cS criterion w1th ~ =0. Equat10n [4-5) therefore applies and the small Ioading would cause unIimited deformations. It must
/\ takes the form be supposed that 6q is removed after the p r í.srn has deformed
\:.:.,
to the shapes shown.l The point is'that eIasticity models
<l 0d ~ 2 c [4-16) compute incremental strains according to the inorementaL
stresses, whereas with the eIastic-pIastic models it is the
C! The elastic-plastic Tresca model described in the next chapter aooumuLated stress which controls the.pattern of movement.
can have identical pre-yield eIastic constants and incorporate
Cl (ilThis impIies that the frictional material is not
G ·perfectIy plastic·, see chapter 5.

(.

\
y

y'
(,
68 69
Both measurement and intuition suggest that the elastic-
~.
plastic prediction of movement is more realistic. (A mountain-
ser may dislodge a boulder weighing half a tonne. The direction
~ Df its movement will depend on the resuItant forces acting on CHAPTER 5
(, it, not on the force he exerts, which is negligible by compari-
(
c son.) The example given above is an extreme case, and undoubt-
edly exaggerates the difference between the two models. If the
ELASTo-PLASTIC ANO ELASTo-VISCo-PLASTIC STRESS-STRAIN LAWS

G perturbation
between them.
6q were vertical, there would be no difference

G
c.l It is tempting to use variable elastic models since they 5.1 Introduction
can usually be implemented with less trouble and at lower
computing cost than elastic-plastic, yet they must be expected In chapter 4 variable elastic non-linear models were
~ to give a less realistic prediction. In many cases, however, discussed. The simplicity of these models has led to their
~ the differences will not be significant. application in many practical problems. They have, however,

« some shortcomings. They do not predict the plastic, ar

permanent, deformations which would invariably arise if the
structure was unloaded. Nor do they obey a fIow ruIe, and
CI to that extent they are arbitrary.
4.7 References
<l This chapter deals with elasto-plastic and elasto-visco-
er- BISHoP, A.W. (1966). Sixth Rankine lecture: "The strength of
50115 as engineering materiaIs", Geot echni.que, 16,
plastic stress-strain laws which do not have the above short-
comings. These laws are appIicable for total as well as
(j' No.2,89-13o.
effective stress anaIyses. The prime dsnoting effective stress
has been omitted for convenience.
C(' oUNCAN, J.M. and CHANG, C.Y. (1970). "Non-linear analyses of
stress and strain in soils", Proc.Am.Soc.Civ.Engrs., 96,
( No.SM5, 1629-1653. We discuss first the uni-axial behaviour
duction to multi-dimensional behaviour.
as an intro-

ç' HUMPHESON, C. and NAYLoR, O.J. (1976). "The importance of the

y' form of the failure criterion", Numerical Methods in Soil

and Rock Mechanics, 17-30, (Proc.of Int.Symp. at Karlsruhr,
c! Sept.1975, Ed. Borm and Meissner).

)i KoNoNER, R.L. (1963). "Hyperbolic stress-strain response ;

cohesive so11s", Proc.Am.Soc.Civ.Engrs., 82, No.SMI,
(; A
115-143.
o
KULHAWY, F.H. and OUNCAN, J.M. (1972), "Stresses and movements
6
Vl
Vl
in oroville Oam", Proc.Am.Soc.Civ.Engrs., 98, No.SM7, QJ
.•..
l..

(( 653-665 .. (/)

<:»

NELSON, J. and BARoN, M.L. (1971). "Application of variable

~ moduli to soil behaviour", Int.J. Solids and Structures,7,
c.S 399-417. Ey E

c1 SEEo, H.B., oUNCAN, J.M. and IORISS, I.M. (1975). "Criteria Strain, E
and methods for static and dynamic analysis of earth dams",
Cl Cri teria and Assumptions for Numerical Analysis of Dams,
Figure 5-1 Uni-axial stress-strain relationship of an
elastic-ideally plastic material.
cI 564-588. (Proc.of Int.Symp. at Swansea, Sept.1975.
Eds.Naylor, Stagg, Zienkiewicz.) Figure(5-1)shows an idealized stress-strain curve
a obtained in a uni-axial test on a material. Note that the
stress-strain relationship is linear elastic up to the point A.
G
C{

"
'-"
C 70 71
é If the bar is unloaded from a stress lower than Yo. known as
the 'yield stress·. the strains are fully recovered and stress
or functions of them. The strai~ invariants are required
incremental (or ratel form ando again. can be the strain
in
incre-
L and strains are both zero. However. if an attempt is made to ment invariants or functions of them.(il
cL apply a stress even infinltesimally
strains increase indefinitely.
larger than Yo. the
If the uni-axial test was Suitable invariants have been defined in section 1.3. For
strain controlled,in which increments of strains were applied stress we generally use em' 0q.8 for three-dimensional formu-
~ anca the strain Ey is attained, any further increase in strain lations. and 0s.od for plane strain. Much use will be made
\l would not then increase the stress beyond Yo' On unloading of the latter since so many geotechnical situations are ideal-
ized as plane strain. However. in the definitions of yield
« from a strain E. strain Ey is recovered. leaving a permanent
strain (EPl equal to (E -tyl in the material. A material
conforming to the idealizea stress-strain curve of figure (5-1l
functions which follow it is possible to use only two invar-
iants even for three-dimensional applications. provided these
<T is called an elastic-ideally plastic material. . are properly chosen. Thus the Mohr Coulomb yield function can
([ be fully described in terms of 0s.od' Conversely, the Orucker-
Prager criterion requires only 0m and 0q' Two invariant forms
(f will be derived here. For completeness the alternative 0m'o .8
formulation will be given for the Mohr Coulomb function. q
(j' Y'

C( o
5.2 Basic concepts
/"
''""
<11
.!:
~ til 5.2.1 Yield Function
C(
In the uni-axial elastic-ideally plastic case illustrated
~' by figure (5-11 the yield stress Yo indicated the onset of
plastic strains. In the multi-axial situation we cannot talk
~. Ey Ey'
about yield stress as there are more than one components of
stress. Instead, we define a yieZd function (Fl. It is a
scalar function of stress (stress components. principal stress
Stroin,
c. E
ar stress invariantsl which indicates the onset of plastic
C. Plastic (permonent)
strain, EP
strains and can be symbolically written as

L Figure 5-2 Uni-axial stress.

Figure (5-2lshows another idealized uni-axial stress-strain

F(o) o (5-1 )

~ The precise forms of the yield functions applicable in

curve. Here. the stress-strain relationship is linear elastic
geotechnical analysis are discussed in section 5.3 and Chapters
up to the yield point A. If the strains are increased beyond
~ Ey to Ey·. the stress increases to B. On unloading, a
7 and 10. By analogy with uni-axial behaviour F(o) < O impIias
cS permanent (plasticl strain remains. On reloading. the behaviour
remains linear elastic up to the stress leveI Y' and corres-
elastic bahaviour and F(ol > O is an impossible situation.

Cl ponding strain Ey'. Thus the yield stress has increased from Equation '(5-1) represents a surface in a stress space.
Thus if we express equation (5-1) in terms of principal stress
Yo to y'. A material conforming to this idealized stress-
C1 strain behaviour ís called an elastic-plastic material. the yield function can be plotted as shown in figure(5-3).Such
a plot of yield function in any stress space is called a yield
G Safare we can generalize the uni-axial stress-strain surface. The space enclosed by it is the elastic domain.
« behaviour. we need to define the variabIes equivaIent to uni-
axial stress and uni-axial strains in the muIti-axial. i.e.
(( two- and three-dimensional situations. In the three-dimensional
case there are six independent components of stress and six of
C( strain. Adv'antage can be taken of the assumed isotropy of the
......•."
• "-..•.. Ós-, :~~.

~. material (i.e. its properties are independent of orientationl

to work in terms of stress and strain invariants. three for (i)---------------------------------------------------
C(' complete generality. or two for two-dimensional formulations. The usual assumption 1s made here that properties are not
The stress invariants can be the principal stresses themselves time-dependent. so that by multiplying strain "rates" by dt
C{' they become synonymous with increments.
r=.
\(

\
'r )
72 73
)
c_ In th~ multi-axial situation, the yield function is a
f \
\....:.
function Df not only stresses but also. plastic strains [plastic
strain components, principal plastic strains, or plastic strain
Ll °3 invariants), It is therefore more generally written as

l) F( 0, e;p) o (5-2)

Li Yield surface, F (Q) = O

or
F( o, h) o (5-3)
~)
F ~ O; impossible
where h represents a scalar function Df plastic strains
stress situation
«- )L
..:.-.
__ +_~
H
,__ 01
called a hardening parameter. Specific forms of the parameter
are discussed in sections 5.5 and 7.3.
(lJ
Here again, F[ç:, h) < O implies elastic response and
~ I
a situation F[Q, h) > O is impossible.
I{
5.2.3 Flow ruIe
t{
r
°2 In the uni-axial examples. we did not have to discuss
t( the direction Df plastic strains. It was obvious that plastic
--
'1.
Figure 5-3 Representation Df the yield surface
in stres.ê.....?p_a.ç:_e.
strains took place in the same direction as the stress.
situation is not 50 simple in the multi-axial case as the
The

stress and strains have in general six components and we need

'(
r: 5.2.2 Hardening Iaw to specify the direction Df plastic straining at every stress
'( state by what is called a fZow ruZe. Consider an equation of
In the uni-axial elasto-plastic situations illustrated the following form
Y
(
by figure[5-2).the
strains.
yield stres~ Y, increases with plastic
At any point, say B[e;y' Y' ) the strains can be d e;P
8F[
d À----
a)
[5- 4)
Q a
} separated into elastic and plastic components. Repeating the
where d~P represents the components Df the increments of
process for the entire curve allows a graph between Y and e;P
l to be plotted as shown in figure[5-4). A relationship Df the plastic strain, and dÀ is positive.
L typa anown in figure(S-4)represents e hardening Zaw. It indi-
( cates how the threshold of yielding changes with the plastic
~trains - the material hardens.
Equation [5-4)' may be expressed graphically. This is done
in figure [5-5) where the vector normal to the yield surface
{( has components which are the plastic strain increment compon-
'- ents. The stress axes become plastic strain increment axes for
(
representing these. For the purpose of graphical presentation
the surface is shown in a principal stress space. There is a
,~ corresponding "hyper-" surface in a six-dimensional stress
,( >- space to which equation [5-4) applies. This Df course cannot
'- be drawn. Note that equation (5-4) does not determine the
~. Yo
~ values of increments Df the plastic strain compoments though,
~ given that the stress component directions are known, it uni-
,t
Vl

'O quely defines·their directions. Because the vector is normal

õí
,( ;;: to the 'yield surface' the normaZity condition is said to apply.
As the direction of plastic strains is associated with the
{ current yield surface the flow rule represented by equation
(5-4] is also called an aS80ciated fZow ruZe. The vector rep-
(í-
J.. resenting plastic strain increments is referred to as 6~ow ~ute
Plastic strain, e;P vecto~,
( Figure 5-4 Representation of hardening law in
rc uni-axial cond1tion.

\~
 (
(

(
I' 74 75
"-.J A description of tha flow rule in which the direction of

é plastic straining is not associated with the yield surface or

function is called a non-associated flow rule, e.g.
C a o (:!)
~
,i
0 , Ê.
3 3 d EP d" -----ao ( 5-5)

\J
IP where o (a) i' F (a)

~ Current stress Here O(~) rapresents a 'plastic potential' function

«
'V,..-
situotion which is different from the yield function. The normality is
not associated with the yield surface but with the plastic
Yield ond plostic
Cl potentiot surfoce,
potential surfaçe (O), (figure 5-5 b ) ,

Cf F (Q l = O
Flow rules are of great importance in the theory of
" O" Ê.,
« / r - plasticity. This is particularly the case with an associated
flow rule since the uniqueness of a solution to a boundary
«,"
value problem depends on it. Moreover, the collapse theorems,
which have a useful place in soil mechanics in finding upper
\1 and lower bound solutions, also require the assumption of an
r- associated flow rule [see chapter 6).
I..(
Oz. Éz
rr , Flow rules also govern the dilatancy duriDg plastic
(Al
'<r straining which, in turn, may have great influence on the
strength. We take up this important area of discussion in
~ s8otion 5.7 and olso 1n ohopter 7 where 1t 1s shown to be a
ç °3·Ê.3
central feature of the critical state modelo

j To summarize: There are three ingredients to the elasto-

plastie stress-strain laws. Firstly, a yield function which
) fP signals if the material is yielding plastically or noto
~,
Q(Q l =0 Seeondly, a hardening funetion which indicates the manner in
i which the yield function ehanges (if at alI) due to plastic
~, Current stress si tuotion straining. Finally, a flow ruIe which determines the direction
( of pIastic straining.
'- Yield surfoce F( Q l = O
r{
We now take up eaeh of these aspects in turn and discuss
',-
O, .Ê,
C- /~!----------~/-----------
their speeifie forms as appIicable to geotschnical analysis.

r(
\......
5.3 Yis1d function .- specific forms
Q As an alternative to the stress tensor, O, ths compo-
°2.Ê.2
Q (B l nents of which depend on the physical direction of the coordi-
nate axes, the yieId function may be expressed as a function
G of the invariants which, since the material is assumsd iso·
tropic, are not direction dependent. Adopting the ~nvari~nts
Q Figure 5-5 Assoeiated (a), and non-associated (b), we have decided to use we ean write for general applications
flow rule and normality condition.
G
F(o o e) o (5-6)
G m q

(( or for plane strain

-J,

(
..
:

(
 7
(
j 76 77
\.' equation (1-2), equation (5-8) becomes
,(
v., 0d) o ( 5-7)
F(OS ' vr:': °Y )2 2
o (5-9)
L F =,tCo"
X
- +4T
xy
- 2c

~,
We shall now discuss various specific forms of yield functions
indicating their applicability in geotechnical analysis. 5.3.2 Mohr-Coulomb yield criterion
<L The form of this yield criterion in terms of shear stress
5.3.1 Tresca yield criterion
~ (T) and effective normal stress(o ) on the failure plane is
In chapter 3 the techniques of geotechnical analysis well known and is given by: n
~ were discussed in terms of effective as well as total stre55.
(I If a total stress analysis is adopted for cohesive materiaIs,
ITI ~On Tan~ + c (5-10)
the angle of internal shearing resistance (~) is obtained as
« zero for undrained situations, as seen from the Mohr diagram

« (fig~re 5-6) for total principal stresses.

ion can then be written as
The yield criter- where c ,~ are effective coh~sion
shearing friction, respectively.
and angle of interna I

C{ This form is not useful for finite element calculations

r> 0d • 01 - 03 • 2 o as the failure plane orientation needs to be definad before
'{ equation (5-10) can be applied. It can be ~hown(i) that the
r Mohr-Coulomb criterion can be expressed in terms Df effective
r
or F
= °d 2c o (5-8) principal stresses as
'\
r where 'c' represents the cohesion.
o 1 (1 - Si n cp) - 03 (1 + Sin cp) - 2 C Co s cp = o
'\
(5-11 )
~,

Using the relationship between 01,03 and the stress-compon-

(, ents which are readily derived from the geometry Df the Mohr
circle (figure 5-6b) equation (5-11) can be written for plane
/'-" strain conditions as
~
C j F =/(0
x
-o )2+ 4T
xy
2 - (O"C;)
x y
Sincp - 20 Coscp = O (5-12)
iÍ Vl y

~ In terms Df °
'Od invariants, equation (5-12) becomes parti-
cularly simpl~. It is
( o) oí oj o, o~ o; oi'
'--'
/(
'-.,/ F = 0d - 20s Sin cp - 2 c Cos cp o (5-13)

« Figure 5-6 e~y~~'p~

Mohr diagram sho~~l]lLi3.:!:.~l,!re This relationship follows immediately from equation (5-12) by
(1 for undrained test in_!~~~~!?). introducing the definitions Df Os and 0d' or from equation
( 5 -11 i.
<1 This is the well-known 'Tresca' yield criterion developed
by Tresca in 1864 and initially applied to metaIs. It is For three-dimensional 'analysis, the identification Df
CI applicable to the widely used "cj> =0" class Df analysis for major and minor principal stresses is quite involved. In such
situations, Mohr-Coulomb yield criterion may be written in
Cl saturated clay soils.
shear strength".
c then becomes cu' the "undrained
(1)------------------------------------------------
C[ See most soil mechanics textbooks. Having proved that the
For plane strain conditions equation (5-8) can be preferred slip direction Ls at 450 - ; cp to the 01 direction.
C(' wri tten in terms of stress componeints. Expanding 0d by equation (5-11) follows from the geometry of the Mohr diagram.
L-'-
LI 78
terms of O ,o and e invariants.
. The final Forrn is
79

m q
l l d E P
1
= d ~ aF
aa,;- = d)d1-Sincp) (5-17a)
F = -o Sin $+ ~o cose - Sin6Sin$ J - c Cos$ = o (5-14)
L m 13 13
~ d c P = d À~ = o (5-17b)
5.3.3 Von-Mises yield criterion 2 a02
cl p
((
This yield criterion was proposed by Von-Mises in 1913
d E3 = dÀ~ = - d 1,,(1+ Sin cp) (5-17c)
primarily for metaIs. It is frequently used for total stress ao 3
({ undrained analysis of soil masses and is an alternative to the
Tresca yield criterion(equation (5-8)), discussed earlier. Summing. gives
(( It is given by , =:p = 1
p
dE
+ dE
2
p
+ dE
P
3 = - 2dÀSin cp (5-18)
~- F o -2c
q
o (5-15) Note that dE: also equals dE: in this case.
r:
\{ 5.3.4 Drucker-Prager yield criterion Since dI" is positive, equation (5-18) implies that the incre-
ments of volumetric plastic strains are dilatant (note the
C; Drucker and Prager (1952) presented an approximation to negative sign) and are proportional to Sin cp for the
Coulomb criterion with associated flow rule.
the Mohr-Coulomb yield criterion. They modified Von-Mises
C{ yield criterion to include the influence of mean stress on
\" yielding. The criterion is written as

ç' F o
q
~ 20
m
Sin $ - 2 cCos $ o (5-16)

Von-Mises yield criterion and Drucker-Prager yield

~ .• criterion are of historic importance only. They were used in
.ro geotechnical analysis as a simplification of Tresca and Mohr-
<:» Coulomb yield criteria. It is, however, well established that
)
these approximations give poor results and offer no real
"-..J advantage in numerical computations.
((
v'
~ Dilatancy
~
d In section 5.2 we discussed flow rules in general. Here
'-' °d Equotion(5-13)
we demonstrate the connection between the flow rule and
~ dilatancy, i.e. the property whereby shearing causes a volume
'1, increase during plastic flow. When the stresses are in the
v elastic domain, the material behaves as linear elastic and
, ( isotropic. The dilatancy is then zero. A change in shear
'---
stress does not cause a change in the volumetric strain and, o;
Q similarly, a change in mean stress does not cause a change in
shear strain. The behaviour is uncoupled. What happens during
Q plastic flow?
r:
..,l
Figure 5-7 Mohr-Coulomb yield surface and
We examine this question taking the example of the Mohr-
associated flow rule.
Q Coulomb yield criterion with associated flow rule. Expanding
equation (5-4) in terms of principal strain components, and
G'
,--.
differentiating (5-11), we obtain
It is instructive to plot the Mohr-Coulomb yield func-
tion (equation (5-13)) in os, 0d space, as shown in figure
'-{ 15-7) ..X represents the point at which yielding oecurs. The
r', plastie strain components defined by the slope of the flow
'-( rule vector are now the strain increment invariants dEsP and
ê'
'-\
(

(
(
81
~ 80
d p associated fIow ruIe. In fact, if W =0. the pIastic potsntial
Ed . From equations (5-17a) and (5-17c) we have
~ function (equation (5-21)) reducss to
(

r
<::
dE P =
s
d E1
P + d EP
3
= - 2 dI. Sin cjJ (5-19a) o = ad - constant o (5-22)

L
,{ and de P =
P
~ (dE1 - de p) = dI. (5-19b)
and conssquently the rats of diIatation of pIastic strains is
zero. This is illustratsd by the vertical arrow in figure (5~B)
d s
<:»
,{ whence the slope of the flow rule vector, dEcF / dE~, is - ~SincjJ.
"--'
It can be. seen immediately from equation (5-13) that the slope
rL of the yield line is 2Sin cjJ. Consequently the fIow ruIe
vector is at right angles to ths yieId surface in accordance
with the assumption of normality.
~ The a ,ad pIot is useful because it shows at a glance
~. whether the fuatsrial is dilatant or noto If the flow rule vector
inclines to the left of vertical dEsP ( = dE p) is negative
({ and thsrefore the material is diIatant. If ~he inclination
fi' is to the right, the material is negatively dilatant.
~ °d
V
It oen be ahowM by e perellel ergument thet the flow ~\
r:
\ rule vector in a 01 ' a3 space is also at right-angles to
the yield surface. This is left as an exerci se for the reader. --~. -211
'( Equotlon (5
r:
The dilatancy predicted by the Mohr-Coulomb yield criter-
\ ion with associated flow rule is unrealistic. Overconsolidated o;
\ materiaIs do dilate on shearing but not so much, nor is the
rate constant. It reduces as shearing progresses. Oilatancy
) controls the collapse load of many geotechnical structures.
Figure 5-B Mohr-Coulomb yield function and non-
If it is prevsnted by, for sxampls, boundary constraints, the
) mean stress increases and this, in turn, increases the strength. associated plastic::FJ:.~~tic.,p(J~Elr:t_~,a_~
function.
\ .' In undrainsd situations ths pore water provides this constraint.
"\
\.:/
The increase in effective stress and strength is then assoc-
iated with a drop in the pore pressure.
One could thus choDse a non-associated
the desired dilatancy.
flow rule to give
An example of this is the treatment of
\ the "super-critical" yield surface in chapter 7, where a non-
<::
A part1al ramedy for th1a a1tuation 11a9 1n edopt1ng e associativs fIow ruIs is dsfined suoh that ~ reduoes as (J
~ non-associated flow rule. Let us consider a plastic potential
\ .•../ increases, becomi2g zero at the critical state. In the eve~t
,~ function of the form of non-availability of dilatancy characteristics of the mater-
v ial it may be prudent to analyse for the extreme conditions,
\ Q = a1 (1 -Sin Wl - a3 (1 +Sin W) constant = O (5.20) viz: an associated fIow rule (O = F) and a non-associated flow
"--'
,'( or O = a d -2a 5 Sin W - constant = O (5.21) rule with W
=0 and then make engineering judgement for the
'-' purpose of designo
where W
is an angle less than~. These equations are the
~ same as equations (5-11) and (5-13), respectively, except that Finally, note that the Tresca yieId criterion is a special
W has been substi tuted in place of ~. The yield function is case of the Mohr-Coulomb obtained by setting ~ =0. The W =0,
~ unchanged. The yield function and the plastic potential func- or zero dilatancy case, therefore results from an associative
tion related to 0s,ad axes are shown in figure (5-8). The
1 normality of plastic strain rates is now with respect to the
fIow rule. This is very useful since it makes this relatively
simple plasticity formulation applicable to the important cIass
Q plastic potential function, as shown in the figure. The rate of analysis of undrained saturated soils in terms of total
(
of dilatancy would be proportional to sin W as shown by equa- stress.
\.> tion (5-18). Since W
< ~, the rate of dilatancy with the non-
assDciated flow rule would be less than that predicted by an
((
C(
(

\
(
 82 83
5.5 Hardening law - specific forms position of subsequent yield surfaces after initiaI yieId, on
a 0d' as pIot. It is noted that the yield surfaces simply
5.5.1 Isotropic hardening expand or contract and alI subsequent yield surfaces are para-
11el to the initial yield surface. Hardening or softening of
,-, In the elasto-plastic materiaIs, the hardening law this type is called isotropic hardening ~r softening. The
j
x.. determines the manner in which the yield function (or yield critica 1 state model described in chapter 7 provides another
,( surface in stress space) changes due to plastic strain1ng. As example of an isotropic hardening/softening modelo The criti-
<:: an example. let us consider the Tresca yield criterion given cal state model, incidentally, is unusual in that the paramater
{ by h is the vo~umetric plastic strain.
'\..,-.

,.(
o - 2 c o
"-'
F
°1 3
5.5.2 K1nematic hardening

L ar F 0d - 2c (5-23)
There is another type Df harden1ng
Tresca yield function can be written as
law in which the

rL
If c is assumed as constant, we have ideal plasticity.
~ Suppose c is a function of the hardening parameter h. This F (°1 - 03 - edh)) - 2 c o
will usually be the deviatoric invariant EdP in plane stra1n.
I or E p in three dimensions. Then we can write (Od - cdh)) - 2 c o (5-25)
q or F
.~
,~,." c = c (h) (5-24)
,
I where c ih) represents a hardening function. Equation [5-25)
represents a yield surface in which the elastic domain trans-
lates 1n the stress space (figure 5-10).- Such hardening is
called anisotropic or kinematic hardening. They hav8 been
-( Subsequent yield surfaces recently introduced in soil mechanics te model behaviour of
soils under cyclic and transient loads. Oiscussion Df this
\
==~---~==-
A topic is beyond the scope of this book.
((, hardening
"(
Flod,h) =O
s: o 1 ;' <

) u
B
lnitial yield surface

"-( Strain softening

<;
(
/~

\,/
( o,
'---- C Subsequent elastic domain
Ia) Ib)
/~

r,\ ~
o
'--./ Figure (5-9) (a) Strain hardening/strain softening functions,
\.
'---" (b) Initial and subsequent yield surfaces after
lnitial elastic domain
h~rdening/softening. C
J
.:z Figure (5-9 a) shows a typical variation of ct'\~f~l(:~ Tresca as
« material with h. In curve A the value of c "incrÉll3seswi th
increase of h, while in curve B, c decreases with h. Curve
J A represents a strain hardening function while curve B repre- Figure 5-10 Representation of kinematic hardening.
sents a strain softening function. Figure (5-9 b) shows the
,J

\
/
 ~
) 64 85
l.i
5.6 Formulation of elasto-plastic stress-strain law It is a basic assumption that during plastic yield the
L stress remains on the y~eld surface. This implies that

C
/(
We are now in a position to gather the threads together d F (~ r h) o ( 5-30)
x., to obtain a single relationship between increments of stre55
.I
, and increments of strain. We thU5 shall seeK the form of O
We now introduce, for brevity, the symbols êf and a
'-....' in the equation -ep
to repre5ent the vectors dF/da and dQ/aa, respectively. -q
da = O d c (5-26)
~,
_ep
'( Expanding (5-30) by the chain rule
,~ where da and d E are increments of s t re ss and total strain
(elastic-plus plastic) tensors and Qep is the elasto-plastic
rI matrix. Firstly, using the additivity po st ulete , we can write ~f
T d
~ +
dF
ãh .
dh'd
dE P ~
P o (5-31 )

t e Equation (5-31) is known as the consistency equation.

E = E + EP (5-27a)
((
Substituting (5-26c)and (5~5) into (5-27b) leads to
d Ee d EP
i or d E= + (5-27b)
r-:
-1
.j where Ee and EP denote elastic and plastic components of the d E = O
-e d a
_ + dÀ a
_q (5-32)
total strain. -
\.,1 Substituting (5-5) into (5-31) leads to
Secondly, the stresse~ are related to the elastic components
(( (fe) o f the strains through an elastic matrix .ge. 1.8.
r: a T d a + dr .~ .dÀ a o (5-33 )
_f - dh dEP -q
'i
I~--
e
a = O (5-26a) Oefining a parameter H by
\ - -e
E
-
)' or da = O dEe (5-28b) T
-e ~f d ~ = H dÀ (5-34)

;
'c. ,
or d Ee = O
-e
-1
da (5-28c) and substituting in (5-33) gives
) Substituting (5-27b) in (5-26b) leads to dF
\...,.'
H dh ) T (5-35 )
ãh (
{ dfP êq
da O [dE _ - dEP]
= _e (5-29)
,
'-'
"\
Thirdly, the plastic strain increments are related to the flow Pre-multiplying equation (5-32) by 2fT g and noting that
'.J
rate, i.e. O O' -1 Ls the identity matrix, leads to e
~e ~e
,-j
T T T
"\

d P = d À~ ~f ~e d~ = ~f d ~ + ~f ºe d À ~q (5-36)
E (5-5)bis
,--,' da
'( We shall derive the elasto-plastic matrix for the general T
Eliminating ~f da by (5-34) and rearranging, gives
non-associated case i n which Q" F. The associated case can
11\
•......• always be obtained by setting Q= F. 1 T
d À = - ~f ~e d E
(5-37)
:1 Fourthly, the yield condition is given by T
6
<i"-- in which 6 H + a O a
-f -e -q
F(a,h) = O (5-3)bis
.~.." ,Rearranging (5-32) leads to
.T' in which h= h(fP) is the hardening parameter referred to
...\ previously. Note that if the material is ideally plastic, so da O dE-dÀO a ( 5-38)
-e _ _e -q
.,J that there is neither hardening nor softening, there is no vari-
-tion of F with h, l.e. âF/dh = D.
J
(
 .) ,

,\
'.....
\
B7
(( 86
Substitution Df (5-37) into (5-3B) gives the required relation
Y between dç; and d!;;.i.e. equation (5-26). The matrix ~ep is
model has close links with
fact been used as a device
elasto-plastic theory and has in
to obtain results pertaining to
c elasto-p~astic behaviour. The elasto-visco-plastic model is
,T"-',
then :
I
flep = ~e
D - 1:. b b T [5-39) described in the following paragraphs.
S ~q ~f
~, The essential and rather phiIosophical assumption in
in which elasto-visco-plasticity is that alI plastic strains [called
1
'-...' b = D a visco-plastic strains in this theory) in the material are
~q -e -q
developed with 'time'. It may be recalled that elasto-plastic
~ = strains are time-independent or, in other words, are produced
~f ge ~f
'r'-- instantaneously.
elasto-visco-plastic
Figure (5-11 )shows a rheological analogue of
material. It consists of a spring which
In the case of ideal plasticity, the yield function is
({ independent of hardening parameter, i.e.
is in series with a dashpot and a slider system in parallel.
The slider denotes yielding and permanent strains which cannot
~ <lF
take place instantaneously due to the viscous dashpot which

«
r- so that by equation
ãh
[5-35), H
D

D, and
needs time to strain.
behaves purely elastically,
elastic spring.
Thus, instantaneously, the material
alI stress being taken by the
-r
r>,
'-( e aT b (5-40)
r'o ~f -q
'-i
O The elasto-plastic matrix, D ,is in general non-symmetric
'( due to the term _ep
r

Spring
'r<--" b b T
~q _f
)
Only when Q = F, i.e. the flow rule is associated, does this
J term and ths elasto-plastic matrix become symmetric. Recalling
~) that the stiffness matrix of a structure Df elastic material
,,( is given [see chapter 2) by
'-'" Oashpot-- -Slider
,í
'--"'
.-(
K J 6
T
D 6 dv [5-41)
v
~i

~
\..'...I
the tangential stiffness of a structure of an elasto-plastic
material at any stage Df plastic flow would be given by
"
..j
6T
'\
K
~ep J ~O ep _6 dv [5-42)
Figure 5-11 Rheological analogue of
~../ v
elasto-visco-plast~city.
1 If ºep is non-symmetric, the resulting ~ matrix would
also be non-symmetric. Most of the standa~ solution routines The model is intuitively more appealing than plasticity
1 make use of the symmetry property Df the stiffness matrix and theory and it happens that the associated algebra is much
simpler.
:1 such routines will not be applicable if a tangential stiffness
approach is adopted for non-associated flow rules [Q ~ F).
1 This is discussed further in chapter B. Let us consider a uni-axial strain controlled test on an
eIasto-plastic material. At time (t) equal to zero, e uni-
j' 5.7 Elasto-visco-plasticity exiel strain [E) has been applied. Since, instantaneously,
the behaviour is pur-e ly elastic, the stress [a) et t = O is
j A model of elasto-visco-plasticity has been successfully E E where E is the a Ie st c modulus.
í This stress 'mey be less
used in the quasi-static applications of the finite element than or greater than the uni-axial yield strsss [Y). If it i5
J. method in geotechnical engineering in the past decade. This
.;.( D

(
1\
 (

(
88 89
A
\.... less than the uni-axial yield stress, no visco-plastic 5.7.1 Assumptions
(
strains are set up. However, if the stress is larger than the
C uni-axial stress, the visco-plastic strain (EVP) is set up at These can be summarised ~s follows:
C a certain finite rate (EVP) which depends on the excess of
O over Y and the elastic strain and stress in the bar reduce (a) It is assumed that instantaneously the material behaves
L as they are related by elast1cally.

G Ee = E _ E vp (b) It is postulated that stress trajectories can cross the

yield surface.so that stress situations outside the
~ yield surface are admissible, i.e. F > O. This is in
a • E Ee
« I co~trast to the theory of eiasto-plasticity.

« or CJ E (E - E vp) (5-43)
1 (c) Stresses outside the yield surface give rise to a visco-
plastic stra1n rate according to a specified 'flow
:,s. The rate of visco-plastic straining is defined in such a
equation'. Stresses on or inside the yield surface
manner that it is zero only when CJ ~YD' Thus a steady-state
Q- (no further increa~e in visco-plastic strains) after a time require ~vp = O.
r t =T exists only when the stress is on the yield surface in
\í the multi-axial situation. (d) The concepts of yield function, hardening law and flow
rule developed in the context of elasto-plasticity are
~-
Figure(5-12) shows a typical stress-strain curve obtained also applicable to elasto-visco-plastic1ty.
(:. by joining the points at steady-state for the uni-axial strain
V 5.7.2 The flow squatibn
controlled testo The stress path traversed in reaching the
r.
':.{ steady-state is shown by the dotted Iines. If the sample is
unIoaded at any stage, elastic unloading takes place, and There are a number of var1antsl that presented here 1s
r>,
'( visco-plaatic ~ermanent strains remain in the sam~18 in a due to Perzyna [1963) and is the bne wh1ch has been used in
r-; manner similar to the theory of elasto-plasticity. geotechnical problems.
) The rate of visco-plastic strains (~Vp) is exp11c1tly
.,,:)
given by ~
J aQ
~ i
ÊVP = ~ < ~(F) > ãã (5-44)
J ~ ~
"-)
,..-l
where ~ is the 'fluidity parameter' - a material constant
o o
A.
J
Vl
Vl
QJ
<-
-,t =-,O ~(F) 1s the flow function

.C\ Vi F 1s the y1eld function at the effective stress leveI

v
,',
"-"
"- <,
<,
<,
<,
<,
t\,
t=T <,
<
~ 1s the plast1c
>
potent1al
denotes that the quant1ty with1n these
funct10n
brackets = O
~\ Yo if F ~ 0, but if F > O, these brackets are treated
<:»

-..!..
<.Ste~ stote
as normal brackets.
points
Ideally, ~ and ~(F) should be identified and determined from
'\ standard experimental tests. However, the main interest in
'-'"
3. geotechnical problems is in determining steady-state stress
and plast1c stra1ns. The transient stress path 1s not impor-
tanto It is usual 1n such s1tuat1ons to assume
~ • Visco- plostic stroin •
Stroin, E
:1 ~(F) F (5-45)

1 and assign an arb1trary constant value to the flu1d1ty parameter.

,J Figure 5-12 Stress-strain time history of elasto-visco-
plastic material of non-strain hardening type.
J
(
 "I

~ 90 91

1 EquatiOh (5-44) then reduces to

d o o d E - \l < F > O ~ dt (5-52)
S
\.....)
E vp = \.I • (F) .ao
30
if F > o
'V 'Ve '" e ao
'V

Chapter 8 gives further information on the stability character-

\j J
E vp istics and the choice of time-step length, and also shows how
J
= o if F ~ o (5-46)
the law is implemented in the finite element method.
'-' Comparing the above equation with equation (5-5) it is
-(
-....J noted that while in equation (5-5) dÀ has to be eliminated,
.t equation (5-46) gives the visco-plastic strain rates explicitly. 5.8 References
It can be shown that provided sufficiently small load increments
-( are used in the analysis, and steady-state conditions are DAVIS, E.H. (1969). "Theories Df plasticity and the failure
'-'o achieved, the result from an elasto-visco-plastic analysis is of soil masses", Chapter 6, Sail Mechanics, ed. I.K. Lee,
1 the same as from an elasto-plastic analysis. Thus equations Df Butterworth.
'-..- slasto-visco-plasticity can be used purely as an artifice to
HILL, R. (1971). "The mathematical
Cl set up a time-marching scheme to obtain elasto-plastic results.
Oxford University Press.
theary af plasticity",
Use of the elasto-visco-plastic algorithm as a general technique
3: for non-linear analysis is discussed in chapter 8.
.,,-, MARTIN, J.B. (1975J. "Plasticity: fundamental and general
'-J 5.7.3 Stress-strain law results", The MIT Press.
J We shall now write the complete equations Df elasto-visco- PERZYNA, P. (1966). "Fundamental problems in viscoplasticity",
,-. Advances in Applied Mech., 9, pp. 243-377.
\J plasticity, identifying how increments of strain are related to
increments of stress, or vice-versa.
Q
Firstly we write the additivity assumption in incremental form,
"''-1 1.e.
,-
'-(
d E d Ee + d EVP (5-47)
"(
,- Writing:
'-i
G.: d E
P ÊVP.dt (5-48)
),
'--z where dt represents an infinitesimal 'time-step'. In applica-
tions dt will be finite and the differential operator 'd'
'<,
( should be replaced by '6' to indicate this. The flow equation
'4..-; in the simplified form is given by
~ a.O
'-..-' E vp =\.1< F>-fa' (5-49)
-\
-....J

-\ The stresses are related to the elastic strains; hence

v
d
v d E
e o -1 d a (5-50)
~e
{,
\.....,
Substituting (5-48), (5-49) and (5-50) in equation (5-47) leads
,.( to
o -1
d E = O da + \.I < F> dO dt (5- 51 )
o ~e aa
~ o" re-arranging (5-51),

J
 93

J. CHAPTER 6
J
J LIMIT THEOREMS ANO TrEIR APPLICATION
,J
6.1 Introduction
-J
Although this book is about finite elements, this chapter
V is noto The desirability of incorporating a yield criterion
in non-linear finite element formulations has already been
'< indicated. It is necessary to check the collapse predictions
(\ of these formulations by alternative means. The limit
theorems of plasticity provide a simple and powerful tool for
'~( doing this.

'( There are many problems to do with bearing capacity, slope

stability or earth pressure, where the engineer is primarily
~
,.
interested in the collapse loaj or factor of safety against
\
collapse and calculations of deformations are not important.
'( If the soi1 is assumed as an elastic ideally plastic material,
it is possible to compute the jounds of the collapse load by
'(
a relatively simple 'Limit Analysis' which can be per70rmed
.7 manually. These bounds give useful guidance on the accuracy
of finite element solutions.
\.-

C In this chapter we first introduce a rigid-pla~tic model

é. of material behaviour. Next, a few corrollories of the
normality condition discussed in chapter 5 are stated followed
by the limit theorems. Finally examples of the application
(~
of these theorems are given.
i\
~ 6.2 Rigid-plastic material
(~
,(
A rigid-plastic material is a hypothetical solid which
'\.-: undergoes no deformations at alI when stressed below the yield
point. It is the limiting case of an elasto-plastic material
(~ with modulus of elasticity (EJ approaching infinity. Figure
(l E-1Jshows the uni-axial stress-strain curve for a rigid-
ideally plastic material. It is possible to conceive rigid
G strain hardening or softening materials as well.

'-I 6.2.1 Assumptions, definitions and some implications of

the rigid-plastic model
.(

\( In many problems, the elastic st~ains are small and can

be ignored. Consequently thE use Jf a rigid-plastic model is
\ justified in such cases. A more im~ortant role of this model,
however, is to find the collapse load for a structure of
"-{
elasto-plastic material. That this can be achieved using a

'I
.--- o • •• • -

;~
 -(
/

'"( 94 95
~ I 5. At the instant of collapse, the changes in the geometry
I
of the body are smail so that alI variables can be
'-.. referred to the original configuration.
(
Rigid stroin hordening
plostic
,\ 6.3 Corrollaries of the normality principIe
'---
-] Rigid ideolly ptasric
'--
:\
Ê Yo~K~---
Vl
!
Normality principIe was discussed in chapter 5. Accord-
ing to this principIe the rates of the plastic strain (€p)(i)
'-.... are given by (see equation (5-4)) ~
/'(
'-- Rigid stroin softening ~p dÀ ~ (6-2)
plostic ao~
'--( '"
:1 Stroin
where dÀ is a positive proportionality
yield function as previously.
parameter and F is the
We shall now discuss two lemmas
\J relating to the applicability of this principIe which are
necessary for the understanding of the limit theorems.
d Figure 6-1 Uni-axial stress-strain curves for rigid
-:
..J
plastic materiaIs Lemma 1: áT EP = O (6-3)
~ '"
r1g1d-plastic model 1s due to the 'Correspondence Theorem' Proof: If stress situation i9 inside the yield surface, i.e.
'-f
r
which states the following: c
F < O, then P = O (purely elastic behaviour) and hence lemma
~ would be tru~. If the stress situation is on the yield sur-
Correspondence Theorem: The collapse load for a body of an face, à should represent change of stress from one position on
elasto-ideally plastic material is the same as that of a body the yi~ld surface to another on the same yield surface (ideally
~ of rigid-ideaIly plastic material having the same geometr~l plastic behaviour). Thus the vector á is tangential to the
the same fixity conditions and the same yield parameters(~
~ yield surface (figure 6-2) and is ort~ogonal to €p which '
In the following paragraphs the words 'rigid-plastic' are taken proves the lemma. ~
to imply ~igid-ideally plastic' unIess strain hardening/
ç'
(.
softening is expressly specified.
O'3·E3

'--' The assumption of rigid plasticity impIies the following:

Yield surface
l- 1. There are no elastic deformations. The total strain

ê (e) is always equal to the plastic strain (~p) ie,

t
"
~.

, \.
v
~ = R,p (6-1)
~gent plane

0.- 2. The rigid-plastic pattern as a rule leads to indetermin-

ancies of various types. For example stress fields

(l cannot be determined due to non-deformability of rigid 0',. t,

regions.
\.:.
(~

3. Unconstrained plastic flow or collapse takes place when

Cl the plastic zona intersects the free boundary or some
such mechanism is formed.
(i
4. Only situations of imminent collapse can be studied. °2, E2 /
Cl Figure 6-2 Geometrical representation of Lemma 1
« li)The theorem 19 actually more general than this. 5ee
« e.g.5alencon (1977) where the theorem 1s also proved.
(i) The increments can be replaced by the rates
rate) - 5ee 5.7. .
(a dot denotes
(j

" '. ",~""t:.~ ':H •••••1i'\lll!!i

••mltliS;I~u.W.l.'U. •• "'""J"., 1. -":O,' ,,1 •.•••. s; ',:~""r--•...'. . -'.:!i.j.!i.
'{

Ç" 96 97
r
<, Lemma 2: (o-o )T
'V 'Va
EP
'V-
> O (6-4)
On the path BC plastic strains (~p) occur and the com-
where O represents a state of stress on the yield surface and plementary work has to take these into account. Thus comple-
~
(
\....
"
tP' rep'fesents the corresponding rate of plastic strains. R.a' mentary work on th~ path BC is given by
is any other 'allowable' state of stress. The term 'allowable" R:+6R:
() needs some explanation. 1n chapter 5 it was shown that the
theory of plasticity does not admit a situation such that
J {R,e+~p}T di(. (6-5b)

C
,-{ F (o) > O
'V
i?,

Note that ce and EP are variable along the stress path. At

"-, Thus 'allowable' states of stress (o ) are such that the point ~ a cerlain total plastic strain (6ÊP) would have
'V
'Va taken place. When the stress path CA is followed, unloading
~ takes place elastically and no additional plastic strains can
F (o ) < O
'Va take place. The complementary work done on the path CA is
~
given by
C5..

Cl JR: {c
e
+6E}'P T
di(. (6-5c)

« •P
°3·E~
i?,+ 6i(.

(1 Yield surface Adding (6-5a). (6-5b) and (6-Sc) we obtain the total com-
plementary work (Wc) done ave r the closed cycle ABCA which is
Q less or equal to zero. Thus
(j
W JR: {~e}T di?, +
r+ 6i?,
{ C e + E p} T do +

Ci c
i(.A i?,
'V 'V '"

~
JR:A e 'P T
di(. ~ O (6-6)
C{ /1 01.t~
{~ +6R,}

ç- R:+tll?,
Combining the terms of elastic strain into one term, we have

2 •P
O2'(2
f {{} T dZ + JZ+
6Z p T di?, +
{ R,} JO'VA {6~p}T
'V
da < O ( 6-7)

C i(. 5?,+65?,
C Figure 6-3 Stress path in loading and unloading from
an arbitrary admissible state of stress The first term on the left hand side of equation (6-7) is
t Proof: The proof of this lemma is based on Orucker's zero as alI elastic strains are recoverable. The second term

t
(l,
stability postuJates. Without going into complicated mathem-
atics it simply implies that no energy can be extracted from
the material in the process of deformation. Let us choose an
is negligible if 6i(. + O.

Ji?,A {6~P}T dI?,~ O

19noring this term, we have,

(6-8)
arbitrary stress path along a closed cycle A B C A, figure [6-3).
ci 1n order to ensure that energy is not extracted from the mat- i?,
+ 6i?,

Q.. erial, the COmPl!mentary work around a closed cycle euch as

As 6~P is constant (the value of plastic strain attained at
ABCA defined by ~T do should be less than or equal to zero,
where c represen 5 tot~l strains. point C) equation (6-8) can be integrated and leads to
(l split 1nto three parts AB, BC and CA.
The stress path can be
'P T
i.i On the path AS only elastic strains (R,e)take place. The- ..'- {6~} (i?,A- i(. - 6i?,) ~ O
complementary work done on this path is given by
11
Ú R, {ce}T da (6-5a)
J 'V 'V
u ZA
(
 '-'
é 98 99
~ Neglecting produc~ of infinitesimal quantities, and replacing

~ 6~P by kP
T 'p (6-9)
(~ (o
'V
- a)
'Va
E
'V-
> O

CL which proves the lemma.

Yield surfoce
« Lemma 2 has many other implications. Consider a stress sit- °3

« uation on the yield surface (figure 6-4) represented by stress

~. Let ~a be another stress situation on the yield surface.
(j Now

(j (R:-~a)T kP = I~-~al IkPI cosa (6-10)

8 "" 90°; (OS o is negative
hence Lemma 2
(j where I I represents the magnitude of the vector. Q Q - Qa is voilated

C{' °3.
~ield surface /
k;..<:::::::~-------_ •. O,
r-
I..{

C{
r\
'-( °1
Figure 6-5 Concavity of the yield surface

ç! O, Substituting (6-11) in (6-4) results in

(.
J' aT ÊP > O (6-12)
'V 'V -
(I
C~
(; °1
The 1eft hand
dissipated per
which must be
side of equation [6-12) represents rate of energy
unit volume within the materialduring
positive.
plastic flow
Thus if this condition 1s violated
Figure 6-4 Geometric representation of Lemma 2 it would imply that energy is being generated within the soil
mass.
~ The riÔht hand side of equation [6-10) is positive or zero if
G a < 90 as it represents the area of the parallelogram ABCO.
It-can be seen from figure (6-5) that the right hand side can
In summary, lemma 2 is true only if [a) yield surface is
convex, [b) an associated flow rule is assumed,as with an
cS become negative if there is a concavity in the yield surface.
Figure (6-5) also illustrates that in a convex yield surface
arbitrary non-associated rule the scalar product (o-~~) ~p
cannot be guaranteed to be positive.
~ alI points on the yield surface and all points within the
yield surface must lie on the same side of the tangent plane.
(l A3 we can choose ~a at any point onor within the yield surface
6.4 Stress and velocity discontinuities

(l let us assume In rigid pIas ti c bodies some parts of the body which have
become plastic may be deforming continuously while other parts
CI ~a = O [6-11 )
may not be deforming at alI. This gives rise to a discon-
Cl [Note that the origin must lie within the yield surface as
tinuity of rate of strain which is in turn related to rate of
change Df displacements o~ in other.words,velocities. In such
(( otherwise it would mean that the material yields without any
situations the components of the velocity normal to the dis-
stresses imposed on it)
continuity surface have to be continuous otherwise a gap will
(( be created or the parts of the body will penetrate into each
other.
C(
r'
'''-{
~
'-I
(
 '(

ç
r,
100 101
\", (d) Boundary conditions Df (i) surface loads. (ii) surface

L displacements - including conditions Df fixity.

L Component of stress normal to

the discontinuity I Q n ) should
We will now try to find some approximate solutions which
although not satisfying alI the requirements listed above do
L be continuous
provide a lower or an upper bound to the exact solution.

~ 6.6 Statically and plastically admissible (SPA) stress field

~
A field Df stress (stresses prescribed at alI the points
( over a body) is said to be SPA if it satisfies the requirements
(a). (c) and (d) (i). This stress field may not have any
( resemblance to the actual stress or true solution. It may also
Surface of stress discontinuity
(. include discontinuities provided the requirements for stress
IA) continuity across surfaces Df discontinuity (see section 6.4)
(( are met.

Ci Component of velocity normal to the The theorem which enables us to correlate the SPA stress
discontinuity I Vn ) should be continuous field with the collapse load is the 'Lower Bound Theorem' Df
collapse discussed in the next section.
ç 6.7 Lower bound theorem
C[' _ _ Surface of velocity discontinuity
If aSPA stress field can be found for a body under a
(( (8) given set Df loads. the body will either not collapse or may
ç be just on the verge Df collapse under these loads. In other
words. the load (P ) for which aSPA stress field has been
ç' Figure 6-6 Surface Df admissible stress and
velocity discontinuities
found is equal to 6r less than the true collapse load (P ) i.e.
c
C Pe 2. Pc
Similarly. there can be a discontinuity in the stress
~: f1eld but the components of stres9 normal to the d1scont1nu1ty
This is one of the two lim1t theorems. They are extremely
(, have to be continuous otherwise conditions of equilibrium
would be violated. Figure (6-6) illustrates the conditions
useful as w111 be shown by examples in later sections.

L required to be fulfilled across a surface Df discontinuity.

The proof of the theorem (Martin 1975) hinges on the
L 6.5 Requirements Df a solution to a boundary value problem
Lemma 2 which in turn is based on the assumptions of:

~ (a) Convexity of the yield surface

This is just to remind the reader that the theoretical
(~ solution (stress field. strains. displacements. reactions etc)
(b) Normality condition or associated flow rule.
Df a boundary value problem must satisfy the following require-
~ ments.
Although the proof has been given for rigid-plastic
materiaIs. it is valid for elastic-plastic materiaIs as well
~ (a) Equilibrium
since the collapse load is independent of the modulus of
~ (b) Strain-compatability. The components Df strain are not
elasticity (E-~ for rigid-plastic materiaIs). Thus. a Iower
bound value for collapse load Df an elasto-plastic body can be
independent as they have to satisfy certain compatability
found by using this theorem.
«- conditions. (See Timoshenko and Goodier. 1951).
(l.
How aSPA stress field is to be found is illustrated by
(c) Stress-strain relationship.
\i' examples. It needs some practice and ingenuity. Calculations
involved are straightforward.
ç
(\
(
'(
1J3
102
~ Again since Txy is zero, o and o are principal stresses.
) 6. B Examples of a.pplieation Df the lower bound theorem The Tresca yield criterion for pu~ely coKesive soil is

~ 6.B.1 Strip footing F = o 1 -o 3 - 2c =10 Y -o x I- 2c = O

(6-14)

L
by the stress field in each of the three
iL It is required to find the ultimate bearing eapaeity [pc)
of an infinitely long strip footing on purely cohesive soil
and it is satisfied
zones.
having eohesion 'c' and unit weight 'y'.
~ If the load on the footing is 4e per unit width the
I( Solution:
boundary conditions of surface loads will also be satisfied.
'-- Consider the strese field shown in figure [6-7). The Thus with a footing load of 4e the stress field shown in
~ stress field has two lines of diseontinuities A C and B O. figure [6-7) is statieally and plastically admissible. Accord-
AB is the loaded area. We first note that the component of ing to the lower bound theorem the true eollapse load is
~ stress normal to the discontinuities is continuous. The stress greater than or equal to 4c, i.e.
!L is assumed to be constant throughout each zone.
(6-15)
p > 4c
c -
~
a- 4C1unil .••.idlh
Note that the intensity of the collapse load does not depend on
the width of the footing and is also independent of the unit
A ( B X
(J weight of soil.
----11 ------,-,
I{ I Iy )'+4CI I I y.y 6.8.2 Vertical cut

cz
~.
y
[
~.y
I y. y·2CI
ly.y+2CI I
~I
ly.y+2CI IYT2CI
Ilyy+2CI
4Ç' yy
ly.y+2CI
cohesive
Find the height to which a vertical
soil ean stand.
cut in a purely

I I
ç y.y

O I
ly.y+4CI

=O I 1, Y =0
- X

\
1 'Y= 1,y

:~ l {Lines of slress disconlinuity

O
.Y

O
~ ZONE I II ZONE~ ZONE m
\.L ~ y.y ZONE I
(
l- ~ ~ y ~
,.\
I
\~

t
((
Figure 6-7 A statically and plastically admissible stress
field for strip footing on purely cohesive
foundetion
.IY_hl

y.lr-h)
1~.-<f'Y
y.iy-h)
1 y,.ly-h)
discont' . ress
Planes of sI
IOUlty
y,lr-h)
1- The equilibrium equations are ~ yly-h)
I Y·Y
;l dT
ZONE m ZONE n
1.
dO
x xy I
+ay- O
dX
I
(( ao
'-1
h
~
ax
+-'i..
ay y (6-13) h
Since Tx is zero. equation (6-13) is satisfied in each of
\~
the thre~ zones. Figure 6-8 SPA stress field for a vertical cut in
purely cohesive soil
Q Solution: Consider the stress field ehown in figure 6-8.
11

(
 7
I
'-./ 104 105
í. It satisfies the equilibrium corditions since (1) there
\
'-, '
6.9 Kinematica1ly admissible strain rate field
l. is no variation Df horizontal stress and the shear stresses are
zero everywhere, and (2) aay!ay = y, where y is the unit weight
of the soil. The stress field also satisfies the boundary A plastic strain rate field (strain rates prescribed at
/ alI the points over a body) is sa~d to be kinematica11y ad-
\ .... conditions. Therefore it is statically admissible. It would
be also plastically admissible if the difference in the prin- missible (K.A.) if it satisfies the requirements (b), (c) and
t cipal stresses was limited to 2c. (d)(ii) listed in section (6.7) and also gives rise to boundary
;{ velocities (vk) such that
'- The difference in the principal stresses in the three
po vk dS ~ O
t zones is f
S
(6-17)

'{ ZONE I yy where po represents the surface lOBes acting over the boundary
«
~.
ZONE II yy - y(y-h) yh
S.

It may be reca1led that in a rigid plastic body, the total

ZONE III O strains are p1astic strains. Equation (6-17) is simp1y the
ri statement Df the fact that work done by the surface tractions
In zones I and II the maximum difference possible is yh which should be positive. As an example consider the case Df a strip
I(
should be lim1tad to 20. footing. With tha downward force, if the strein reta fiald
Thus assumed is such that the 10aded surface moves upwards say
i yh = 2c uniformly, the 1eft hand side of equation [6-17) would be neg-
\' or h
2c
y
ative and such an assumed strain rate fie1d will not be K.A.

'( It is to be noted that associated with the K.A. strain

where h is the height Df the vertical cut. rate field is a stress field which does nct necessari1y satisfy
\ Thus for the height Df a vertical cut up to 2c!y a
the conditions Df equilibrium.

r statically as well as plastically admissible stress field has

been found.
The theorem which enables us to corrElate K.A. strain
fie1ds with col1apse is the 'Upper Bcund' theorem.
rate

~
"i(
I~
According to the Lower Bound theorem
the vertical cut can stand (h) is given by
the height to which 6.10 Upper bound theorem

If a kinematically admissible strai~ rate field can be

\ h > 2c
(6-16) found for a body under a set of loads, thEn the body muse be
- y
on the verge Df c01lapse or must have already collapsed. In
~ The stress fields shown in figures (6-7) and (6-8) are one of other words, the load [Pu) for which a kirematica1ly admissible
.( the many possible statically and plastically admissible stress strain rate field has been found is equal to or greater than
'~
fields for these problems. If other SPA stress fields are the true collapse load, i.e.
li found for which a higher lower bound is obtained, it would be
an improved solution. But before we attempt to seek other Pu ~ Pc
(
lower bound solutions we shall discuss the upper bound theorem.

« The proof of the theorem

lemma 2.
[Martin, 1375) is again based on

\1
We illustrate the use Df the theoren by some examples.
cf
i.( 6.11 Examples of application of the upper bound theorem

\l 6.11.1 Strip footing

'{ Find the ultimate bearing capacity (pc) Df an infinitely

long strip footing resting on a p~rely cohesive foundation.
li
I,)
'-'--
L 106 107
Solution: Consider the velocity field shown in figure (6-9l.
~ The region EAOeO is rigid and is not moving at alI. The Let us assume that this, indeed, is the case. Now the
rate Df work done by the external forces must be equal to the
L velocities are zero alI over this region. BO, AO and OC are
the planes Df velocity discontinuity but note that the normal rate of work done by the internal stresses. The strain rates
0..- component Df velocities is continuous across these discontin- are zero everywhere as the velocities do not vary in the x or y
uities. The block AOB is assumed to be moving downwards directions. Internal work is therefore done only on the
li (along Y-axisl and to the right (along +ve X-axisl with unit surfaces Df veloeity discontinuity.
velocity. The resultant velocity is 1:2 units álong AO. The
Q Rate Df work done by externa 1 forces = force x veIocity
block BOC is assumed to be moving upwards and to the right,
(1 the resultant velocity Df I:2being directed along De. The
=Pu8.1. (6-19)
jump in the tangential velocity along the discontinuity is
(j' 1-(-1) = 2 units. We first need to demonstrate that the pro-
posed strain rate fieId is kinematically admissible. We Rate of work done by internal forces = rate of work
(j therefore examine the requirements Df the kinematic admiss- done over AO + rate Df work done over OB + rate Df work
(j ibility diseussed 1n seet10n 6.9.
(6-20)
done over De
(-

C("
= (c. I:2Bl. /2 + (e.Bl. 2 + (e/2 B). /2 6eB (6-21l

ç _
"I ./Pu /unit Io'idth
é
Equating (6-19) to (6-21) we have

r:
r' __ B_

"IB ~ ) O
x Pu B = 6c.8
\
("
E
•

A\)(~So
, , I , ,

1 I [4 //
1 /

or Pu 6c C6 -22)
j <,
" ~1
fi 11 fi /
According to the upper bound theorem, since a kinematically

>f
-, " I /
/ Velocily = O admissible strain rate field has been
Pu = 6c, at this load the collapse is
found for the load
imminent or must have
Velocily = O "" ~ Planes of ~elocily
f. already taken place. Thus, the true collapse load [Pc) is
'--' "" ~ disconlirulty less than Pu i.e.
(
\,.; ioy Pc < Pu = 6e
,(
'-' It may be reealled that we had seen in 6.8 .1 that using lower
(
V bound theorem, the true eollapse should be greater than 4e.
i( Thus,
~
Figure 6-9 A kinematieally admissible veloeity field
4e<Pe<6c (6-23)
"I...:.- for the strip footing problem

Cl F1rstly, the strain eompatibility is automatieally sat-

gives the bounds Df the collapse load.

« isfied since we have stipulated a velocity field. It is similar

to assuming a displaeement field, whieh would always give rise
6.11.2 Vertical cut

Q to a compatibla atrein fiald. Secondly if tha shaaring atresse6 Find the height to which a vertical cut in purely co-
on the boundaries AO, De and OB are l1m1ted to the cohesion hesive soil can stand.
J 'c', the material eonstitutive law would also be satisfied.
We wish to find a solution using the upper bound theorem.
~- Thirdly, sinee the block ABO moves downwards along the direction
A lower bound solution was found in 6.B.2.
Df the force acting on AB,
(~

~
f AB P
u
B dS > O (6-18) eonsider the velocity field shown in figure (6-10). A
wedge making an angle a to the vertical is sliding with a unit
.r:

Thus the proposed veloeity field is k1nematieally admissible velocity along the plane AB. We use identieal arguments as
'{ already used in the solution of the problem in 6.11.1 to show
(-- if the shearing stress on the boundaries AO, De and OB are
'-( restrieted to 'e'.
!

~l
(

I
 1
( -,
r'
I,..
108
that the velocity field is kinematically admissible with the
109
6.12 Improved salutions
f shearing stress along AB limited to c. Assuming h as the
L)
L. height of the slope, the rate of work done at the discontin-
.uity AB is '
In the sections 6.8 and 6.11 examples of the application
of lawer and upper bound theorems were given. Using more
elabarate stress and strain fields, the bounds for any problem
C c(_h_).1
COBa
(6-24)
can be found within narrower limits. Theoretically if the
lower bound and the upper bound solutions coincide, the corres-
~ ponding limit load must be the' true collapse load. We shall
~ take up the problem of bearing capacity of a strip footing on
purely cohesive soil and discuss some more elaborate statically
l and kinematically admissible stress and strain rate fields.

6.12.1 Strip footing on cohesive soil

([ C h tan a B
Lower bound: Consider the stress field'shown in figure (6-11).
f It can be seen that the stress field is statically and plast-

;alA I /
1 Velocity = O ically admissible. The dotted lines represent stress dis-
({ continuities and p = y.y where y is the depth af the poin~
r
\{

C'
(
h
cosal\ r
I \J
Plane of velocity
discontinuity
under consideration below the' ground surface. To see if the
components of stress normal to the planes of discontinuity
continuous, one needs to resolve the at r-as aas,
are
The equations
for transformation are particularly simple as shear stress i5
C
'( ai zero everywhere. ~he stress field gives Pc = 5c as the lower
bound solution. Thus with this solution taken into account
~ the collapse load is bounded by 5c and the previous upper
(: A bound, i. e.
1
5c 2. Pc < 6c (6-29)
C
J Figure 6-10 A kinematically admissible velocity field
for a vertical cut in purely cohesive material
~. External work is done by the gravity forces. x
L, Rate of external work weight of wedge ABC x vertical /
I ''
\
I p+3e
pose ,
p+3e
/ I\
~.
L
~
component

Equating
of velocity ~ yh. htana. cosa

(6-24) to (6-25), we have

= ~ yh' sina (6-25)
P.2C
-7 p
p+2C /

/
/P+C
/1

p.3C
P.2~/

p+
I
p.~

47
/ p.2C
,\
p+2C
pose

I
I
I \
I \
\
\

p.)C I \ I \
(( h =~
y sin2a (6-26) --I _
~ _ P+C-;j-
. J'+2 p+2e
\i \
~
/ t.J P.2C\ - --\-
We are interested in finding the smallest value of h for the
/ ~2C /30') ~+2e I\ \
~ upper bound solution.
TI
a = ~ , therefore
Minimising (6-26) we obtain
I ~ / p ,p p' \ \
~ e-zc I \ \
/;r!
p+2C ~P

~ h < 4c
(6-27)
I I \ \
([
- y
Plan
es d stress discontinuity
I
Y
I \\
Using the result of the lower bound theorem obtained in p = y,y
( 6.10.2 we have

C" 2c < h < 4c

y - - y (6-28) Figure 6-11 SPA stress field for strip footing on
~' puraly cohegive'~oUndation

<-

\
 7
L, 111
I 110
(,
Upper baund: Cansider the velacity field shawn in figure 6-12. Naw,
C The cylindrical zane ABCOA is moving with a canstant velacity
w radius/unit time. The baundary ABC is a velacity discan- Rate of wark dane by tHe external forces; Pu.1. ~ (6-31 )
(J tinuity and the zane autside the cylinder is rigid having zero

t velacity. It can be shawn that the velocity field is kinemat-

ically admissible. Equating -rate af wark done by the external
where 'B' is the width of the faating.

L forces to the rate af wark dane by the internal forces

be shawn that the upper baund callapse, is given by
it can

~
Pu ; 2rrc ; 6.28c I•
cr Bh
Line of symmetry

This upper bound 1s higher than the ane already abtained in

Cl sectian 6.11 and is therefare af no use(i) . C O;*p.!.! III~O I
'\" 45o'V'\lI4~u_
C{
c
,,~fí.
<, <.(/'-_''''",1'
-,__-::/) j_ - Constont tongentiol
velocity = l/fi
<...... Vfi /\18
Zero A ' <, -------
C( veloci ty - - -
Ci- A O _ ---,C Surfaces of velocity

ç- L /
di scontinuity

ç \
~ /
/
ç' \

2 Zone of zero
velonty
unçulcr
\
""
<; -
w radius/time

B
_ v/ /

f e of velocity
S"~i:~OOhOOit,
Figure 6-13 Kinematically admissible velacity field
for a strip footing on purely cohesive
foundation
( Rete of work dane by the internal forces ; Wark done over the
c. plane of discontinuity OB + Work done over the plane af dis-
continuity DA + Work done over the surface af discontinuity
cl Figure 6-12 Kinematically admissible velocity field
for a strip load on purely cohesive
AB + Wark done aver the plane of discantinuity
in the region OAB due to shear distortian.
AC + Wark done
Limiting the
~. foundation shearing stress to 'c' on alI the planes of discantinuity, we
{\ can write the expressian for the rate af work done by the
v Let us now consider the velocity field shown in figure internal forces as
f1
'-'
r(
(6-13). o'B is the line af syrnmetry. The zone O'OB is
moving downwards with unit velocity.
with a velocity of 1/12 along AC.
The zone CAO is maving
Along the arc AB of the
= [c.~)
12 12
~ + O + c [rr.~ ~
2 n nJ
II 12
~ + [c ~J ~
12 12
'-
Cl
Cl
circle, the tangential velocity is 1/12.

out the region.

The angular velocity
(w) alang this arc will be given by 1/12.0B where OB = B/I2.
It is assumed that the tangential velocity is constant through-
This assumption implies that there is a
+
r/h
o
[c. ;. r. dr) _1_
- I2r
=cB(2+rr)
2
(6-32)

conatBnt rBtl o~ Ing1nllr1ng IhlBr atrBin Iquel to

1
(6-30) Equating the rate of external work to the rate of interna I
Cl nr work, we have
r-
where r is the radial distance from O. The lines AO, AB, OB
~ Pu; (2 + n lc (6-33)
r· and AC represent planes of velocity discontinuity.

(ibther kinematicaIly admissible velocity fields of similar

'-{
r-
type can be imagined and upper bound collapse Ioad calculated.
'-\
(
'-(
r:
y 112 113
\ : Taking this new velocity field into account, equation (6-29)
can be revised to

~ Sc .::.
Pc .::.
5.14c
CHAPTER 7
if Thus the true collapse load has been bounded within very close
C limits. lt can be shown that equation (6-33) is also a p CRITICAL STATE MODEL
,( lower bound so that p = 5.14 is the exact solution. c
v c
,f 7.1 Introduction
'- 6.13 Application of the limit theorems to strain hardening
II materiaIs The critica1 state model is basically a constitutive Zaw
relating strain to effective stress. lt is an e1asto-plastic
((
'-.:- Limit theorems are not strictly valid for strain hardening law and can be classified with the laws cescribed in chapter
plastic materiaIs. They are still, however, useful. In most 5. It has, however, sufficient idiosyncrasies to justify
II materiaIs only a limited amount of strain hardening or strain treatment in a separate chapter. The law is incremental 50
« softening takes place and the final yield parameters become
independent of plastic strains. lf an estimate of the final
that small changes of strain are related to corresponding
stress changes. lt must therefore be applied repetitively
\j parameters can be made, the bounds of collapse load can be and the increments accumulated. These mLst be small.
again worked out assuming the body to be made of a hypothetical
(j' ideally plastic material having the same yield parameters as Superficially the model is a "black box" which can bs
r: the strain hardening/softening material in its final state. "plugged" into a finits elemsnt or other form of computer
\{ program for the analysis of boundary valLs problems. lt has
({ 5.14 References
however, a wider role resulting from its capacity to bring
together in a single model a number of a~parently unconnected
r
(( but generally accepted concepts in soil mechanics. ThDse
CHEN, W.F. (1975], "Limit Analysis and Sail Plasticity",
familiar with conventional soil mechanic~ may obtain deeper
r EIsevier, Amsterdam.
'{ insights by means Df the modelo For others, partieularly if
,," they have a baekground in plastieity thecry, it ean serve as
MARTIN, J .6. (1975). "Plasticity - fundamental and general
'\ results", The MIT Procs.
a soi1 mechanies primer. (The writer i5 dubiDUS, however,
about its suitabi1ity for inclusion in :rtroductory s.m.
\
( SALENCON, J. (1977). "Applicatian af the theory of plasticity
courses) .

'1 in soil mechanics", English translation, J. Wiley and Sons.

lt uni fies the fol10wing concepts:
l.'
(. 1. The critical state
,(
\...,.. 2. Voids ratio - effective stress rElationships
(ie e-Log a' plots of consolidat:on tests and
~ their generalization to include devietor strese)
i(
'- 3. Plastie deformation eharaeteristies.
~ 4. Mohr-Cou10mb strength eriterion.
!{
~
5. Hvorslev strength eriterion
~
i.L The way the model ineorporates the first four of these
eoneepts is exp1ained in this ehapter. The Hvorslev strength
criterion 15 not eovered. The interested reader is referred
~
to ehapter 8 of Sehofie1d and Wroth (196E), or seetion 2.3.6
tf of Nay10r (1975).

(l
lf
(
(
'7
(; 114 115
I.
\.. .. the relationship between the stress and strain invariants.
L. The model was originally developed under Roscoe's leader-
ship at Cambridge in the 1950's and 60's. The text by 7.2.1 State boundary surface
Schofield and Wroth (1968) made the theory.accessible to a
C wider readership and is still the standard reference. This
is now complemented by the book by Atkinson and Bransby (1978)
The first essential feature of the model based on the
l which, since it is.aimed amongst others at undergraduates,
provides a gentle introduction. Most modern texts make at
experimental work of Rendulic (1938) and confirmed late r
(Henkel, 1960) is that a surface can be defined in a stress-
~ voids ratio space inside of which a point representing the
least some reference to the modelo It is nin°. state of a soil must lie. Figure (7-1) illustrates part of
L The model was based largely on triaxial tests on recon-
such a surface in a os' 0d' espace. It is called the state
boundary surface (s.b.s.).
t stituted (i.e. consolidated from a slurry) Kaolin. The stress
state was restricted to that of the triaxial test in which
([ 01 > 02 = 03 with some consideration of ·01 = 02 > 03(i.e. the
Od
r{ triaxial extension test). Roscoe was careful not to claim
validity outside the scope of these tests. Subsequently the
,; model has been extended - rather tentatively perhaps - to
'\.
general stress states. Elostic \<1011
((
ç The model is usefully described in terms of stress and
strain invariants. These have been considered in section 1.3.
For generality three effective stress invariants are needed
(~. State boundary
and, 0m' Oq and e are particularly suitabls. The presentation surface
C( given here is for plane strain and involves Os ano 0d and the
corresponding strain invariants ES and Ed' . Apart from o
1 requiring only two stress and strain measures instead of
three this presentation has the added advantage that, as has
Cá
\ been demonstrated in chapter 5, the Mohr Coulomb yield crit-
erion is very simply incorporated.
) Do o,
( It is unfortunate that the triaxial test is not plane
( strain since the majority of situations requiring analysis
are idealized as such. This is the justification for the use
Figure 7-1 State boundary surface and elastic wall
t. of a plane strain formulation here. If analyses are to be
restricted to the triaxial test a parallel theory using 0m
A soil consolidated from a slurry starts off with a very
and 0q instead of Os and 0d may be used~ This has bsen the
~ conventional approach. For the triaxial tsst Oq becomes
large voids ratio and then traces a path along the s.b.s. If
1<
v squal to 0d' and 0m and 0q (or 0d) equate with the Cambridge
it is consolidated isotropically (01=02' or 0d = O) the path
A B is followed. If consolidation is anisotropic (01/02
p and q respectively.
<S cgn~tant) path A1B1 is followed. Should the soil then be
slowly unloaded the state path (as the path in this space is
ci Since effective stress is used throughout primes will be
omitted for brsvity. only in a few places later in the
called) moves inside the s.b.s. to, e.g. Co or C1. It is
assumed that this path is restricted to what the Cambridge
!l chapter where total and effective stresses need to be dist-
school called an eZastic waZZ. The elastic wall advances with
inguished will it be reintroduced.
the state point during consolidation but on unloading remains
~ fixed. Thus the elastic wall containing Bo B1 Co C1 cannot
7.2 The geometric model
1 move until the state point returns to the s.b.s. If after
So long as the model is limited to relating two com- unloading to Co 0S were again increased to the value corres-
Cc ponents of stress to two of strain it is possible to describe ponding to 00 the corner of the elastic wall previously at
~. alI its fsatures from the geometry of lines in a two dimen- Bo would advance to 00' The wall expands as it advances.
s10nal stress space or surfaces in a three dimensional stress: It is also possible for the elastic wall to retreat and
shrink. This happens, as will be explained later when the
~ voids ratio space. This was the medium of communication used
by Roscoe and his co-workers. It will be used here to develop s.b.s. is intersected by the state path in regions closer to
~ the voids ratio axis.

(\'
(

\
 (
C 116 117
/<:»
The state paths referred to above will be familiar when 7.2.2 Hvorslev and Rendulic surfaces and the critical state
L portrayed on an e-Log as plot (figure 7-2). This is obtained line

« simply by projecting the paths of figure(7-1)onto the e-os

plane and converting the axis to a log scale. The lettering
in figure (7-2) corresponds to that in figure (7-1). The
only part of the s.b.s. is shown on figure (7-1). This
<I shape of the s.b.s. is so chosen that the lines Aooo. A101 are
may be called the Rendulic surface in recognition of its
originator.(i) It undergoes a discontinuity in slope at the
« straight and parallel. This is consistent with soil "con-
ventional wisdom" (see e.g. chapter 15 of Taylor. 1948).
criticaZ state Zine. This line is the limiting case of an

« Their slope is À when a natural log base is used (Cc=2.303À

anisotropic consolidation line such as A1B1' ouring consol-
idation along a line A1B1 very close to the critical state line
or- when the base 1s 10). The elastic wall seen on edge in the
semi-log plot is also assumed straight and of slope K. It
i9 also assumed that alI elastic walls are geometrically
the soil would be in a state of incipient shear. i.e. adias
would be close to the maximum value the soil could sustain.
v.. (adias would also be constant). The line of intersection of
r:
similar. The assumption of straightness is a rather crude the elastic wall with the s.b.s. has zero slope (dod/dos=o)
\.( idealization since in reality state paths will be neither at the critica 1 state.
straight nor reversible - they will trace a flat loop.
((' The complete s.b.s. is shown in figure (7-3). The part
of it to the left of the critical state line is approximately
~ plane. This is the "Hvorslev" surface. O C B CO illustrates
ç an elastic wall. The projection C'O' of c8
gnOthe a :0
plane is straight and of slope related to ~' (see below9.
The intercept O 00 is related to c' and ~'.
~. Ao
- - - Typical actual path It was mentioned earlier that a path within an elastic
1 wall would cause a retraction or shrinkage of the wall if it
'"" ~À
rejoined the s.b.s. naar the voids ratio exis. This occurs
J"-j in the region to the left of C - called here the "super-
(\ critical" region. The wall remains where it is if the state
V point is at C and expands in the "sub-critical" region between
,,( Bo C and Bo' When the effective stresses are controlled. as
'j .~ in a drained testo the position of the yield surface. and
,(
<:» )- 'Do therefore its rate of advance or retraction relative to stress
changes. is entirely fixed by the shape of the s.b.s. Suppose
~ o I~----------------------------~- the stress changes from E' to F' then the elastic wall would
r( toç , as shrink or move back from E to F. Alternatively a stress
o change from G' to H' would cause the elastic wall to advance
6- Figure 7-2 e: Logo Plot
from G to H and expand in the processo
s
Q
(l
C{
a
r;
(i)Atkinson and Bransby (19781 call it. the Roscoe surface.
It is no disrespect of the memory of Roscoe that the name
~ of his predecessor in this field is preferred here. He
({ would probably like it this way. It makes sense now to
have the names of the two contemporaries. Hvorslev and
~ Rendulic. designating the two parts of Roscoe's state
boundary surface.
q'
C'\.
"
,(
i
Çi 1j8 119
(
the formal derivations given here - to modify the original
( Cambridge model 50 that the elasticity is constant or linear.

/. Critical state
This requires that the projection Df the elastic wall is
straight in the e-as plot rather than in the e-Log as.
(, °d
line [K ceases to be a constant).

//~r~'
Hvorslev surface
When a state point moves on the state boundary surface
~ D p~astic yie~ding occurs. The expansion or retraction, il1-
C:.-( • iiil Rendul ic surface ustrated by the paths GH and EF in figure [7-3), are referred
to respectively as hardening or softening. A hardening law,
cl expresses mathematica11y the function of the s.b.s. in con-
ti / /:;'/~( trolling the change of size of the yield surface with stress
/ ?E~:-(.C' change.
D'
- F' I <, (o
~ I ,,/ So far the model provides a relation between os' 0dand e.
« Dó I
/
/'\,\ //
G''4{H'
The voids ratio e, can be determined for a given stress path.
Volumetric strain is related to the voids ratio increase in ~
CI C' ~ \ \ voids ratio from its initial value, ~e, according to
o ~ \
(I \ E
6e
[7-" J
'-J V
1 +e
Cr B~
o,
C( e is strictly the average voids during the change, but may
often be taken as the initial voids ratio, eo' For plane
C( strain EV=ES'
Figure 7-3 The complete surface
C( To complete the relation between the invariants of stress
and strain the deviatoric strain Ed mu~t be included. This is
~
/-
done by means of a flow rule as will be explained in section
7.5. The main implications are that strains must be divided
\ 7.2.3 Relation to e1asto-p1asticity into elastic and plastic parts [the flow ruIe applies to the
( latter) and the stress-strain relation must be incremental.
(\,; .. Certain similarities with the properties of elastic- 80th associative and non-associative flow rules as described
(; p1est1c materiels descr1bed in chapter 5 will by now be
apparent, and it is appropriate to introduce some plasticity
in chapter 5 will be required hers.

terminology. 7.3 Hardening law

6
6 The intersection of an elastic wall with the s.b.s.
forms a yield surface when projected onto the stress [os,od)
The plastic or irrecoverable volumstric strain associated
with movement of ths elastic wall is identifisd as the hard-
G plane, e.g. D'C'80' of figure [7-3). In the two stress
component presentation this ·surface" appears as a line. It
ening parameter, h. As has been shownit can be compressive
[+ve) or tensile [-ve) depending on whether strain hardening
~ is conven~ent however to retain the term "surface" which can or strain softening occurs.
f\ identify the equivalent of a surface whether in a 2,3,4 or
V 6 stress component space. In figure [7-4) let plastic volumetric strain, h, corr-
espond to a voids ratio change, 6e, for a state path along or
~ When a state point is inside the current elastic wall parallel to the virgin consolidation line [i.e. repregenting
and therefore inside the yield surface behaviour is isotropic normal or anisotropic consolidation). The void ratio change,
'i elastic. With elastic walls assumed straight in the e-Log as 6e, is made Ff~f an elastic component
Ú plot vax-iable elasticity is implied. [It is shown in 7.6
e
below that the elastic bulk tangential modulus is proportional 6e = -K Log p [7-2)
CI to as)' It is, however, convenient - and this is done in
e

a
( E

~
(
 (
'-- 120 121
~ and a plastic component Differentiating equation [7-5)
rL 6eP = - [À-K) LogeP [7-3)
I(
da
x; dh x-c [7-6)

« where p is the ratio of the as value of point A, to that of

point Ao' These relations follow from the geometry of the
lines in figure [7-4). 5ince the initial state line is
giving
°c
(l parallel to the virgin consolidation line the ratio of the
a
c
KP [7-71
(ê str~sses at C and Co are the same as those at A and Ao 50 x
that
cj- a The increase of KP as the soil consolidates [Oc is a measure
c
p [7-4) of the size of the elastic wall) is clearly in accordance with
a the observed properties of clay soils.
co
:J
((' Relating volumetric strain to voids ratio change by equation 7.4 Yield function
[7-1) •
The only constraint placed 50 far on the shape of the
p 6eP p
r: E
v
= h = - ---1 -
+e
[= E
5
for plane strain) elastic walls and the s.b.s. [which is the locus of alI of
~ them) is that the walls should be geometrically similar. The
q and by [7-3) and [7-4)
°c
requirement that the critical state line be parallel to the
( h = X Loge a [7-5)
virgin consolidation line Cor to any anisotropic consolidation
test state path) in the e:Logos plot follows from this. The
'~ co
ç
r
where X = [À-K)/[1+e) is
a dimensionless measure
specific shape for the yield surface i.e. the projection of
the elastic wall onto ds:Od space) is assumed to be a straight
line in the super-critical region and an ellipse in the sub-
i of the plastic bulk
compressibility. Equa-
critical. We refer briefly again to the origins of the model
to explain this choice.
) tion (7-5) ia tha
'-,
I
hardening law. X is The Cambridge school did not define the shape of their
({ , clearly a constant when model a priori but derived it from an empirical "work law".
\ .•...:/' a variable elastic "Cam clay" was thus defined. Its yield surface was a log
[K constant) formulation spiral. 5ubsequent work by Roscoe and Burland [1968) showed
~ is used. It can be that better experimental agreement was obtained with "modified
assumed constant in a -lJe' Cam clay" which had an elliptical yield surface. Rather than
~
linear elastic form- o, selecting the yield surface shape to fit the experimental data
( Oco
Log. o,
~/
ulation by using a they modified the work law so that it produced the elliptical
representative value of shape. A further consideration'was that this model was only
~, K. The inconsistency proven in the sub-critical ,[ar "wet" as they called it)
r( causes no problems. region. The Hvorslev surface was a somewhat tentative hypo-
\..- CS line çv,Cline
Indeed, X may be assigned thesis. The approach taken here is to treat the choice of
;1 a value directly rather Current 101011 ~ ,/ shape as empirical and 50 avoid the need to derive it.
than from À, K and é. ;..c ' A
(l .dx ~x
l'
From the geometry of figure [7-5) the equation of the
A plastic bulk '1 /T failure line in terms of as and 0d can be written
CL modulus may be defined Co Ao
Log, o,
rr
\..l as a = 50 - T = O [7-8)
d 5
da
c
f KP
Ciil Figure 7-4 Hardening parameter
related to voids
in which 5 = 2sin~' and T = 2c'cos~'.
slope and intercept respectively of the
S and T represent the
Mohr Coulomb failure
( ratio line in 0s,Od space, i.e. the line D'C' on figure (7-3].
Note that in chapter 5 the M.C. failure criterion has also
C( been expressed in the form of equation (7-8J.
(('
C{
(
(
 \-.
122 123
lx.,
It simp1ifies the a1gebra if the yie1d surface is p10tted
(
in a stress' space with the 0d sca1e distorted so that the
~- critica1 state 11ne 1s at 450 and the sub-critical yie1d
(
\_- surface p10ts as a circ1e. This 1s achieved by using as
ordinate
~
,(
°d °iScs 1:
'-~ =

l~ where Scs = 2sin~~s is the slope of the c.s. 1ine.

failure line

l oividing equation (7-8) by Scs and noting that

,,( T = (Scs-S)Oc the equation of the super-critica1 yie1d surface
becomes:
(( c' IctJ~, I \ ~ _ O

F(i) = ãd - SOs - (1-S)Oc o (7-9) c'Cot~ I

01
O, I
((
with S = S/S
cs
~
The sub-critical ellipse plots as a circle in 0d:os Figure 7-5 Mohr circle at failure
(( space. It is assigned the equation
((
°d
- 2
-o (20 -o )
s c 5
F í I = (7-10)
~
í í

°d °c + Ôd
Supercritical regions
~ The denominator ha5 been introduced 50 that F(ii)= F(i) for
(il I (iil

~ stress states that do not satisfy the yield criterion. This

/ Critical state line
makes contours of F(i) and F(ii) continuous across the line
~ Os = OCo This is necessary in certain computing schemes. No tension (,i
s" / s~s"
"',
(

,.(
line ------- I 1~'1
_ln equation (7-9) and (7-10) os' 0d and 0c are variab1es,
\_/ and S is an empirical constant slightly less than one.
L,L_/y
-r:
(lf c' is assumed zero then S = Scs and S = 1). O 1 I \
20,
.
~ O,
(( E O O,
Exactly what happens to the yield surface near ths
'-' orig~n 1s not crucial since the intercept f = 2C'COS~'/SCS on
.(
\-./' the 0d axis is relatively small. The Mohr Coulomb line may
conservativsly be cut off by the "no-tension" line 00 [figure
~ Figure 7-6 Norma1ized yield surface
7-6) which rspresents the limiting condition 02 = O, or
0d = 20s' Tension occurs to the 1eft of this line. Less
~ conservativsly the line CO can be continued to E. An ass-
elliptical shape also applies in the super-critical region.
(i umption between these extremes provides ~ logical compromise.
This has the advantage of simplicity.
discussed in section 7.10.
The pros and cons are

« The yield surface is bounded by the 0s axis since 0d

7.5 Flow RuIs
G' can have only positivs values. Stress paths in which the
major and minor principal stresses reverse when 0d reaches
zero simply reflect off the Os axis. This is il1ustrated in This provides the necessary link to complete a con-
C{ stitutive law relating stress and strain increments. lt pro-
example 3 below.
vides a relation between the components of the plastic strain
(\
incremeni; in this case the volumetric, dE~ [= dh), and
lt snould be mentioned before leaving the subject of
deviatoric dE§ .
~ yield surfaces that some authorities (particularly the auth-
ors' colleagues at Swansea) choose to assume that the
~
~
'\
'-.-\
l
(
 ( -
"-
( 124 123
\~
A flow rule can be represented by a vector normal to The flow rule vector can be described mathematically as
C
,(
a p~astic potentiaZ. This is a surface defined in the same
stress space as the yield surface. The assumption is made
the gradient Df O (i.e. VO), or

"-, that the principal plastic strain increment directions co- dEP = dÀ ~ (7-11 )
incide with the principal stress directions. This allows the s da
l stress axes to be shared with plastic strain increment axes.
5

-p
é Thus 0s,od axes can be shared with dE~,dE~orOs'~d with dE~ and dE
d
= dÀ ~
aÕd
CL d~~ = Scs dE~. (NB not dE~/Scs' The requirement is that
({ Õd dE~ = 0d dE~ = plastic work). If normality applies, or, dividing the second equation through by Scs gives the altern-
as it is alternatively expressed, the flow rule is associative, ative form
e the plastic potential is the same as the.yield surface, i.e.
O : F. O = O represents the equation Df the plastic potential. dEP = dÀ ~ (7-12)
(( d dOd
Normality is assumed to apply in the sub-critical region. dÀ will be related to the stress increment, the current stress
({
Calladine (1963) in his discussion of the paper by Roscoe, state, and the strain hardening characteristics in the next
ç' Schofield and Thurairajah (1963) must take credit for showing
how this relatively simple rule could be applied to their
section.

( experimental data. Just as normality is unsatisfactory for A plastic potentia1 for the super-critical region which
(
the Mohr Coulomb criterion because it causes excessive ex- satisfies the requirement Df variable dilatancy described
pansion (see chapter 5) so also is it unsat1sfactory in the above is
~
super-critical region. 50 much dilation does not occur in So
\ real soi1s. A non-associative flow ru1e is needed. That
proposed here causes the dilatancy to increase uniform1y from
0(1) °d + 20
c
(a -a
c s
)2 = O (7-13)

\( zero at the critical. state (where it must be zero by defin-

ition) to a specified maximum at zero as,
in which 50 = So/5cs and 50 = 2sin~0' ~ is the dilatancy
(
angle with ~o the assumed value at as O. Generally ~ will
be less than ~ and wi11 vary from ~o to zero'as as varies fr~m
L Figure (7-7) illustrates the flow rules. The variation zero to 0C'
in dilatancy 1n the super-critical region 15 represented by
~ a vertical arrow at C which inclines progressively to the Since the flow rule for the sub-critica1 region is
~ left as a reduces. Note that in the sub-critical region associative O(ii) ~ F(ii) and is given by equation (7-10).
the arrowspoints horizontally at A. This implies that equal
~ all round compression will cause volume change without dis- The partial derivatives of O w.r.t. as and 0d are ob-
tortion - a property consistent with the assumption of tained by differentiating either equation (7-10) or (7-13) as
~ physical isotropy. appropriate. It will be more convenient in what follows to
~, revert back to 0d' Ed from Õd and Ed' Explicit expressions
for the partia 1 derivatives will be obtained in the next
~ Cíd
d[m
I ver+ors .
section after first deriving an expression for dÀ in terms
<l of them.

(l 7.6 Stress-strain invariant relation

<i 7.6.1 Elastic component of strains

C( °lil=O, Any effective stress change d~. whether yielding occurs
or noto will cause elastic strains d~e. Generally these are
~ /
Oliil=O
related according to
-"
L_V I
~ E O De ' Os.dE,P) e
d~ =.ç,e di(, [7 -14)
~
Figure 7-7 Flow rule where ~ is an elastic compliance matrix. This relation als~
~
( -r,
applieseto variable elasticity in which case .ç,eis the
\.(
L
t
126 127
~ tangential matrix treated as constant over the small increment here, we work in terms of Os and 0d'
but otherwise varying with stress.
~ For change involving plastic yield the state path stays
The corresponding incremental relations between the on the state boundary surface. This is expressed mathemat-
~ plane strain invariants used here are: ically by the statement F(os,Od,h) = O. (Inclusion of h as
~ a variable allows the complete set of yield surfaces to be

r)G
e
f represented by F, rather than just one for which h has a

;J 1:::)
,( de: )
~ (7-15) particular value). Clearly dF also is zero. Applying the

« 1.: chain ruIe gives the consistency equation:

= ~. =
C1 dF
aos
do
5
+ ~
aOd
do
d
+ ~
ah
• dh O (7 -18)
Equation (7-15) is readily derived from the standard elast-
(( icity stress-strain equations, (see equation 3-10, the left

({
hand side of which expresses the matrix in terms of K and G).R Now dh = dEP (by definition), 50 introdueing equation (7-11)
into (7-18)Sto eliminate dh, and rearranging gives
The original Cambridge model assumed that deviatoric elast-
(( ic strains were negligible 50 that G was effectively infinite.
aF
C( The assumption of a straight elastic wall on the semi-log
plot implied that K was proportional to the mean effective
(~dO
ao
5
5
+ 30'
d
do )
d
r stress. Referring to section 7.3 above, and equation (7-2)
dÀ
aF ao (7-19 )
'{
in particular, and noting that Log p beeomes dos/os for a ãh30
C(" stress perturbation in the elastieewall:
5

F ís expressed in terms of 0s,od'oc (equat~ons 7-9,7-10)

\' de:es
de,e K dos
'1'+'8 1+8 a- Df wh1ch 0e 15 a funct10n Df h, thsrsfDrs
j-' s
~ = ~ doc
2. G) de: ah
\'C;, Now do
5
(K +
3 5
da
c
dh

r
[
K +

An alternative,
2.
3
G = (1+e)
K
°S

and more general, expression for K is

(7-16)
Eliminating

aF
ãh
~)Oe
(aO
dOc/dh by equation (7-6)

e X
.(
c. K
1 +e)
= (K °m (7 -171
dÀ -1 (aF
--- do aF)
+ --- do (7-20)
I( H aos 5 aOd d
'--". This results sinee K is also the slope of an eIastie wall on
6, an e:Log
e
°m pIot, and'K = do /de: (by definiiion).
m v
in which °c (~] (~)
~ When ·linear sl!et1clty 1e assumed equation (7-16) or H = -- ao ao
(7-17) may be used to give an idea of a suitable vaIue for K. X e 5
~

~R] tl
K may be estimated or measured in standard consolidation tests,
Substitution of dÀ in equations (7-11) and (7-12) gives
(rt is typieally in the range 0.03 to 0.06 for elays of
Li ° °

rl
medium plastieity). A representative value of or ao
[ will be used. G should not be obtained by eliminatTng K s
between (7-16) and (7-17), =
~aa; ao s aod ao·s s
~F (7-21)
({ H aF ao aF ao d
dEP
f
7.6.2 Plastie eomponents of strain d 30
5
aO
d
aOd ao;; °d

We first determine the proportionality parameter dÀ

f in the fIow rule equations (7-11) and (7-12). The proeedure Equation (7-21) ean be written more eoncisely in matrix
f parallels that given in ehapter 5, The derivation there is
in terms of the stress tensor eomponents (o ,0 ete) whereas
notation. An asterisk is used to indieate that the matrix
elements are invariants, e.g, = [Os'Od]T whereas i
[' x y
~
~,.

(
y
ç' 128
[ox,oy,T1T as before. Introducing The total strain increment is obtained by adding the
129
( a
-v

~-J
\,
elastic strain increment invariantsfrom equation (7-15) to

J
{

a
",f
· = l-. -,aFaos -aF
aOd
J T and a • =,
"'q
l- -ao
aos' aOd
T
the plastic from equation (7-21). Denoting the 2x2 elastic
compliance matrix in (7-15) by C· we hav~
e
\.' • = • •
L equation (7-21) becomes
de:
'"
C

•
da
",ep 'V
• • • =
(7-22)

G * 1 T'
de: = -H (a ) (afl da (7-21a)
in which de:
-v
c de: + de: and C
"'e "'p "'ep
C
*
"'e
+ C
'Vp
"'p ~q '" '"
~
The inverse of equation (7-22) is
or even more concisely as
~ • • •
cL de:
• = C
• da
• (7-21b)
da
'V
= ",ep
O de:
-v
(7-23)

(.. "'p p '"

• • * -1
in which ~ep = (~ep) is a 2x2 elasto-plastic modulus matrix.
in which C is a 2x2 plastic compliance matrix.
p Performing the inversion leads to
<l •
Note that C is symmetric only if the flow rule is • • ~S b' (b*)T (7-24)
Q symmetric, i.e. ~f 'F = O.
O
ep
O
e 'Vq ",f
([ in which
Explicit forms for the terms in equation (7-21) are
(J readily obtained by diÚerentiating equations (7-9), (7-10) • O a
•
tf '\,e",f
~.. and (7-13). They are as follows:
b
• O a
Super-critical region "'q 'Ve "'q
cz
c'
,( aF(il S_ aO(i) = _ ~ (1 _ as)
S
'"f "'q
H + (a •) T b •

C( ~ - Scs da
5
S
cs
a
C The elastic modulus matrix D: = (C~)-1 is obtained by inspect-
ion as the inverse of equatíon (7~15), i.e.
C(' dF(i) = _1_ aO(i) = _1_ 1
ç" K + "3 G

ç'
~ Scs ~ Scs
o
'\,e
o
,DG 1 (7-25)

aF(i) (_ 2-.)
'(J1 1
--=-
dOC
1 S
cs In the next section the complete consitutive law will be
derived from equation (7-21). It will be represented by

c) Sub-critical region
equations identical to (7-22), (7-23) and (7-24) but without
the asterisks on the matrix terms.
6 dF (ii)
-a-o-
dQ(ii) 2S
cs
(a -a
5 c
)
i
cS s
= -a-a-
5 °d + Scsoc 7.7 Stress-strain component relation

cS aF (ii) aQ(ii) 20
The assumption that principal plastic strain increment
0. ~=aa;-
d
Scs(od+Scsoc)
directions coincide with the principal stress directions
already been invoked in the definition of the flow rules.
has
It
also allows Mohr's circle to be used to represent both stress
~ and plastic stain incremento (Figure 7-8).
(1.. dF(ii) 2Scsos
-a-o- = - 0d+S a Consider first plastic strain increments. From the geo-
c cs c metry of the Mohr's circle
~
«
3.
Note that in the derivation of the last two expressions use is
mede Df the fact that the numerator of equation (7-10) is zero.

(
 (
\... ./
130 131
L dEP = ~ dEP + dEP cos 2a stress that cos2a = (a -a )Ia and sin2a 2. Ia d we obtain
C x 2 s d x y d

L- dE~ = ~ dE~ - dE~ cos 2a da

d
= (da -da)
x y
cos2a + 2d. 3in2a (7-28)
i
L dyP = 2dEP sin 2a Combining (7-27) and (7-28) we find
d
(
.t
dR, = ~ dR, (7-29)
\;....

~ (dtl! t
~ V2cid
with R as defined
~ above.

q-

C'~UC'
Os I ar (dE:ll ,casa~ . Substituting (7-29) in (7-21bJ and the resulting equation
(1/zdE:f) in (7-26J gives
\{
dEP = ~T C ~ da (7-30)
~ '" "'p '"

ç [,sina or dEP = C da (7-30a)

r- Oy o, o o, sina '" "'P '"
I{ (dE:,PI I dEP) C is a 3x3 plastic compliance matr~x.
(dE:l' ",p
(, Stress stote ai P
( The complete 1ncremental stress-strain law relating the
ç Figure 7-8 Mohr's circle of stress ar plastic strain
tensor components results from adding the elastic components
of strain (equation (7-14) to the plastic i.e.
increment
~ dE = C do (7-31 )
This can be represented by the matrix equation (using "'ep
()
the conventions established in the previous section)
'" '"
('
'y in which dE = de e + dEP and C = C + C
dEP = RT de:' (7-26) '" '" '" "'ep "'= "'p
'" '" "'P

L in which ~ =
[0.5 0.5

2:i02J
The inverse is

L cos2a -cos2a
da = O
'" "'ep
dE
'"
(7-32)

i\ It has been shown in chapter 5 that ~=p is given by an equat-

\-- Consider now stresses. By definition
ion identical to (7-24) but with the asterisKs removed so that
/., the matrices contain the tensor com onents. (3 in the present
"-" a = ~ (a +0 )
,{ s 2 x Y case. but the relations also apply or the three dimensional
L Differentiating
case with 6 independent components. The scalar B has the
same value since
~
"
da = 1 (da + da ) (7-27) 'T'
b
T
b
\.,l s 2 x Y (a) = a
",f "'q ",f "'q
AIso by definition
li The constitutive law, equations (7-31. or 7-321, could
C{ a
d
= 2 (a -a
)( Y
)2 + 4T2 have been derived directly following the procedures of chapter

~- Differentiating
5 rather than by first deriving the law relating invariants._
This two stage derivation was followed here as it seemed
more suited to the geometric desc~iption of the critical
\Í 20d dOd = 2 ea -a ) (da -da ) + 8. dr state model given earlier in this chapter.
• X Y X Y
\(
Dividing through by 20d and noting from the Mohr circle of
\(

!"
._------------
'\
C, 132 132

" \
7.8 Parameter values If c' is known for a given state Df consolidation measured by
\ 0c' ~~s may be calculated from (7-33). Note that the implied
(
,( The model has now been expressed as a constitutive law c' will vary during the analysis as 0c varies. ~' and ~cs are
\..' in fi form suitable for "plugging" into a finite element or constants. c' is often 5mall and can 50metimes be neglected.
other program suitable for the analysis of boundary value In this case ~' = ~~s.
/'-, problems. The first question asked by the practitioner is:
[ "What parameters must be given vaIues to perform an analysis"?
They should be both few and recognizable. Although it may
~ is the dilatancy angle at zero os' The flow ruIe has
been cRosen 50 that ~ varies from ~o to zero as Os varies from
(
not be immediately apparent from the foregoing the number of zero to 0c' For Iack of better information ~o = 2/3~'
G important parameters are few and they are alI "old friends", is suggested. Note that if yieIding is entirely subcritical
~ even though they may be expressed in unfamiliar forms for ~o is not required.
algebraic convenience. They are in three parts: (1) material
ri
\.~ constants, (2) a preconsolidation measuré, and (3) the initial The hardening constant X may be seIected empirically or
stress state. computed using laboratory measurements (or estimates) of À
( and K from the equations
7.8.1 Material constants
~ À-K
[7-34)
X =-
(l' AlI these relate to the soil skeZeton and are therefore
in terme of effective stress. First are the two elastic
1+8
r- or in terms Df the counterparts Cc 2.3À and Cs 2.3K when
\Í constants. If constant elasticity is used they may be defined a base 10 log plot is used.
by K and G or by E and V. The transformation from one pair
(] to the other has been illustrated by the example in section 7.8.2 Preconsolidation measure
ç, 3.2.1. If variabIe elasticity is preferred~ may be defined
with K, nowa variable, given by equation [7-16) or [7-17). The initial value Df 0c' oco must be supplied. oco is
ç G may be kept constant or if desired made to vary with stress. the radius of the initial yield surface in the ãd, Os space.
K may be obtained from oedometer or triaxial tests. K, f~ Oco i5 half the consolidation pressure in an isotropic con-
C I
not calculated from K, will be selected from experience ~ as solidation test, and a little more than half in an oedometer
will G. If plastic yielding dominates, as in the drained testo
'i loading of soft clays, the choice of the elastic parameters
r-
l.t will not be critical. 7.8.3 Initial stress state

Next come the "5" parameters: 5. 5cs and So. Since The initial effective stress components must be supplied.
these are defined by S = 2 sin~', 5cs = 2sin ~cs' 50= 2sin~0' They must be such that the stress point they define lies on or
~ (
~', ~6s and ~o must be supplied. ~'is the familiar slope within the initial yield surface. The program should check
(~ Df the Mohr circle failure envelope [in terms Df effective this.
'-, ( stress). ~cs is less than or equal to ~', the difference
G between the two being a measure Df the cohesion intercept c'.
In section 7.4 it was noted that T = (Scs-5)oc' Expressing
Since the model is suitable for the effective stress
techniques described in chapter 3 [section 3.2) the initial
(', this in terms of the expansion of T, 5cs and S: pore pressure must also be specified. Introducing now the
"-'
A prime to denote effective stress the components to define the
'\..../ z c: cosé ' 2[Sinq,~s - 5in~' )oc initial stress state are therefore 0xo' 0yo' TO' uO'
ci· or
c'
cosq,' + sinq,' (7-33)
Selection of these has been discussed in section 3.4.
Sinq,~s
~' o
c Df the 5 material constants q,' and X stand out as most
important. The preconsolidation measure, oco is also crucial.
CI The practitioner needs to concentrate his judgement on these
ri (i) three.
~ This is sometimes called "guestimating". It helps to
rJ.. know what answer the analysis is expected to produce.
,.
\.:.

G.
!,{
 t- 134 135
'--..-. The effective stress path is ~ully defined in this case
7.9 Examples by 01 increasing and O2 remaining constant at 200 KPa.
\(
Consequently:
( The three examples which follow show how the model can
'- be used to determine stress-strain relations for an idealized
d0 - O
sample in which the stresses and strains are uniform. In dOd 1
~ the second and third examples, the effective stress path is !Cd0 -O)
2
das 1
\l also computed since in these examples, unlike ths first, it
is not controlled dirsctly. It is therefore a line of slope 2:1 in 0d:o space. Since
J ~' = 30° the critical state line is slopedSat 45°. The
The first example also shows how the model parameters iR~ersection of the stress path with the critical state line
(I
are determined from conventional soils data. It complements at C reprssents collapse. C has coordinates as = 0d = 400 KPa.
\:
the Grangemouth oil tank case history described in chapter 11
where similar procedures were used to arrive at the parameters. To obtain the stress-strain curve from A to C the stress
\. change (60d = 400, 60 : 200) must be divided into a large
Example 1 s
number of small steps. A programmable calculator at least
~ 1s required. To illustrate the procedure the calculation of a
A sample of clay has been isotropically consolidated to single incrsment as 0d' increases from 98 to 102 is presented.
'-I an effective stress of 200KPa, at which point the voids ratio To improve the accuracy the accumulated value of the stresses
is 1.0. It is then sheared under fully drained conditions will be taken at the middle of the increment, i.e. as : 250,
\ (zero pore pressure) to failure with held constant. (i.e. 02 0d : 100. The stress increment is das = 2, dOd : 4.
\., as in the triaxial testo The analysis here being plane strain
will not strictly be applicable to the triaxial test although Yielding is entirely sub-critical in this example, con-
\.. the results will not be very differentl. A plot of od
\ sequently ~' and ~o are not required. ~' is used to give
against Ed is required for the shear stage. Scs : 2 sin ~cs : 1. The plastic hardenr~g constant X is
'1 obta1ned assuming
The clay has the following properties:-
'-o
(\ 8 = e , i. e.
À : 0.2, = O. 05, ~ , : 300 o
<;
, K
cs
'--.. Since there is no unloading the soil is normally con- À-K
X =-_
: 0.2-0.05
1+1
= 0.075
( 1+e
solidated at the start of shearing with oco: 100 KPa,oxo:oyo
'-... 200 KPa, and TO : O, (the pore pressure is zero conseque~tly
~ ° represents both total and effective stressJ Constant elasticity is assumed with K obtained from K
(equation 7-16) for the average as value of 300, i.e.
~. Od (K Pol
t K : (1+e) 2x300 = 12000 KPa
'-.. 400 c_ -- a
K 5 D.05
'-.:.

'1
(

300
/ <
Collapse yield
surface
G will be guest1mated at 6000 KPa. (This corresponds to a
Po1sson's ratio Df 0.29. Alternatively v could have been
assumed and G derived.)
él Initicl
.1 200
The parameters required are summarised in Table 7-1 .

\.1

100

"
\{
Intermediate yield surface

'~ 100 200 300 400 o,IK Pol

'( Figúre 7-9 Drained test stress path

1
'(

\' 136
TabIe 7-1 Parameters required for exampIe 1
137

C\
Substituting in equation (7-21)
.'
~..
f dE~
Material properties Stresses (KPa)
= 10-6 1217
207] (7-35:

~
Elastic
K = 12000 KPa
G = 6000 KPa
a
co
= 100

yield surface
(Lní t e I
í

size)
1dE;) l207 197
1::1
S = 1.0 (~' = 30°)
a
xo
= 200

C Plastic X
cs
= 0.075
cs
o
yo
= 200
The elastic strains are obtained
and G in equation (7-15), i.e.
by substituting for K

L
f
idE;
(, (S, So not needed) T
o
= O
dEel = 10-6 71 ol do ) (7-36:

~ For the increment under consideration oc' de9cribing the

current size of the yield surface, is needed in addition to
[
O 42J ld':
l o~ and od' In an incremental computer program oc is best Adding equations (7-35) and (7-36) gives the relation rep-
( calculated from the aecumulated plastic volumetric strain h resented by equation (7-22), i.e.
by equation (7-5J, or incrementaIIy by (7-6). In this sampIe
~
({

V
calculat10n, however, it i9 eonvenient to obtain oc directly
from ths geomstry of figure (7-9), denoting the 0d • 100,
Os = 250 point by S and noting that 0e is the radius of the
yield surface through S, by Pythagoras:
j"') .
de:d.
10-
6

['"
207
207]
239 1::)
(7-37:

= = =
f (250 - a )2 + (100)2 = a l
c c
Substituting
de: = .00137.
dos 2 and dOd 4 gives de:s .00140 and

f oc2 cancels to give: d

Note three things about these eonstitutive equations.
\
(: o
c
= 145 KPa

The partial derivatives needed for the consitutive law

They are symmetric.
been super-critical).
(They would not have been had yielding
The positive off-diagonals
identify nega tive dilatancy.
in (7-37)
(An elastic material with zero
( can now be worked out (we drop the suffix (ii) for brevity), off-diagonals would have zero dilataney). And, lastly the
( i. e.
( plastic strains are four ar five times larger than the elastic.
.( aF _ ao _ 2S cs (a s -o c J This is typieal for sub-critical yielding .
= 2(250-145) = O 857
( ãO-ãO- °d +S cs °c 100 + 145 •
,( s s Rapatition of celculations similar to the abova by maans
\.~ of a small computer program leads to the stress-strain curves
aF _ ao _ 20d
2 x 100
L aO - ~
d
- S
cs
(od+S a)
cs c
=
100+145
= 0.816 of figure (7-10).

Example 2
Ó 2S a
aF cs 9 2 x 250
- =- = The clay sample of example 1 is sheared under undrained
~ ao = - 100+145 -2.041
c Od+SC9OC instead of drained conditions. The initial stresses are the
~ same, and the material properties since they relate to the
From which the parameter soil skeleton are also the same. The clay will be assumed
L saturated so that there is negligible volume change. Since
a
aF aQ _ conditions are plane strain E:s = O.
t H = - ~
X
ãOãO - -
145
0.075 (-2.041) (0.857)
_
- 3382 KPa
We now use a prim~ to
distinguish effective from total stresses.
c s
l
In this problem the effective stress path is not fully
í( defined. We impose a deviator stra1n change dOd and knowing
([ de:s = O must now caleulate das and dOd'

f
'{
\~ 138 13~
(I

ç'
(i
Cld [ Critical state'~
400
(J
) Cld C.S.line
300
lJ 7Final y.s.

G KPa

200 100
'-y-
G 100
KPa

~
(l n V I
10
I
20
I
30 Ed
o V
100
I r
,nn
I
~oo Os

« %

« Es

10
Figure 7-11 Exampls 2 stress paths
(]
(J %

C(
°d
C( 10 20 30 Ed ,-- Critical state
%
C( 100
rr-,

'-( KPa
Figure 7-10 Stress-strain curves for example 1
(~

'1 By equating the sum of dE~ and dE~ from squations [7-15)

)'
\...
and [7-21) rsspsctively to zero an explicit expression for
do~ in terms Df dOd is obtainsd. dos thus calculated, dEa °d
and dE§ are obtained from [7-15) and [7-21) respectively and %
;
,-, added to give dEd' As previously, os' 0d and h [from which
0c is calculatsd) will bs updated after sach incrément. lhe C Critical state
rssulting strsss path is plotted in figure [7-11) and stress-
strain rslation in figure [7-12). lhe pore pressure, which
/o is simply the horizontal distance between the total and
effective stress paths, is plotted against deviator strain 100
C in figure [7-12).
l'~ KPo
V
Exampls 3
Cl
A "simple" shear box, ie of the type which distorts the
(l sample from a rectangle to a parallelogram, contains a clay Ed
which is first consolidated from a slurry under the Ko %
(l condition [ie no lateral strain) to a vertical stress 0y of
e 300 KPa and then unloaded, still under the Ko condition,
until the vertical stress has rsduced to 60 KPa. It is then Figure 7-12 Example 2 stress-strain and pore pressure-
Cl strain rslations

fi
 (
c 140
slowly sheared to failure. Conditions are drained through-
141

c out and pore pressures are negligible. (The primes will again

c be droppsd since o ·'0').

collapss load ars required.
Stress-strain curves and the
The clay is assumed to havs the
material propsrties of exampls 1. As will bs seen supsr-
~ Oy(Eyl critical yislding is involved so that $' and ~o will bs nseded.
°d
j
_t(y)
They are assumed to be 27° and 200 respectively.
200
-Df-ox / y.S. vhen y = 10 %
This sxampls iIIustratss sub-critical pIastic yielding
during consolidation. elastic unloading (including "rebound"
C!.- / off the as axis). elastic shearing. and finally plastic
yielding in the super-critical region. As will be seen the
model reveals some shortcomings in this final stage.
KPa
cr 100
We first find Ko for the consolidation stage. Ouring
(( this stage dE1 • dEy and dE2 • dEd • O and y • O. Consequently
dEs • dE1. and dEd • i dE1 or dEs • 2dEd' The assumption is
G now made that the slastic strains are relatively small so that
ç dEd dEP
d 1
'2 (7-38)
C(, KPa
200 300 Os
dEs dEP
s
ct
r
Figure 7-13 Stress p~th for ex~mple 3 The fIow ruIe vector must therefors be inclined at 1:2
in Og. Os space. This is indicated by the point A in figure
'I (7-13). Since Scs • 1 the yield ellipse 1s a circle.
r: Consequently at point A:
~ °x
S
\..,
40 200 °d
a -a
1
'2 (7-39)
s c
Á
U 30
Applying Pythagoras:
C KPa \
\
KPa
a 2 • a 2 + (o -a )2 (7-40)
G
.
..-{,
20
\', <, _---
°x _ 100 c d 5 c
Eliminating 0c betwsen [7-39) and (7-40) we obtain
\..!/
10
,.(
'--' d
t\ rlO
O )2 + cr -
4 [Od) 1 o
s s
y
(l % whence

%:~
-Ey ad
1 a
0.236 • no
!] 5

From the definitions of as and 0d

J
5 1 1
(-
J. 0/0 10 Y a1 = as + '2 °d and a2 • as - '2 ad

'-l.
Figure 7-14 Shear stress. shear strain and vertical whence a2 2-no
-( strain for example 3 K • - • -- • 0.780
o a1 2+no
r
"I'

l
\
 '?
142 • 143
~
i.. This is a little higher than would be expected. The widely °d 2 = (a -o )2 + 4,2
x y
L used empirical formula K = 1 - Sin~' would gíve Ko ~ 0.5.
The theoretical value wi~l however, bs rstainsd sincs the we obtain r = 32.7 KPa,'
L purposs here is to illustrate the working of the modelo
To obtain ths stress path and stress-strain relations
L At the end of consolidation 01 = 0y = 300 KPa (givsn)
and 02 = 0x = 0.789 x 300 = 236.7 KPa. The correspondíng
during super-critical yielding bsyond P the constitutive
is obtained in the form of equation (7-31).
law
Use is then made
tf
'-- invaríants are 0S = 268.3 and 0d = 63.3. These ~efine the
point A in figure (7-13) which lies on the end-of-consolidation
of the fact that during shsar lateral expansion of the shear
box is prevented 50 that d~x = O, and the vertical stress is
~ yield surface. DA represents the consolidation stress path. constant 50 that doy = O. The first of equations (7-31) then
tL 0c is obtained from equation (7-40) or (7-41) as 141.6 KPa.
becomes

(~ Unloading as °
reduces from 300 to.60 KPa now takes o = C do + C d,
place. This will &e elastic (at lsast initially - there is 11 x 13
«
~. the possibility that yielding will re-occur before unloading
C13
is complete). With the assumption of linear elasticity ths
«- oondi tion of no lateral strain imposss the ccns t r-aí.nt or da
x
= --
C11
dr (7-41)

( da x = (~J do y
ç 1-v
ar in terms of K and G
(Suffixes 1 to 3 are used to identify ths slsmsnts Df the
~ep m~trix.) Eliminating dox from the second and third
~( equatlons:

~
=. =
3K-2G)
(3K+4G dJJy
d~ C21 dox + C23 dT [C23 C2~)
C11
dr (7-42)
r: Y
Substituting K = 12000 KPa and G = 6000 KPa and doy = ôOy
\
ç = - 240 KPa (givsn),ôox = 0.4 ôOy = - 96.0 KPa 50 that after
unloading 0x = 236.7 - 96.0 = 140.7 KPa. . dy C31 dox + C33 dT = [C33 -
C31 C13)
C
11
dT (7-43)

) Note that 0x now excseds °

50 that 0x becomes 01 and
\. ryy becomes 02' With 0d define~ as (01-02) this causss the These relations will be determined explicitly for the
-~
~--'
unloading stress path AB in figure (7-13) to reflect off the
as axis. At B as • !(oxtOy) = 100.3 and 0d = [ox-Oy) = 80.7.
first increment beyond P. The invariant plastic compliance
matrix ~~ i5 obtained first. The procedure i5 the same as in

L B is within the yield surface, justifying the earlier ass-

umption.
example 1 and lead5 to

:(
•...... -3 [- 5.22 5.75]
The shsaring stage of the test is now carried out. The c 10
( "'p
26.18 -28.84
,-J assumption Df elasticity causes thsre to be no change in 0x
as T is increassd in the·elastic region. Sincs 0y is held
~ constant Os remains constant and 0d increases. Note that
I~ 0d increases whether the sample distorts to the left or to the To use equation (7-30) to compute C the matrix R must
'- right. Ths stress path therefore moves vertically from B. first be evaluated. This requires eva1eation of ths"'prin-
~ Let it reach the yield surface at P where supercritical cipal direction as meas~red by the angle a in figure [7-8).
yielding commences. This can be done at any point on the stress path knowing the
« The dsviator stress at P is obtained from the geometry
stress components, eg from

'J of figure (7-13) as Tan2a = --- 2T

a -o
(7-44)
(J x y

\i.-
0d = 0e [Scs-S) + 505 At point P T = 32.7 and °x - °y = 80.7 whencs a = 19.60

5ubstituting 0c = 141.6, as = 100.3, 5cs = 1 and 5 = 25in~'

í..(

C
'-l
/-:
'-{
= 0.908 we obtain 0d at P as 103.8 KPa. Solving for T from:
~ -[
0.5

Cos2a
0.5

-Ccs Zc 25i:2 J l =
0.5

0.775
0.5

-0.775 ,:J
 ,(

,( 144 145

'l and y and T initially increase, thus by equa~ion (7-48) 0x' and
'r [0 6."
23,86 -24.61 therefore 0S, reduces. The stress path starts off downwards
and to the left from P (figure 7-13). Repeated application
C ; ~T ~. ~ ; 10-3 8.04 -31.52 31.89 of the above procedure in a compJter prcgram produced the
'( 'l-p. P
stress path PQ in this figure. Strain softening occurred

~'-.
r -11 .69 44.81 -46.141 (7-45) very slowly 50 that by the time the sheêr strain had reached
10% (at which point the analysis was stcpped) the stress path
The elastic compliance matrix ~e must be added to obtain was still a long way from the critical state.
C This in terms of G and v is
'l-ep
,:y and Y:Ey curves are plotted ir figure (7-14). The
-v O results are interesting and some~hat enigmatic. The soil

'--'
~
C ; ~
'l-e 2G ['"' -v

O
1-v

O
O

21 (7-46)
dilates as it should (ie Ey negative). This would eventually
leveI off as the critical state ~ere ap~roached but has barely
started to do this at 10% shear strain. The reduction in 0x
is not in accordance with physical expectation. One would
,~ expect an expanding soil to push harder ~gainst the sides of
Given G = 6000, K = 12000 we obtain v ; (3K-2G)/(6K+2G) ; 7./7. the box! The peak in T is expected. It is surprising, how-
J Substituting this in (7-46) and adding to (7-45) gives ever that T first increased rather than jecreasing immediately
.( after yielding .
- 6.18 23.84 -24.61
These somewhat quirky resu1ts are probably a consequence
\(
~
ep
; C +
'l-e
~
p
; 10 -3 I 8. 02 -30.92 31,89 of the high constraints in this example. The soi1 cou:d
( strain free1y only in the vertical (y) dire~tion. This con-
-11 .69 44.81 -45.971 (7-47) trasts with examples 1 and 2. The sensitivity of the stress-
strein relat10ns to the compliance (~9p) metr1x has already
Note that the elastic contribution is very small and that the been mentioned. In a similar exampfe to the one presented
matrix is unsymmetric due to the flow rule being non-assoc- here the writer computed a stress path which moved cp and to
iative. Substitution of the terms C11, C1~' etc. of the the right from point P. Such a drastic change could be
.( matrix Cinto equations (7-41), (7-42) anB (7-43) gives
'l-ep caused by, for example, a small change in C33 such as would
( change the sign in equation (7-50). Let the reader beware!
dOx -3.98 dT (7-48)
'(
dCy 10-3 (31.89-31.94) dT ; -0,00005 dT (7-49) 7.10 Conclusions
-3
dy 10 (-45,97 + 46.57) dT ; 0.00060 dT (7-50) A critical state constitutive law suitable for plane
<;
( strain applications has been derived. By expressing i~ in
terms of the plane strain stress and strain increment invariants
It can be seen that equations (7-49) and (7-50) involve it has been possible to do most of the derivation geometrically,
(
the sma1l differences of relatively large numbers. The only in the final stages when the three components of stress
( expressions for dEy and dy should therefore be viewed with and strain were related was it recessary to take a more abs-
suspicion. A ameIl chenge 1n the coefficienta of the ~ep trect epproech.
matrix (equation 7-47) could, for example. change their signo
Nonetheless we shall pursue this example to its conclusion. It can be seen now how thE first ~our conventional soil
(
.- Let us next find the initial slope of the effective
mechanics concepts mentioned at the beginning of the ch3pter
are incorporated in the modelo
~ stress path in os,od space. Since doy = O dos; l dox'
Using equation (7-28) and eliminating dox by (7-48) we obtain 1. Critical state
~ dOd ; -1.82 dTo Consequently
l.. When a stress path reaches the critical state line t,e
dOd model allows distortion to occur without change in eff-
( 0.914 (7-51 )
dos ective stress or volume, (or pore prEssure if undrai,ed).
This is of course the essence of the critica 1 state =oncept.
{
r 147
y 146
2. Voids ratio : e~fective stress relationship
(í surface is encountered. In regions close to fixed boundaries
( there is a "numerical trauma" as major stress adjustments take
(- This is embodied in the state boundary surface which in the place to cause strains which are compatible with the boundary
model ia formalized as a plasticity strain hardening law.
Cl 3. Plastic deformation characteristics
conditions.

straints.
This is a similar problem to that illustrated by
example 3 where the troubles are attributed to excessive con-
There have been some recent developments in non-
\~
,{ linear finite element techniques which make them better able to
Again this is embodied in the plasticity formalization by
'-'
,{
L.
means of the flow rules and hardening law. The main con-
sequence of this is the ability of the model to reproduce
incorporate awkward constitutive laws.
here.
A marriage is needed

the marked difference in stiffness between virgin consol- It was mentioned that an alternative form of the model
~ idation and unloading/reloading of over consolidated soils. continued the sub-critical ellipse into the super-critical
Note that by using plasticity theory to achieve this the
( model differs from conventional [met~ll plasticity in that
region. This has the advantages of simpIifying the model and
allowing an associa tive flow ruIe to be used throughout. It
cI volumetric plastic strains control the strain hardening
[or softeningl.
suffers the disadvantage that there is a large elastic region
above the Hvorslev surface where the Mohr Coulomb criterion is
(f violated. The situation is not quite as bad as might first
4. Mohr-Coulomb strength criterion
(( appear since if the yield surface is intersected in the super-
critical region strain softening will occur eventually bringing
This has been incorporated simply by making the super-
the stress path to the critical state (as in the version des-
~ critical yield surface a straight line in 0s:od space of
cribed herel. Furthermore dilatancy will progressively in-
r slope related to .' and intercept to c' and .'. (A bonus
\~ crease as the stress point moves to the left of the critical
is the ability of the model to vary c' according to the
state. This, as with our version, is in at least qualitative
amount of preconsolidation the soil has experienced.1
~
r:
agreement with experimento

'i In addition to these four points the model is able to There appears to be a future in "kinematic" critical
reproduce, at least qualitatively, the essential features of state models. Instead of there being just one elliptical
~ shear tests. Thus a progressive increase in shear resistance yield surface, one or a family of such surfaces are defined
~n6~de the basic surface.
1 with shear distortion to failure associated with reduction in
voids (or increase in pore pressure if undrainedl is obtained
They move about and change in size
with the stress point, the rules never allowing one surface to
~. for normally consolidated soils. For over-consolidated soils cross another. These surfaces control plastic yield and allow
I~; a peak strength will be reproduced followed by dilatant be- some to occur when the stress point is in the elastic region.
,l haviour (ie increase in voids or negative pore pressure devel- Such models are being developed for cyclic loading. If nothing
L, opmentl which diminishes as the critica 1 state is approached. 91se they ease th9 sharp transition from the elastic to plastic
({ Lastly the model requires material property parameters which states. This should provide some relief to the "numerical
,-,' are readily obtained from conventional constants. (.', À or Cc trauma" referred to above.
;S and the preconsolidation stress are the dominant onesl.
r(
"\,,;.y The model sounds wonderful. What then are its weaknesses?
f( Its credibility in certain applications (Example 31 has already
'-' been questioned. As far as finite element application is
( concerned it is not always easy to implement. Although the
'-' model has been incorporated in finite element programs since
about 1970 there are not many published examples of its app-
J lication to boundary value problems, nor does it appear to
Cl have been used widely in industry. Perhaps one reason for
this is that when used in programs which incorporate some of
(I the earlier non-linear computing schemes - in particular the
constant stiffness methods (see chapter 81 - it does not always
U converge nicely and sometimes not at alI. Solutions can be
r
expensive. The writer suspects that this may be due to the
~ very abrupt change in stiffness which occurs when the yield
,~
\..(
r>.
((

<- '

( , \
 "--'
/'-J ,148 149
~
7.11 References
L ATKINSON,J.A. and BRANSBY,P.L. (1978), "The. Me.c.hQYÚC6 06
( soirs", McGraw-Hill. CHAPTER 8
({
CALLAOINE,C.R. (1963), Correspondence, Ge.ote.c.hYÚque., 13, No.3,
TECHNIQUES FOR NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS
CI 250-255.

(J HENKEL,O.J. (1960), "The relationships between the eHective

stresses and water riontent in saturated clays",
<[ Ge.ote.c.hnique., 10, No.1, 41-54.
8.1 Introduction

C( In chapters 4, 5, and 7, non-linear stress-strain laws

NAYLOR,O.J. (1975), "NOrt-Ürte.aJt 6-{.nde. Ue.me.rttmode.l6 60lL
c{ <>oili", Ph. O. Thesis, Uni versity of Wales.
have been described. With these laws, the resulting stiffness
matrices of the finite elements and the structure as a whole
\' RENOULIC (1938), "A consideration of the question
limiting states", BQLÚrtge.YÚe.uJr.19, 159-164.
of plastic
are non-linear. i.e. the stiffness 1s not constant but depen-
dent on stress or strain. Techniques for solv1ng non-linear
stiffness equations are discussed in this chapter.
~ ROSCOE,K.H. and BURLAND,J.B. (1968), "On the generalised
AlI the techniques to be described can, with certain quel-
~ stress- s train behaviour of •we t ' clay", Ertgirte.eJÚrtg
ifications, be applied 1rrespective of the constitutive law. It
)' p~tic.ity, Cambridge University Press, 535-609.
will be shown, however, that some techn1ques are better su1ted
to particular laws than others.
J'
<:»
ROSCOE,K.H., SCHOFIELD,A.N. and THURAIRAJAH,A. (1963),
"Yielding of clays in states wetter than critical",
In non-linear analysis, the loads have to be applied
,.( Ge.ote.c.hnique. 8, No.1, 22-53.
incrementally. Iterations or 'time-steps' may also have to be
'G' incorporated within the load increments. 'Time' may be used
SCHOFIELO,A.N. and WROTH,C.P. (1968), "ClLUic.a..e. Stl1-te. So.u
,( purely as an artifice (as in visco-plastic method) and time
'-./ Me.c.hQYÚC6", McGraw-Hill.
steps as a substitute for iterations.
A
"--" TAYLOR,O.W. (1948), "Furtdl1-me.rttal.6 06 so.u Me.c.hQrtiC6", Wiley.
.( Single degree of freedom illustrations are used for clar-
L ity. AlI problems have numerous degrees of freedom. Depending
'\ on the discretization, the efficiency of the techniques may not
~ be the same as seen in a single degree of freedom illustration.
(1
8.2 CIassification of techniques
~
CI The techniques can be roughly classified into two groups.
The first group consists of those techniques in which element
cc stiffnesses and the stiffness of the structure are formulated
only once and equivalent Ioads which are updated in every iter-
C[ ation or time-step ere epplied. In the e~cond group the etiff-
.-
'-í nesses are computed and assembled in each step. It is also
possible to have mixed techniques in which stiffnesses are up-
r dated according to some indicator of convergence. There are
'\
ç further subdivisions in the two groups. These are summarized
in table 8-1. Note that these are still only basic approaches
\~\ and there are a number of possible variationg. We discuss the
basic ideas of each of these techniques in the following para-
r>.
'(o graphs.
.~
'\'
<r,

"-(
( \
(
150 151
(
Figure (8-2) illustrates the procedur~s for the one-dimen-
'i Table 8-1
s10nal case. The ~etterings 1n diagrams (a), (b) and (c)
correspond. The positioning of the points E2, E3, .•.. on
( the 11nes of slope Do requires an explanat10n at the outset.
i Equivalent Load Variable Stiffness
,""' Methods Methods They have been positioned randomly. The actual positions will
(
,- depend on the boundary conditions and the discretization (ie.
( Initial stress Tangent stiffness ~ the number of elements). Thus, if there is a single bar
'- Initial strain Secant stiffness
element with a load applied to the end, E1,E2' ., ..En will alI
be at the same 'leveI' (ie. stress value). In general, the
\,(
'-' Visco-plastic points E may be associated with 1ncreasing ar reducing stress.
(
'~

(
'---
8.3 Eguivalent load methods

,
{
In this group a set of equivalent nodal forces are computed
which, when applied to a linear elastic counterpart of the actual
( body, produce the correct displacements (figure 8-1).

( t

(
t
i
(
A body of
1 non-linear A"
\. material
J (a) Initial stress (b) Initial strain
"
J
~)

1
~
{
~.
(
~ Figure 8-1 Diagrammatic representation of
1:,'
(
'-..-.
r(
equivalent load method.
j~
"- The calculation of stiffness for the elements and assembly
,i. of the stiffness for the entire structure (~o) is performed Strain
only once. Numerous updatin~of the loads tright-hand side of Axes for the three diogroms
,~ equation (2-18D are required to obtain the correct solution.
(l AlI three methods start with a linear elastic analysis (c) Visco - plostic
\ based on an elastic modulus matrix, Qo,with corresponding stiff-
ness matrix ~o' It is in the computation of the corrective
~ forces which form the r.h.s. of the stiffness equations that the
three methods d1ffer.
(
Figure 8-2 Equivalent load methods.
:(
(

(
 152 153
(
',. 8.3.1 Initial stress method
r
Let the linear elastic analysis for a particular load Read and check alI except load
increment produce strain 1l€1' Point A1 in figure (8-2 a) data.
represents the stress according to the stress-strain law at
Calculate nodal forces equiva-
this state of strain, and E1 the stress had the material behaved
lent to (actual) initial stre-
elastically during the increment. E1A1 (:11) is therefore a
( sses. put in accumulated load
measure of stress error. It is the 'initial stress' from which
vector~. Put ~o Cusually Ol,
( the corrective nodal forces are calculated. (Initial stress
Zo on a file, say FILE 3.
in this context has nothing to do with initial stresses in the
( ground.) Let 601 represent the correct (as opposed to elastic)
Calculate element stiffnesses,
stress increment corresponding to the strain increment 1l€1'
( Then - ~oe and write them on a separ-
ate file, say FILE 1.
!1 Qo li ~ 1 - llQ 1 (8-1)
.{
IRSOL ~ O
( Element nodal forces corresponding to ~1 are given by W
(see chapter 2, section 2.7) DO 100 IN :1 MAXIN CMaximum number of load
.(
ljJe =
_ 1 --
T
f
8 11 dv (8-2)
increments)

Read incremental loads, store

Integration is over the element volume, and 8 represents the in r.h.s. vector óR.
( 'I.
strain matrix. These nodal forces are'assembled to give the ~
,( overall corrective force vector ~1' P ~ P + llR
'I. 'I. 'I.

~1 then forms the r.h.s. for a re-solution of the stiff- IF IRSDL = O, assemble stiff-
ness equations. (Note that this is much more economical than ness, eliminate and put diagon-
would be the case if the stiffness matrix, ~o' were changed.) aI matrix on FILE 2.
This produces a new set of incremental displacements from which IRSOL = 1 IF IRSOL : 1, resolve. Return
strains 1l~2 are computed. This defines point E2 on figure
'( (8-2 a). 1 is then computed using equation (8-1) with the I with incrementel dieplecement.
suffixes '172replaced by '2'. ~2 is obtained using the same f, = ó + M Keep updating displacements.
<I:, 'I. 'I.
( procedure as for 1jJ2' The process is continued until ljJis
sufficiently small-to be ignored. When this occurs, the process Compute llE, llo, T (initial
( is said to have converged. stress co~rec~io~, Fig. 8-2bl
or ~ Cinitial strain correc-
( A criterion for convergence is required. A convenient one tion, Fig. 8-2c), whence resi-
is to require that the norm of the vector ~ i.e., dual vector~. Increment Di E
( NO and update FILE 3. 'I. 'I.

:.~
IIjJI :
_
/-:-2'1'1
+ ,/,2
'l'2+.... +IjJN
2 (8-3)
YES
-l (where N is the total number of degrees of freedoml has reduced
below a threshold or tolerance value.
;(

The rate of convergence can often be speeded up. This is 100 ...•
4f------ CONTINUE
\ done by multiplying the corrective forces ~ by an accelerator,
'~

;\
a, which is greater than one. a: 1.8 has been found optimal
for some problems, although numerical instability can occur in
cartain instances when a exceeds one.
é
-..( Figure 8-3 Flow diagram for initial stress/initial
A flow diagram for the initial stress method is shown in strain method
figure (8-3).
(,

,(

(
 (

(' 154 155

8.3.2 Initial strain method YI having been calculated, the initial strain procedure
r is followed to obtain force residuaIs ~I' Re-solution provides
The corrective nodal forces are computed on the basis of the basis for calculating the second step plastic strain rates,
( the 'initial' strains, :r
I' represented by E I B I in figure Y2' from which 1:2 is computed using a time-step t,'t2• The
(8-2b). The stress ~', represented by EIAI" replaces '1 procedure continues until convergence is obtained. The compu-
( ter flow diagram is the same as that for the initial stress and
of the initial stress mkthod. It is given by
( strain methods (figure 8-3) except that subroutine RESIO will
incorporate different logic to calculate the strain rates, X.
( 'I• o Y
-o _I
(8-4)

Corrective forces • _
~.I are computed using equation (8-2)
:{ with TI replaced by 11' Re-solution then proceeds exactly as
It has been explained in chapter 5, section 5.7, how the
in the-initial stress method until convergence is achieved.
{ visco-plastic material can either be used to represent a truly
viscous material, in which case t represents real time, or a
Numerical instability leading to non-convergence (with
'-i computed displacements amounting to possibly hundreds of kilo-
time-independent elasto-plastic material, for which t simply
controls the convergence. In either case there is a limit on
\{ meters:) can sometimes occur with the initial strain method.
~ 6t above which instability may occur but below which conver-
Use of a declerator, i.e. a < 1.0, may prevent this.
.{ gence is guer-ent sed b). The limiting value nf t,t is known as
the critica~ time step, t,t • Expr8ssions for it can be der-
The flow diagram for the initial strain method is essen-
,( ived for certain material l~~s when the time-stepping process
tially the same as for the initial stress (figure 8-3).
is exp~icit as it is in the method described here. Cormeau
( (1976) presents the following thre~:

( 8.3.3 Visco-plastic method 2 (8-8 )

Tresca: llt
cr = jJG
This is the same as the initial strain method except that 2
~ the procedure for calculating the 'initial' strains, YI' is Von Mises: t,t
cr = 3jJG
(8-9)
( different. The first step is to calculate visco-plastic strain-
2(1 - ZIJ)
rates, ~ , and then to multiply these by a time-step, t,t , to Mohr-Coulomb: 6t = (8-10 )
( obtain -I I cr jJG(1 -2V+Sin2<jl)
\. ..

( Y = Y t,t (8-5) In these equations G is the shear modu Ius , v Poisson' s ratio,
_I -I I

l' For the one-dimensional case, the visco-plastic strain

and <jlthe friction angle. They will be in terms of effective
or total stress according to the type of the analysis.
'- rate is related to the stress error, TI = EI AI in figure
(
'-, (8-2 c). Most simply, it is proportional to TI and is g í.van by An explicit expression for t,tcr is not available for
(
. the critical state law (chapter 7). Here, empirical rules have
to be used to ensure numerical stability •
,c·( YI jJ TI (8-6)

where ]J is the fluidity coefficient previously introduced in Note that a high stiffness, represented by a large value
( of G ar v elose to 0.5 (implying large K), in even one
'--" chapter 5.
element can result in a very small critical time-step with the
:r
~ For multi-dimensional elasto-visco-plastic laws (which is result that convergence may be unduly slow.

1 the main application for the method) equation (8-6) is replaced

by equation (5-44). Letting fI now represent the plastic
8.4 Variable stiffness methods
~ strain rates and assuming that <jl(F)= F, the equation becomes

i yI = <F> ~
In these methods, the stiffness of the ~tructural assem-
]J (8-71 bly is repeatedly updated. This process is mor~-expensive in
,{ (lo
The scalar yield function, F, replaces TI as a measure of the
,--(
stress error, and the gradient of the plastic potential, (lO/(l~ (il i.e., in theorYJ in practice, convergence may sometimes
fixes the ratios of the strain rate components so that the be so slow that it cannot be obtained in a reasonable time
normality condition of plastic flow is satisfied. even on a large computer.
--(

(
 156 157
computer time as compared with re-solution (as a rough rule-of-
thumb, one updating of the stiffness is equal to about five re-
solutions).

o
'v
0'0%lo!) See Figure 8-3.
,( ~o~;!)1
-,:",_~,

( See Figure 8-3.

'_O

Incr.
00 100 IN = 1.MAXIN (Maximum number Df load increments)

+
~
'- B = correct end-of- incr. point
The load increment ôR is read.
fi
OOT= crude modulus
"- OT = ideal modulus
"

M = 6R + ~ Adding the residuaIs (which should

,( be small) reduces error accumulation.
T
~ K calculated using start-of-incre-
o'! E ~8nt O ,E (from FILE 3).
\
Figure 8-4 Tangent stiffness method.
'\
. .
8.4.1 Tangent stiffness method
Assembly and elimination
Return wi th M .
each time.

~
p E + ôf!
'\ This method is based on piecewise linearization of the
stress-strain curve. The tangent modulus matrix in the basic Increment loads and displacements.
......
\ form of the method is the initial tangent matrix (figure 9J s ó + ô§
Reactions added to ôR in FRONT.*
8-4). It is assembled at the beginning of each increment of
'l load. The load increments should, in theory, be infinitesimally
small to be able to edhere to the true stress-strain relation- ComputeÔE,Ôo. Update E,O and write
( ship. With finite increments, at the end of the increment, equi- on FILE 3. -Then calculãte ~
librium conditions will not be satisfied. Thus, (optional but desirable). -
•..•.. '
If required
(~T) 62 - 6B = '1! 'I O

where KT is the tangential stiffness, Ôo is the incremental Wise to output ~

nodal displacement vector, ÔR is the v~ctor of nodal forces
-,' applied during the increment,-and ~ represents a set of resi- 100 CONTINUE
dual nodal forces. In the basic tangent stiffness method. the
J set of residual forces are added onto the next load incremento
Stiffness of the structure is re-asssmbled and the whole process
".~( repeated. ~ *Alternatively, reac-
:l Figure (8-5) shows a flow chart for the tangent stiffness
tions may be computed
in RESIo as nodal
( method. forces equivalent to ~.
..( Iterations may be applied within load increments with the
aim to make ~ + O. There are a number Df variations Df the
.J technique, and the reader should refer to specialist texts
(Zienkiewicz, 1977; Owen and Hinton, 1980) for further details. Figure 8-5 Flow diagram for tangent stiffness method.
J
 y

158 J 59
An important point to be noted in respect of this method 8.5 Assessment of techniques
is that in strain softening situations [figure 8-4) the tangent
stiffness is negative. This may lead to numerical instability. The techniqueg in the first group (initial load methods)
are efficient for moderately non-linear problems. In the
0.4.2 Secant stiffness method problems of plasticity and visco-plasticity non-associative
'.~- flow rules and strain-softening can be dealt with quite easily
( by these techniques as they require assemb1y and solution with
\~-'
The method is based on a secant modulus matrix Os. In
soi1s the stress, strain origin for defining the modulus will initial stiffness matrices which are symmetrical and positive
not normally be zero due to the existence of initial stresses, definite. On the other hand. the techniques Df the second
and in some cases initial strains. (Strains are usually taken group Cvariable stiffness) lead to non-symmetric stiffness
s as zero at the start. but sometimes they are non-zero to matrices for non-associative flow rules (chapter 5). Tangent
continue strains calcu1ated in a preceding analysis - see stiffness is nega tive for post-peak behaviour in strain-
~.
chapter 3). The procedure 1s 111ustrated in figure (8-6). softening situations and may lead to numerical instabi1ity.
.{ Most solution routines make use of the symmetry property of the
The f1rst analysis using a stiffness based on an 1nitial
modulus OS produces stresses and strains corresponding to stiffness matrices. 501utions with non-symmetric stiffness
~ point 1. o l' is then identified allowing a secant modulus O~ matrices are about three times more expensive.
to be defined. A second analysis with stiffness based on
J AlI the teehniques within the first group may sometimes
O~ then produces stresses and strains represented by point 2,
,( whence 2' and D~. The process continues until the defined be very slow to converge. Techniques in the seeond group are
points settle down onto the curve. An alternative is to perhaps the only way for solving highly non-linear problems.
identify the points on the curve 1', 2', etc. by a 'sloping', Computing eosts are problem-dependent.
'í
ar even a 'vertical' line instead of the horizontal line from
\{.
the points 1, 2, ete. In the context of elasto-plasticity and elasto-viseo-
plasticity, the visco-plastie method appears to have many
'( This method i5 more ver5atile than the tangential sinee advantages. In addition to being able to deal with non-assoc-
it can ineorporate strain-softening stress-strain laws, but is iated flow rules and strain-softening situations, its ability
t generally less efficient. to incorpora te true time-dependence allows the study of prob-
.; lems like delayed placement of lining and other structural
I
components. Moreover, for a predefined load, even a non-
converged solution provides useful answers, since the correct
)
a solution is being progressively approached.
:(
Stress- strain Ia",
°1 LI --------f,----~--~;?~,
8.6 References

,_O CORMEAU,I.C. (1975), "Numerical stability in quasi-static

03
°2
1 / ;Y; elasto-viscoplasticity",
Vol.9, 109-127.
"IYLil. J. Num. MeA:h. iYl EYl9.,

'-o
OWEN, D. R. J. and HINTON, E. (1980), "FJ.nae. Elemmú A..Yl
\
Pla.ó;t,i.ci.;tt/',Pineridge Press, SWl!lnS81!1.
,.(
.
'-
\
ZIENKIEWICZ,O,C. [1977), "FiYL-U:e. Eteme.n.:t Me.:thod J.Yl
EYlg.tYle.eJúYlg SCÜ.Ylc.e.", MeGraw-Hill.
~
i
:i °0Eo E
J
'-Í
Figure 8-6 Seeant stiffness method
J.
 161
'{

~
'-...'
\
I
(..
CHAPTER 9
(

'--- SEEPAGE ANALYSIS

'-
9.1 Introduction
(
'- The problem Df flow through soil masses is Df considerable
li. importance in geotechnical analysis. The wide variety of pro-
blems encountered require methods Df analysis for both trans-
,~ ient and steady flow. As has been mentioned in chapter 1, the
former is outside the scope of this book and only steady-statE
,(
seepage is covered here .
.{
There are a number Df procedures for solving steady-state
\( seepage problems ranging from closed form analytical solutions
of the governing differential equations to hand-sketching of
'i flow nets and laboratory devices such as electrical analogy.
Most of these procedures are only convenient for homogenous
,{ soil conditions. The finite element method provides a powerful
tool for seepage analysis in multi-layered anisotropic sit-
, uations. There is yet another motivation for using f.e.m. In
\. chapter 3 the "known pore pressure change" class of analysis
was discussed. If the designer intends to use the f.e.m. for

'r stress analysis, it is convenient to use the same finite element

mesh for seepage analysis as well. The pore pressures from this
( enalysis [stored et the nodel points on e file) cen be streight-
way used in the stress analysis which is carried out in term:
\ of effective stress.

-~. 9.2 Seepage equations

\
The steady-state seepage through a porous medium is
\
'---, governed by the following differential equation (see Scott,1S63)

~,

u
,~ axa [K
xaxa ] +aya [K
yayau] +ãZa [K
zãZau] -- o (9-1 )

(
where Kx' Ky and Kz are the. coefficients of permeabi li ty in
the x , y, and z directions, 'respectively; x , y, z being the
1 principal directions of permeability.
J. u
u = + z water head or potential
'i, Yw

1.
\'( 163
162
u pore pressure (2) Flow boundary condition; here the intensity of f10w (q)
y is prescribed on some part of the boundary. This can be
unit weight of water
w written as
z elevation head above a datum.
au +K-!/,au +K-!/,au
The derivation of the equation is based on the f0110wing assump- K-!/' +q o (9-4 b l
x ax x y ay y z az z
tions:
(a) Fluid flow is steady. where !/'x,!/'y
and!/'z are the direction cosines of the outward
normal to the boundary.
í (b) Soi1 ske1eton is rigid and is fully saturated.
i (c) The fluid is homogenous and incompressib1e. The special case of an impervious ~oundary is inc1uded in
\..
equation (9-4 b l and is obtained when q = O. As an example
( (d) Inertia effects ere negligible and Darcy's law holds good. we write the equations of seepage and bOJndary conditions for
the situations shown in figure (9-1).
When the soi1 medium is of isotropic permeability (i.e. the
same in alI directions) equation (9-1) rsducss to
'.~
r;;2 U o (9-2)
,~
where r;; 2 is the Laplacian operator, i. e. : t L-Sheet pile
I ""ali
h'
:( a2
r;; 2 ::~ + ~ + - (9-3) A
d
.( dX2 dy2 dZ2
2 -
For two-dimensional problems, the ~z~ term disappears from Assumed

L dotum Impervious boundary

both equations (9-1) and (9-3). The basic unknown in the anal-
{ ysis is the .water head, U, which is to be determined at alI the X O~O>j.•• __
po1nts in the domein of analys1s subject to certa1n boundary
~I~J~~
0&'""..
~~
àÃ__ """""' E
conditions, i.e. the value of U is known (or specified) on
certain parts of the boundary of the domain. Ia) Confined f lov
'(
Based on the type of boundary conditions, the steady-state'
( seepage problem can be classified into two categories: that of
(a) 'confined' flow, and (b) 'unconfined' flow. In confined
flow problems an impervious boundary is defined along alI parts
of the external boundary where the head is not prescribed. An
\
<:
example of confined
below a sheet pile wall
flow is the seepage through the strata
(figure 9-1 a). In problems of
unconfined flow, a free or phreatic surface is involved, the
position of which i9 not known a priori: On the phreatic sur-
face pore pressures, u, are zero, and u cannot be directly
L X
h'

A
~,~~~c~J'--,~~r-T)~!----~.~~~~r.c-r7~w.~&a~
_

calculated. Seepage through an earth dam (figure 9-1 b) is an

exemple. (b)

1 9.2.1 Mathematical formulation of boundary conditions

(
There are basically two types of boundary conditions that Figure (9-1) Confined and unconfined steady state flOl
\ arise in the flow problems:
(1) Head (or potential) boundary condition; here the head is Sheet pile wall: Assuming 2-dimensional conditions,
prescribed on some part of the boundary, i.e.
u U on a part of the boundary (9-4 a)
K
aü
--
2
+ K -
a'ü o (9- 5)
( x ax2 Y 8y2

(
 (
'( 164 165
applies over the entire domain AO EC subject to the boundary Figure (~-21 shows a typical division of a two-dimensional(1)
'(
conditions (see figure 9-1 aI, region into triangular finite elements. The head (ü) at any
\( location within a finite element is assumed a function of the
u h + h' over AS (9-6 a) heads at the nades (ü,) forming the element according to
'-- ~
í u h + d over SC (9-6 b l n
,,~

(lu•
u L Ni Ui (9-81
,{ o over DE (9-6c) i=1
(
ãY
'--
\ where N. is the shape function for nade i, and n is the
Earth dam: The governing differential equation (9-51 is to be
number o~ nades in the element (c+. sec t í.on 2.3).
L applied on the domain AS CE. The location of SC is not known
a prior i and has to be assumed. It is subsequently corrected.
,( Use of equation (9-8) together with standard techniques
The upstream and downstream faces of the dam (figure 9-4b) of variational calculus (see for example, Z1enkiewicz, 1977)
( leads to a set of n algebraic equations which can be written
below the water leveI are equipotential surfaces. At the free
surface (SC) the pore pressures are zero, therefore the poten- in the form
e
'\ tial is simply equal to elevation head (yl. Also there 1s no !Se !! O 19-9)
flow across the free surfaces. The complete boundary condition; e _
can be written as follows: where u is a vector of the n element nodal values of u, and
( Ke represents the element 'stiffness' matrix given by
u ~ h' on AS (9-7 a)
'{ -
u = d on DE (9-7 b I Ke fê T E ê dV (9-101

'( -
u = h on BC, u = O (9-7 c) in which B is a 2 x n matrix made up of a row of n submatrice:
'( u = y on CO, u = O [9-7 d )

I
.... dü (lNi)
\ dy = O on AE (9-7 e I ax'
[9-11 )
!.
B.
-~ aNo
~
-, 9.3 Finite element discretization of seepage equation
( ay'
'--
i( The seepage problem is one of the simplest of problems where i identifies the element nades as before
'- which can be solved by f.e.m. The domain of analysis is discre-

\
,_o
\ tized in a number of finite elements [see chapter 21. Each
nade of the finite element mesh has only a single degree of
freedom, i.e. only one unknown variable [head at the nada 1
pointl.
and p
['~ ': ] (9-12)

y where K; and K' are the principal permeabilit1es for the

element under c~sideration (figure 9-3). [They are aligned
in the directions x', y' •) P is known as the 'permeabili ty
J matrix'. Note that the shape-function derivatives are w.r.t.
the local rather than the global axes. The integration in
1 equation (9-101 is carried out over the volume of the elemento
It will be noted that equation [9-10) is very similar to the
'stiffness' equations derived in chapter 2 (section 2.7) .
.(

-(

,.(
x [il We discuss here only two-dimensional problems. Extension to
three dimensions i5 straight-forward once the reader has
'\ got an understanding Df the ideas.
Figure (9-2) Typical division of two-dimensiDnal region
,( \ into triangular elements
,
 {

167
\ 166
9.3.1 Calculation of right-hand side (Q) for seepage equations
'\
"( y We consider here two types of boundary conditions given
by equations (9-4 a) and (9-4 b l.
''\ ~ .'f.~
(a) Prescribed heads: For the prescribed pressure head condi-
I
tion, equation (9-4 a), the procedure adopted is identical to
( that adopted in stress analysis calculations. (see, for example,
'-- Zienkiewicz, 1977.) Let us assume that we have triangular ele-
(
ments leading to the element stiffness equation of the form

I,~~

(
.:

'--
\.~

\.ç
(

Figure (9-3) A triangular element with principal directions

x
l
K11 K12

K21

K31
K22

K32
K13

K23

K33 ,
-'
{:: ).{
Assuming "e has the prescribed
: )
Io r known) value, 0.,
(9-16 )

the corresponding diagonal slement Df the matrix (K22) is multi-

.í of permeability along local system ofaxes Xl,y'. plied by a large number (say 108) and the corresponding right-
hand side is substituted as Kn x 108 x 0.). The final element
IJ Before "ne assembly of the element stiffnesses to formu-
stiffness equations becoms
late the global stiffness matrix for the entire domain (~), the
'< element st1ffnesses (~e) have to be transformed to the global
iK11 K12 K13 .

l
system of coordinates (figure 9-3). The transformed stiffness i
\( [!Seg ] of the element is given by I !
K
-
e
g
IT !Se T (9-13)
'21
K31
K22 x 108
K32
K23

K33
I

I
{~:} - { '" '~08 ,a} (9-17l

I
'{
where I 15 a transformation matrix defined by
\ ,[ Cos e -sine-: and this procedure would lead to UB being calculated as CL
I (9-14)
( Sin e coseJ (b) Prescribed flow: The flow terms (O) for the condition of
prescribed flow are made up from element-nodal contributions
( whers e is the angle between the global x-axis and the local
(
axes of principal permeabilities. Q,
J.
= f
S
N-:
J.
q dA (9-18 )

The above transformation need only be carried out for

anisotropic cases. where q represents the intensity of flow across the boundary
Df the element (see figure 9-2). Integration is over the area
.(
o f the element side (i. e. length x thickness in 2-D], Iln
<::»
The standard procedure of assembly (section 2.7) is used
assemóly, at interna 1 nodes the contributions to the flow terms
to formulate the ~ matrix and the final equations to be solved
~ are represented by
cancel out leaving only the external rates Df flow in the
\ finally assembled equations. When a particular boundary is
~ [ = 9 (9-15) impervious, q is simply equal to zero and the whole integ,al
1 where r represents a vector Df the heads at the nodes including
on the surface is zero.

i those which may have been prescribed, and Q represents the flow
(which corresponds to force in structural f~rmulations) or 9.4 Computation Df veloc1ties and flows
~ 'forcing function' and 1s assembled from the individual element
contributions. A discussion Df the calculation of the flow The solution Df ~quations (9-15) gives the potential
~ terms follows. heads at the nodes. The engineer is often interested in find-
.~ ing out the velocities Df flow and discharges. These can be

(~
 (
168 169
'(
evaluated from the potential heads. Using Oarcy's ~aw. the x For computation of the discharge. a section line ar plane
'7 component of the superficial velocity v 'and discharge q 'are
x x has to be specified as shown in figure (9-4 a), The flow across
given by the part of the sectio" line intercepted by an element can be
v ' = - K 'i' and q' = v ' A (9-19) found by transforming the velocity components normal to the
'- x x x x x section line. Assuming 6 to be the angle which the normal
(,( to the section line makes with the global x-axis (figure 9-4 b).
'-, with similar expressions for the y' components. Here i is discharge through section l' -4' (length L and unit thickness)
( the hydraulic gradient and A is the area of the surface normal
~ is given by
to the flow. Note that the local coordinate system is used
(
'-.:.- here. q (v Cos 6 + v Sin 6)'L (9-21 )
x y

'- Writing i' = aü/ax'. i' aü/ay' and introducing equa-

tion (9-8), we o~tain y 9.5 Treatment of free surface boundary
(
n oN
1 v ' = - K' L ---,i U
i
(9-20 a) Solution of the problems having free surface boundaries
x x i= 1 dX involves iterations. One of the procedures is to assume a
',i trial location of free surface and specify flow across it as
n dNi zero. The standard procedure of computation gives the potential
'J, v = - k' í'
L. -u,i (9-20 b)
heads [G) on the chose~ free surface. This potential head is
Y Y i=1 ay compared against elevation head, as at the free surface ~
':( should be equal to the elevation head. The free surface is mod-
Equation (9-20) defines the velocity vector at any point ified to correspond to the computed poiential head and the pro-
\( within the elemento Its components in the global (x.y) direc- blem is solved again. The process converges very rapidly and a
tions may readily be determined knowing the angle e. few iterations are usually adequate.
:'(
There are other procedures for the treatment of free sur-
'( face and the reader should refer to other texts (Zienkiewicz.
1977; Oesai and Abel. 1972),
(
9.6 Examples
(
, ,
( Two examples are given here to illustrate the application
'-.-' of the finite element method to the steady-state seepage problem.
( The first example of one-dimensional flow through two layers of
\ ...> different permeabilities is aimed at simply explaining the var-
ious steps involved in the solution. while the second example of
flow through an inhomogenous earth dam involves iterations as it
( is a free surface problem.
'--,
(e)
~ Section Une 9.6.1 Example 1 - Flow through two layers

'1 The water head in the underlying aquifer is at the ground

leveI. It is required to find out the quantity of seepage and
J
1 htl- the water head at the junction of the two layers when the ground
is flooded to 6 m depth (figure 9-5 a).

J
'~
!y
~
LlD r 2
Idealizing the problem with two linear elements of unit
cross- sectional area (figure 9-5 b l and treating the total
water head as basic unknown variable. we write
(b)
~ x
i
u
[~ ~l {Ü1 } (9-22)
'\ 2 ., ü2
Figure (9-4) Finite element discretization of sheet
-{ wall problem; (a) section acrDSS which where ~ represents a local system of coordinates. The 8 matrix
flow is to be computed; (b) geometry of
''-(
section line through an elemento
(
 (

'( 170
171
9.6.2 Example 2 - Flow through an earthfill dam
r
( Figure (9-6) shóws the details Df the problem Df seepage
'-- through an earth dam (after Taylor and Brown. 1967). The earth
( dam consists Df two zones having different permeabilities. The
\.: Flooded to 6m depth -1 ü\=14m

t
downstream rock toe has very large permeability and 1s assumej
4m origin ~ Element 1 free draining. As the problem involves a free surface. its
•1 2 trial position has to be chosen. Th1s 1s shown in figure (9-6) .
4m
The free surface is assumed to be an impervious boundary. This
~ Element 2
leads to the determination of pressure heads on it. In the
3 üJ = 8m next iteration. the location Df the free surface is modified to
correspond to the computed pressure heads. The final location
10I Physicol problem (b) Finite. element mesh ond
local system of co-ordinates
Df the boundary obtained after 25 iterations is also shown on
,~
figure (9-6). Dotted lines represent equi-potential lines.

,,<
'"~r Figure 9-5 Seepage through two layers of different
-( permeabilit1es (after Naylor. 1978).
15 in th1s case a 1 x 2 matrix and has the form
Equipotential line
( ClN ClN
1 2 , 1 1 '
ê , ãX'" -I
i - -I (9-23) Free surfoce - Initial trial
dX J L ~ j/, I
'i
Applied head = Free surface - After 25
í where ~ i9 the length of the element (depth Df the layer). The 100units
value iterotians
ClN/Clx results from the relationship between local and
( global coord1nate systems. The st1ffness matrix for element 1
can be written using equations (9-10). (9-11) and (9-12) Ko
'( Rock toe
4 r- _ !
K
-Celement
-
1] - o
J ,. + 4
2 [0.02) - ~ • ~ -; dx [9-24)
L 4

-5 -,
-2 , 5
10 :-5 5 (9-25)
( I

( Figure (9-6) Steady unconfined seepage through an earth

Using a similar procedure, the stiffness of the second element dam (after Taylor and 6rown (1967))
can be worked out. The final assembled equations are
J
-5 o -, 9.7 References
J 5

:J
J
, -5

O
7.5
-2.5
-2.5

2.5
I
I
f ;;} . E:J (9-26) OESAI, C.S. and ABEL, J.F. (1972). Introduction to the Finite
Element Method for Engineering Analysis, Von Nostrand
Reinhold Company.

-( Solving these. we obtain u 12.00 m and 01 - 03 = 10 NAYLOR, O.J. (1978). "Finite Element Methods 1n Soil Mechanics"
2
---(
litres/year. Chapter 1, Developments in Soil Mechanics, edited
C.R.Scott, Ap~lied Sc1ence Publishers.
~(

.(

\
(
173
( 172
SCOTT, R.F. (1963). PrincipZes of SoiZ Mechanis, Reading,
(
Mass., Addison-Wesley.

TAYLOR, R.L. and BROWN, C.B. (1967). "Oarcy flow equations with
( a free surface", Proc; ASCE J.Hyd.Dn., Voz, 93, SM6. CHAPTER 10
( ZIENKIEWICZ, O.C. (1977). The Finite Element Method in Engin-
eering Science, McGraw-Hil1. ANALYSIS DF JOINTEO ROC< MASSES
(

( 10.1 Introductio n

( Rocks differ from soi1s in many important aspects of their

,( behaviour. The finite e1ement ana1ysis Df rock structures 1ike
tunnels, underground cavities, foundations of hydraulic struc-
tures, rock slopes, etc., therefore, rsquires special consider-
J ations to account for these differences.
-(
The aim Df this chapter is to present a fsw models Df rock
( behaviour and certain techniques which are specia1 to the
analysis of rock masses. An examp1e Df their app1ication is
included in chapter 12.
(
10.2 Some characteristics Df rccks
(

( A detailed discussion on alI the aspects Df the behaviour

Df rocks is beyond the scope Df this book. We shall concent-
.( rate only on a few aspects whicr are o~ importance from the
point Df view Df the finite ele~ent analysis.
(
Rocks vary widely in their competence to carry loads.
{ At one extreme we have massive hard rock deposits virtually
free from any discontinuities, whi1e at the other we have
highly fragmented and crushed rocks.

\ In the former category we rarely have a cause for finite

( element analysis and the latter category needs no furth3r
elaboration as the techniques Df soils discussed in the pre-
( vious chapters of the book are applicable.

( The rocks which we are required to analyse are generally

heterogeneous, anisotropic and contain discont1nuities the
spacing Df which may vary from a few millimeters to tens of
metres. More than one set Df discontinu1ties may be prsssnt
J in a rock mass giving it a complex fabrico The anisotropy and
( the presence of discontinuities p1ay a domineering role in ths
deformational and collapse behaviour of rock structures. Ths
( influence Df the discontinuities, therefore, must be incorp-
orated in ths material model used for analysis.
J
Initial stresses have an important influence in any
-( geotechnical analysis - more so in the analysis of rock struc-
.(

<-

(
 174 175
( tures as the tectonic stresses may be present in the rock maS5. Some rocks, such as chalks and evaporites, exhibit time
The init1al state of stress may not have any resemblance to dependent behaviour. These rocks are examples of extreme be-
the relatively s1mple gravity induced stresses which occur in haviour. Even though intaet rock samples of many roeks may not
50i1s. However, the techniques used in finite element analysis show any pronounced time dependenee under moderate stre5se5,
are the same as already deseribed in chapter 3. the roek mass tempered by excavation often does. What, perhaps,
happens is shown in figure (10.1).
The third aspeet whieh needs to be taken into consider-
ation 15 that of 'seale effects'. In soils, the test samples Excavation produces a zone Df micro-craeking around the
are assumed to represent the soil mass from whieh the sample excavation. The additional load resulting from the exeavation
has been obtained. In other words, the seale effects are is transmitted through the miero-eraeks. The intensity of
ignored. A roek sample in many situations cannot inelude the stresses at the contact points is relatively high thus
influence of the presenee of widely spaeed diseontinuities. eausing ereep and plastie.strains. It may be particularly
It thus represents 'intact roek' and not "roek mass'. In important to incorporate non-linear time dependent behaviour
analysis appropriate allowanee has to be made for this effeet. when other structural components are to be associated with
.;
~4
rocks during construetion, e.g. tunnel linings, rock bolts,
etc., since the load transferred to these eomponents may sign-
Natural rock line
ificantly depend on the time dependent behaviour of the roek.

.(
Finally, the presence of groundwater in the rock massas

'~»O::':e:"szone of . leads to additional complications in the analysis. The

.v-' ;." principIe of effeetive stress applies to rocks as well. Fully
due 10 I~~~~l-~rocking undrained or drained analysis can be performed in exactly the
.,.,.,' ~" xrcvution
same manner as for soil masses. Coupled flow aod deformation
problems are more eomplicated due to changes in the perme-
:::<.:::::.::{: ability of several orders of magnitude due to opening/closing
of discontinuities. Such analyses are beyond the scope of this
texto
IA) ZDNE DF MICRO-CRACKING

Load 10.3 Discontinuities in the rock masses

(
I
t t i
( From the point of view of finite element analysis the
discontinuities in a rock mass can be broadly classified in
{ two categories,

( (a) Discontinuities with infilled gouge material.

( (b) Discontinuities without infilled gouge material •

.( I B) TRANSFER DF LOAD THROUGH
<::' 10.3.1 Diseontinuities with infilled gouge material
MICRO-CRACKS
In this category we have major discontinuities like
faults, crushed or sheared zones. It has been shown (Goodman,
1970) that when the thickness of the infilling material is
i~ more than about twiee the height of asperities, the strength
and the deformability of the discontinu1ty is governed by those
of the infilling material. In the finite element context, such
discontinuities produee regions of non-homogeneity whieh can be
1 taken eare of by arranging the mesh 50 the the elements conform
to the fault or erushed zones boundaries. It is fortunate that
J (C) ZONES OF CREEP/ PLASTIC STRAINS
usually not many discontinuities of this type intersect the
-i domain of analysis, thus keeping the number of elements within
Figure 10-1 Development of ereep and plastic strains in reasonable limits. The material model to be adopted for the
(~ rock mass due to exeavation
 ( 176 177
elements used for modelling discontinuities would simply depend
'( on the type of gouge material.
-'
( 10.3.2 Discontinuities without infilled gouge material

( Discontinuities of this type are present in large numbers. i-

They may also form a fabrico Modelling of the discontinuities
of this type by discrete elements is impossible. In the
{ analysis such discontinuities are assumed to be ubiquitous and
,\
the stress-strain laws for the rock are modified to take the
.( fabric of discontinuities into account . NOTE :
Z is in the plane
( of the strata
10.4 Some Models of the behaviour of jointed rock
f
We discuss here three models of the behaviour of jointed
.( rock. Choice of the model in any particular practical sit-
uation is problem dependent.
(

( 10.4.1 Rock as linear elastic anisotropic material

figure 10-2 Section through stratified material
( Anisotropy is of two types,

'( (1) Anisotropy of elastic moduli. o:(1-o:}) cv (1+v ) O

n n s
( (2) Anisotropy of strength. o X Io:vn (1+v s ) (1-v2 ) O I (10-1 )
s
'" Gn 2
( If we odopt e linear elestic model, the anisotropy of O O --(1+v )(1-v -20:v )
E s 5 n
strength is not relevant. The results of linear analysis can n
(
be used simply to identify the zones of over-stress based on
'( the available information on strength. E E
5 n
where o: X
E
( For a completely anisotropic material, 21 independent n (1+v )(1-v -20:v2)
elastic constants are needed to describe the stress-strain s s s
( relationship in three dimensions. It is impossible to be able
to evaluate this large number of constants for any rock. It Equation (10-1) relates to axes x', y', z' with x'and y'
in the plane as shown in figure (10-2). The orientation of
.\ ...:"'
is usual to make the assumption of transverse isotropy. In
this type. of anisotropic material, the rotational symmetry of stratification in general may not coincide with the axes
( properties exists in the plane of the strata, i.e. there is chosen for the analysis of the structure. In such a case the
only one set of elastic parameters for any direction along the O matrix given in equation (10-1) must be transformed to
(
plane of the stratification (figure 10-2). Such a material has ~btain a matrix corresponding to the global system of co-
.1 only 5 elastic constants - Es' vs' En' vn and Gn. Subscript s ordinates which is given by
refere to the properties in the plena of the stretificetion end
,( n refers to the direction normal to it. E, v and G are Young's l2 global = TT n T
'" li; '"
(10-2 )
modulus, Poisson'g ratio and shear modulus respectively.
~( where ~ represents a transformation matrix given for two
For the plane strain case the O matrix relating the dimensional problems by
l stresses to strains (see chapter 2)"'takes the form
-.\

~
,(

.~
(

'( 179
178
'no-tension' material is written as
2 2
r Cos s Sin S -2SinSCosS
F -03 - tol F o (10-4 )
'(
2
T = I Sin2s Cos S 2SinSCosS I (10-3)
where 03 represents the minor principal effective stress (we
( again drop the primes as effective stress is implied in what
'--..-'
SinSCosS -SinSCosS cos2S-Sin2s follows) and tol represents a tolerance constant (it is nec-
(
<:: essary from numerical considerations to prescribe a small
( in which S represents the angle defined in figure (10-2). For amount Df tension as allowableJ. Note that when 03 is tensile
\_'
3-D and generalised plane strain problems (see section 10.5) and numerically greater than Tol, F > O and visco-plastic
( the transformation matrix involves direction cosines Df the strain rates (~vPJ would develop givsn by
x', y', z' axes with respect to x, y, z axes and can be set up
J (Jaeger and Cook, 1976). With the R
mat~ix thus defined the
kVP )1 < F > aF
ao (10-5)
rest Df the procedure of the finite element analysis remains
,i. unchanged.
'V

.~ whers Z
represents componsnts of strsss and an 'associated
10.4.2 Rock as a no-tension material flow rule' (ehapter 5~ has been assumsd. < > have their usual
,( meaning, i.e.
If rock is assumed to have a large number Df randomly
,( oriented planes of weakness, and if it is assumed that tensile €vp 3F
F > O
=
)1.F. aR: if
stresses cannot be transmitted across the planes of weakness, 'V
-( [10-6)
we ean model rock as a no-tension material (Zienkiewicz,
Valliappan and King, 1969). Traditionally designers do not .vp
,( C = O if F ~ O
'V
like to rely on geological materiaIs to provide tension. For
-( the analysis of many practical problems such as underground
openings, foundations Df dams, ete., the designer is often The cavern no-tension analysis of chapter 11 used the
'( interested in a stress analysis in which tensile stress has visco-plastie algorithm.
been either eliminated or an estimate Df tensile strsss which
~( would sxist if craeking did not oeeur is obtained. A no- 10.4.3 Time dependent multi-laminate model
tension analysis enables the dssignsr to estimate the extent
'( Df cracking if no reinforcement is provided. He can then do It was emphasied in section 10.2 that an important
a with-tension analysis to determine the amount of reinforce- feature of roeks is the presencs of ths planes of weakness
'~;
ment needed. The cavern example in chapter 11 (section 11.5) forming a fabrico The multi-laminate modal describsd here
'-.. ' illustrates both these approaches. Thus a simple analysis for takes into account this factor.
.(
tension relaxation can be quite useful from the practical
'-- (al Ideelized modal and assumptions
( p01nt of V1iW.
\.J- '
.( In chapter 8 techniques for non-linear analysis were It is assumed that rock material is traversed by n
,-' discussed. Constant stiffness methods, in particular the families of discontinuities, [figure 10-3J. In practice n is
( 'initial strsss' and 'visco-plastic' methods, can be used for limited to 1, 2, or 3. It is assumed that the shear strength
<:»
eliminating tension. It is also possible to use tangential on these discontinuities is considerably les5 than that of the
stiffness methods. 'intact' rock material. Let ~1' T2' •••.•• ~ represent a set
~~
Df transformation matrices which ~ransform th~ global stress
J In the visco-plastic method, the criterion of 'no-tension' (~) to the normal stress and shear stress on the plane of the
dlscontinuities.
has to be expressed as a pseudo 'yield function'. The model
J represents a 'time dependent no-tension material'. The relax-
J, ation of tensile stresses is traced with respect to time [on
an arbitrary scals if an arbitrary value of ths fluidity
J cosfficient, )1, has bsen assumedJ. This scheme has been found
to be quite convenient particularly in problems where the be-
J haviour Df other structural components such as tunnel linings
is to be studied since 'delayed' placement Df the lining can
J be conveniently simulated. The pseudo yield function for
~\
(

\
(

j80 181
(2) The peak shear strength of the discontinuity planes ca~
( be represented by a Mohr-Coulomb type friction law.
Assuming a linear form, we have
(

111 < 0n tan<1>+ c (10-11)

(

( Equation (10-11) can be written in the form of a y1eld

function for a discontinu1ty (say kth) plane as
(
F 111k - 0n tan<j>- c o (10-12)
(

Similar yield functions can be written for each of the

d1scontinuity planes, i.e.
,(
,( Figure 10.3 Rock material traversed by 2
F [ 111 - °n tan<j>- c ] o (10-13)
1,2, .•. n
families of discontinuities
~(
Equation [10~3) represents n yield functions, one for
each of the families of d1scontinuity planes.
J Thus

(3) It 1s assumed that if the stress is within the yield

{: }
,~

-{
=
{1 Z envelope of a particular family of discont1nu1ty planes
n 1 represented by equation (10j12) the behaviour of that
set of discontinuities is purely elastic. It 1s indeed
( possible that yielding would take place on some families
{:} = {2 Z (10-7)
of discontinuities while there may be no yielding on
( n 2
others.
,,(
{:n} ~ {n !?, (4) It 1s assumed that d1scontinuities
excursions into the tensile zone.
remember their
By this we mean the
( n
following: once tensile stresses have taken place across
~ The behav10ur of the discontinuities has to be idealized a particular familj of discontinuities, the discontin-
in a manner that can be incorporated in the modelo For this uities open. If subsequently the normal stresses become
( the following assumptions are made: compressive they would not be transmitted unless the gap
clossd. How this 15 achieved 15 d1scussed further in
( section 10.4.3 (d) below.
(1) It is assumed that a discontinuity plane cannot carry any
( tensile stress, i.e.
This idealization' of the behaviour of discontinuities is
(
typical. Slightly different assumptions can be made.
0n > O (10-8 )

( The above characterization of the behaviour of the d1s-

Applying the same condition to alI the discontinuity continuities leads to 2n yield functio~ (equations (10-10) and
( planes, we can write (10-13) ). To this we should add one more y1eld function for
the 'intact rock'. Experience, however, shows that th1s may
( (o )
n 1,2, .•.•.. n
> O (10-9) be necessary only in boundary conditions such'that yielding
is forced to occur in the intact rock rather than along the
,~
Equation (10-9) can be v1ewed as a condition of plastic joints.

1 y1elding and the corresponding yield function can be

wr1tten as Theoretically it should be possible to handle 2n yield
~( function with any of the solution techniques d1scussed 1n
F o chapter 8 but to date it has been poss1ble to 1mplement th1s
(10-10)
..J 1
[ -o n 1 , 2, •.•.. n model by the visco-plastic algorithm only. The rheological

-(

(
 ( 182 183
analogue of a rock mass having n families of discontinuities The visco-plastic strain rate contr~buteá by the kth family of
( or laminates can be represented by (n + 1J dash pot - slider the discontinuity planes can be written as
systems as shown in figure (10-4). Each of the components 30
represents a family of discontinuity planes and the (n + 1) 'vp k
~k < Fk > ~ (10-16)
system represents the intact material. The activation of in- ~k
dividual components is governed by the yield functions some of
which may be dormant at any time. The model thus allows sim- where Fk represents the yield funct~ons of equat10ns (10-8)
ultaneous sliding and separation at several discontinuity and (10-12) and 0k 1s the plastic potential function (chapter
planes. 5) for the kth family. Assuming an assDciated flow rule with
Qk = Fk' equation (10-16) reduces to
8F
'vp k
~k < Fk > ~ (10-17l
~k

Now, strain rate for the rock mass is obtained by summing up

Dash pai
Il~ ~
Süder IDisccnhnuíty
Famlly 11
the contributions of each of the discontinuity
intact rock resulting in
planes and

(
n+1
'vp aF k
(
2
~ L ~k < Fk > ~ (10-18)
( k=1
(Discontinuily Family 21
, ( With aqu~tion (10-18) defining the reta of visco-plBstic

(
ç n+ 1
(lntact rack I
strains the working of the visco-plastic
multi-Iaminate model can be identified.
algorithm of the

-- --- --- -:, ---

-
C.O(\s\~(\\

(
(
c
.2
V)
1"
--- ---- ().~

-----
Figure 10-4 Rheological analogue of multi-Iaminate 8 r~\)
t
(
rn-laminates) material "
cl
----
--- --- --
- -::::---- --- .>:

(b) Complete equations of the multi-Iaminate model I I I I I

( I I I
The complete equations of the multi-laminate model can I ~II
( now be written. The total strain (~) consists of two parts, I I I I I
elestic (~e) and visco-plastic (~vp1, 1.e. I I I IC
(
I I II I
{ + ~vp (10-14)
( ~ On

Figure 10-5 Mohr Coulomb law o. a typical

( plane of disco.tinuity
The elastic strains are related to stresses through
~ (e) Oilataney of joints
e -1
( ~ J2 R, (10-15)
The model is capable of handling either an 'associated'
or 'non-assoeiated' flow rule. The yield functions repres-
5 ented by the equations (10-8) and (10-12) are shown in
where O is a matrix of elastic constants •
.J figure (10-5). A plastie potential funetion for an assoeiated
flow rule is also shown in the figure. Sliding on any plane
J of discontinutity leads to separation of the planes. The

-<
G
(

(
 (

( 1B4 1B5
dilatancy in real discontinuities is often assumed to depend (d) Monitoring of joint opening and closing
(
on the physical angle Df inclination Df the asperities to the
( discontinuity plane (0) and is caused by the 'ride up" action Due to the relaxation of tensile stresses normal to plane
(figure 10-6). The dilatancy does not go on unabated and aftér Df discontinuity plastic strains signifying opening of joints
( some sliding it stops. In the model, if assocated behaviour take place. During further loading if the normal stress be-
is assumed, the dilatancy would continue indefinitely. On the comes compressive the compressive stress is transmitted across
other hand, if non-associated behaviour with 0/ = O (figure the open joint implying that the joints become fillRrl. It is
10-7) is assumed no dilatancy would take place at alI. Ob- usually more realistic to assume that the.yclose. Assuming
( viously to model real situations a variable angle 0/ is re- they close perfectly, we write an additional yield function.
quired. Experimental data to define 0/ are meagre and in many If the joint has been under tension, the peak normal total
( situations the extreme conditions represented by 0/ = ~ and
'-.-. tensile strain for each Df the families (Entmax) is monitored.
.( 0/ = O both need to be analysed. If the current leveI of total compressive normal strain on the
planes of discontinuities (E~t) is such that

c max
( Ent < I Ent ( 10-19 )

Ideallzed shape
~( asperities the additional pseudo-yield function to be used is

~(
F (J I O (10-20)
( n (1,2, .... n)

{ where I I denotes absolute values.

Discontinuity plane
.(
Equation (10-20) ensures that compressive stresses are
.( transmitted across discontinuties only when they are closed .
Figure 10-6 Dilatancy due to 'ride up' action Again, this represents only an extreme condition Df perfect
Df the asperities of a joint matching of asperities.
"(
'-r In problems where reversal of loads or unloading does not
take place in any part of the body, normal stresses on the
'( discontinuity planes will not change signs and there is no
'- need to monitor the opening and closing Df joints.
(
'( - - - - - - - - Q = 11:I = constant
10.5 Generalized plane strain analysis in rock mechanics
1,/ F = 11 I - o, tan rt> - C = O
(
For many situations in rock mechanics the plane strain
\ conditions are not strictly valid even though the overall

1, .
geometry may be idealized as plane strain. The first category
( of such situations are those in which the orientation of the
.::»
axes of principal initial stresses may not coincide with the
( plane Df analysis.

Do

.~
( Figure 10-7 Non-associated flow rule - non-dilatant
behaviour of discontinuities
J
J
~
(

(
 '( 1.86 j87

'7
, \

'>
\

(
~J

,(
Al
. ~.~ General direction of
principal stresses

.____Tunnel excavation (A I GEOMETRY DF A

-- -- -- ---- FAMILY DF OISCONTINUITY
.t ~-------"""- - - -- -- --

.~(
AJ (A) GENERAL SITUATION (B I HOMOLOGOUS POI NTS
~
J
./ ....••
I Y
DF A SLICE DF UNIT
THICKNESS

4
Figure 10-9 Families of discontinuities inclined
'-{ to the plane of analysis

In both the above situations the analyst is forced to

x carry out a three dimensional analysis of the structure.
<. Th1s may be expensive in computer time as well as 1n the pre-
paration of the input data.
\
'\
/ An alternative for dealing with such situations 1s to
carry out a generalized plane strain analysis or what may be
'l (B) SECTION A-A called a 2~ dimensional analysis. This needs developing a
~1~ special element der1ved from a three dimensional elemento
'i Consider a point p on the front face of the sI ice of analysis
\
Figure 10-8 Presence of out of plane components
'-- (figure 10-9). There is a point p' having the same x and y
of insitu stress
.1
, co-ordinates on the rear face of the slice. The plane strain
--: 1 Assuming the z axes along the centre-line of the tunnel, shear
cond1tions would force the displacement of the two points p
and p' to be the same. Thus we have three displacement comp-
~j stre!s oomponente TXZ (or Tzxl end Tyz (or Tzyl mey be prs8snt.
onents (u, v, w) and they are such that
I
These components cannot be taken care of in a two dimensional
'-.C

!:) . I:)
plane stra1n analys1s.
i
~'
In the second category are the situations where the axis
1 (10-21 )
~ of anisotopy, due to the laminated structure, does not co-
incide with the plane of analysis. In a two dimensional prob-
'~ lem the or1entation of the normal to the discontinuity planes
p p'
for the multi-laminate model discussed in section 10.4 must
li 11e in the x, y plane.
Applying the same argument to a point p on another slice
'" This hardly ever happens in real situations which are adjacent to the slice under consideration, we have
J illustrated in figure (10-9). u
~p
= u,
~p
= u"p ; u
~
= ru,
~
v, w'Jl T (10-221
,\
 '(

155 159
Pande (1975) for further details of this type of analysis.
~
r
This implies that the w component of displacement 1s
independent of Z co-ordinate of the points considered on the
body. Mathematically this me~ns
10.6 Effective stress analysis of undrained rock masses
~ = ~ (x, y)
Techniques of effective stress analysis were discussed in
chapter; 3. These are valid for r-ock masses as wel1. However,
In other words the displacements at any point are indep- a few remarks are called for in the context of the effectlve
endent of the z co-ordinate. This implies that stress.analysis of rock masses. In chapter 3, it was shown
(equation 3-6) that the bulk modulus of pore fluid element ~f
dU dV dW is given by
ãZ dZ dZ
o (10-23)

,. 1 n 1-n
'- Substituting in the 3-D strain-displacement relations we
- +-- (10-26)
Kf I< I<
w s
~ obtain
where I<w is the bulk modulus of water, I<s is the bulk modulus
~ dU
-J
E:
x ax of soil particles and n Is the porosity. In problems of soils
the drained bulk modulus of the soil "skeleton" 1<' Is small as
av compared to f(w and I<s' In derivation of equation (3-6) it has
'J. e:
y ãij been tacitly assumed that either the soil grains are incomp-
resslble or the mean stress in the particles equals the pore
'{ E: O pressure.
z

"'1
Yxy
= au
ay
+
dV
-
ax
~ (10-24 ) Consider an element of unit volume of rock skeIeton and
pore fluido Let this element be subjected to a change of
effective stress (óZ'), and pore pressure change of óu.
dV
'( Yyz ay Assume that the element is undrained, i.e. no pore fluid can
-,, escape (ar enter) from the unit volume, which implies that
dW
Yzy ax ó (Volume of the element) O (10-271
\
Turning to the finite element implementation of general-
r' ized plane strain conditions, we describe the topology of the
where ó represents 'change of'.

-' elements and nodal co-ordinates in two dimensions. A sllce Now we work out the various components of volume change.
1.(\,
, I
of unit thlckness Is assumed for analysis. Each nade has
'--' three degrees of freedom (u, v and w displacements). The six (a) Reduction in volume due to change of pore pressure (bu)
',-,' strain components and six stress components are used in the B
matrix in ~ nbu (1-nJóu
r<
w I<s
(10-28)

~
I, -t ~ (10-25)
, The terms correspond to the reduction in the volume of pore
'":,, where ô are nodal displacements. The ~ matrix is 6 x 3n where fluid and rock grain respectively.
n is t~e number of nades in the elemento
(bJ Reduction in t?e volume due to change of effective
stress (óz') (1.
1 This approach allows two dimensional elements to be used
when otherwise 3-D elements would be required. For example
8 noded (24 d. of f.) quadrilateral elements would be used mócr'
(10-29 )
instead of 20 noded (60 d. of f.J "brick" elements with a con- 3f\
J sequent considerable reduction in the cost of computing and where ~ = (1,1,1,0,0,0)
T
for the general 3-D case.
...l data preparation. As a ruIe of thumb, experience indicates
that the cost of computing can be reduced by an order of mag-
(i) This assumes that the mean stress in the solid particles
;,.( nitude. The reader should refer to Zienkiewicz, Taylor and is the same as the mean stress in the rock mass.
 '(

'y 191
190
The total reduction is thus equàl to PANOE, G. N. (1979). "Visco-plastic algorithm for mode1l1ng
\ tensile non-linearity in rock and concrete .structures",
mTóo' Mechanics of BimoduIus MateriaIs, ADM Vol. 33.
'I nóu + (1-n)óu '\, '\,
+ ---
~'
kw K'
s
3K
s PANOE, G. N. (1979). "Numerical modelling of rocks - poss-
L, ibilities and problems", Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Num. Meths.
which must be equal to the change in the volumetric strain of in Geomechanics, A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam.
\..J
the skeleton. Thus
[ ZIENKIEWICZ, O. c.. VALLIAPPAN, S, and KING, I. P. (1968).
mTóo' "Stress analys1s of rock as a 'no-tension material''',
óe: = mTóo = nóu + (1-nlóu + '\, '\,
,I (10-30) Geotechnique, Vol. 18, pp 56-66.
'-, V '\, '\, Kw Ks ~
,
I
ZIENKIEWICZ, O C. and PANOE, G. N. (197:1. "Time dependent
'"'-, Introducing (10-26)
multi-Iaminate model of rocks - a numerical study of
L mTó€ Óu + '\,
mTóo'
'\,
(10-31 )
deformation and failure of rock masses", Int. J. Num. &

'\, '\, k'f "'3"k: Anal. Meths. in Geom., Vol. 1, pp 219-247.

~ s
0c ZIENKIEWICZ, O. C., TAYLOR, R. L., and PANOE, G. N. (1978).
Equation (10-31) 1s equation (3-7) with an extra term on "Quasi-plane strain analysis of geological problems",
{ the right-hand side. It would be zero if ~s is much larger Computer Methods in Tunnel Design, The Institution of
than k . On re-arrang1ng (10-31) we have Civil Engineers, London.
(
f
óo'
v óu Kfi{)
T
(ó~ -
'\,
3j() (10-32)
\~I
s

V\ On substitution of (10.32) in the effective stress equation

(3-2) 1t cen be shown that the O matr1x, in terme of total
'{ stress, required for computatio~ of element stiffness (see
chapter 3) is given by
\
\
\,
o
'\,
O'
'\,
+ mmTK
'\,'\, f
mmTO' ~
3K
-vv '\,
I<

S
(10-33)

~
"( In the above O' is the drained modulus matrix.
~
'--'
The procedures for incorporating this in the finite
,\
'-'
element program for an effective stress analysis are the same
\ as discussed in chapter 3, section 3.2.2.
(
(: 10.7 References

GOOOMAN, R. E. (1977). "Analysis of jointed rocks", chapter

f1, Finite EZements in Geomeohanios, ed. G. Gudehus,
,~
J. Wiley and Sons.

~
-,~
1

,{

t
'{
c'
'( 193
V
ç~
ç CHAPTER 11
(I'
(
SOME CASE HISTORIES
(J
,(
i'" ~ by ROY TABB

l
L 11.1 Introduction

~ In this chapter we will examine some case histories using

finite elements to obtain a prediction of how the real structure
~ will behave. It is stressed that we will only obtain a pre-
diction and at alI stages the validity of the material prop-
CL erties and analytical methods must be continually re-assessed.
~
Parametric studies should form a part of any study whereby
€L the importance of variations in material properties are tested.
These parametric studies could avan form part of the planning
(T of the site investigation and laboratory testing programme.
Cf' There is little value in spending large sums of money investig-
q.. ating material properties that have little or no relevance to
the design, or, conversely, not focussing attention on the
parameters which will have the major influence on the designo
(('
r=, For the problems where there are no case histories avail-
'\ able or no direct method of calculation then finite elements
C( can offer some assistance in guiding the judgement of the
engineer.
ç' 11.2 Lined tunnel with ground freezing
Xl
'-..1 A lined tunnel ia to be driven tnrough gravels which have
been treated with ground freezing as-shown in figure (11-1).
cb
Q; Probes have shown that the temperature gradient varies
between -BOoC near the wall of the tunnel fallin§ to -120oC
cL approximately 1m in and then finally rising to O C at a distance
of nearly 5m from the tunnel wall. This i~ not strictly a
ü case history although the steps taken closely follow those in-
rt volved in a recent tunnel driven under the Thames.
~
The Engineer wants to know what the likely chan~e in wall
CL stress due to a $radual increase in the temperature following
the termination of-the freezing processo This problem is out-
~ side the scope of "judgement" for most of us and for sueh a
« case finite elements can usefully be employed.

fi
«
\
("., 195
194
Q'j changes from ice to water and water to ice then the prediction
will be made more accurate.
(,
Once the temperature gradient change has been predicteà
~ then finite element techniques can be employed. For this stage
we can use a conventional linear eIes t c program set up to
í

I handle thermal strains. The theory is similar to that des-

cribed in chapter 2 (section 2.7) for handling known imposed
~/
strains. It is more fully detailed in the text by Hintonand
~ Owen (1979). .
11:0.~.4:05;Om

t /'
The axi-symmetric mesh was set up as indicated in figure
/ (11-2).
I
(( /- l After alcpse of time
/
<l 0(.
\
\..;1
l-A! end of freezing

(7' -120

q'
.:\ I .
Figure 11-1 Temperatureiprofile behind tunnel lining
I

.", i
In many Gountries, incl~ding the W.K., there are few
.
·1
commercial laqoratories suitcilblyequipped to undertake low
temperature testing of soilslor rocKs. The difficulties are
:-\ immense and for most problems the expense would be prohibitive.

~.,:
Knowledge of the physics of 1rozen materiaIs .can assist in the
selection of material properties and for further details of
the principIes involved rS~d4rs are referred to Jumkis (1966).
\ \
Cencrete Sei!
This text also presents typical material properties which, with
~ care, could be used for pr,e11minary design purposes. Upper
and lower bound values can tMen determine the sensitivity of
the analysis to the selectedlvalues.
Figure 11-2 Mesh for ground freezing problem
I
~ The major parameters. reguired are:-
The temperature c~anges from the assumed initial profile
~ (a) coefficient of linear expansion,
f.\ of figure (11-1) are specified at the element corners. These
v are used to calculate the change in stresses using the elastic
0:.- (b) conductivity, constants and the coefficient of linear expansion. These stres!
changes must then be added to the insitu stresses to obtain the.
li. (c) the elastic constants. final state of stress at the tunnel wall. The analysis will
also predict the change in hoop stress within the concrete
«~- A prelimipary analysis is required to predict temperature
gradient changes with time. This is achieved using a computar
tunnel lining.
(f program based 6n the diffusion equation in a similar way to The analysis which formed part of the real case history on
Q~ the analysis of t rens.ísrrt se,~page problems (i)• If ~he program which this illustration was based predict~d that no·sp~cial
\
has the ability to handle the latent heat aspect of the phase precautions needed to be taken since the chahge in stre·ss tva~ ,.
« (i)
i small.
f
f The theory for this is cuts de the scope of this bonk ,
í

Chapter 9 is restricted to:M:.e.a.dy ~.tLte. seepage. The

This example illustrates the principIe of using the finite
element method in parametric studies.· It leads u~ into the
o interested reader is refer,red to Carslaw and Jaeger (1959)
for the basic theory.
f
( '7

l:'D 197
( 196
(
~d J
next se.ction in which ·case i histories are discussed in mor.e Preliminary design calculations had been completed and
detall using . both linear e.iastic and non-linear methods. the necessary wall penetration estimated using fixed earth
\j) ,
theory. The rather empirical nature of these methods for a
( cantilever wall with a large free height prómpted the more
11.3 Cantilev8r retainingiwall analysis
\:J}
detailed study.
(
,-:;) The problem, examined in 1976, involved a deep cantilever
( , wall which was to retain a cutting for the new M25 motorway. The techniques employed initially followed conventional
\...J' The motorway was cut into ~he Gault Clay hillside and the wall soil mechanics theory. The "at restO earth pressuredistributior
was to be formed using eit~er contiguous bored piling or by were calculated for the full height Df the wall.
diaphragm walling using slwrry trench methods. The cross section
() after tionstruction is show? in figure (11-3J. The techniques Prior to 8xcavation both sides Df the wall will be at a
used for this analysis are'now somewhat dated but serve to state with Ko Z Kp and the only way stability can be maintained
( ~)
illustrate how relatively unsophisticated.computer programs can during excavation is for the forces on the back of the wall to
beused to good effect. reduce since further passive resistance cannot be mobilised.
(
í1) The factor of safety against the wall overturning must be
( calcwlated in terms of the active pressures rather than by the
(1~ more conventional method in which working is in terms of the
passive pressures. This is necessary becaus~ ths pressures
on the front of the wall are already at the full passive limit
fl) and thus using these pressures will always result in rotational
t factors of safety close to unity. Any margin of safety for
such a system therefore results from an ability to reduce
r
(
\";
"
6m (approxJ
forces on the back of the wall down to the active limit.

H m thick retaining \!Iall It is quite apparent that any analysis of this type of
~ structure must involve some form of soil yielding in order to
I
\ achieve a solution and a true linear elastic approach without
C V plastic yield would not be appropriate since no further passive
( \
pressures can be mobilised.
\J)
lu The method employed was essentially that Df strategy 1
described in section 3.5. The wall was'progressively unloaded
lJ by simulating the removal nf passive support, A,t each stage
( plastic yield was determined and the elements in question had
'-.. , Figure 11-3 Cantilever retaining wall
their ability to carry further stress changes suppressed (by
G The Gault Clay, being heavily over.consolidated, is, in
using a suitably low shear modulus value whilst ~eeping the
bulk modulus unchangedJ.
L its natural stete, close to pessive yield neer the ground ,:.
surface due to the high ho~izontal principal stresses. The A more detailed description of the techniques employed

,L "at restO earth pressure ccieff1c1ent,

taken as equal 'to thepasslve
, K o • could reasonably be
earth pressure coefficient, Kp'
The analysis was required to give an estimate of wall movement
are given in chapter3. The procedure adopted was to manually
calculate the stress increment and use a eonventional
strain computer program.
plane
Wi th the current s t ega of software
C as well as the wall .atres sas and to determine the 'safety development the analysis could be easlly autpmated s:fnce
r\ factor' against overturnin~. special1st programs are more readily availabl!3.

f\ The use. of ground encher-e had already been examined and

rejected because of the pr~blem of land ownership. Any solution
The prediction of movements were ·.in,reaspAab,le ,agreement
with. publ1shed elastie .methods but tJ:1e,moi?t~~rp:t;;isiN?;
résults

C involving proppingor batt~ring would ~Ffect land purchase and

was therefore rejected pending the examination of the feas-
were in conneetion with the wall bending~tresses,
loading of the wall results in heave· on the front ofthe
The un-
wall

r'\1 ibility for.a cantilever w~ll. and shear on both faces as indieated in figure ({1-4),

\(1)

\
 j 98 199
These would provide valuable information on displacements and
bending moments in the short term and monitor changes with time.
~
r- It is likely that wall cohssion will significantly reduce
{ wall moments in the short termo There is however the wider
,
v; ,
6m
~'<, Shear slress frem question of the effect of time on retaining structures con-
structed in overconsolidated deposits. After the initial re-
i ~
sai I 10 •••011
''-.;.i

L
( 1
( is often assumed to be 0.6 of the undrained value and v' is
(
\.....
Figure 11-4 Computed shear loading on wall
!'---"
c It is instructive to assess the finite element results
assuming shearing on the back of the wall 'as indicated in
figure (11-4) with the shear stress assumed ~o equal 0.3 Cu
where Cu is the undrained cohesion of the Gault Clay.
Taking the wall thickness to be 1.2m and Cu equal to
100 KN/m2 then the moment at dredge leveI due to shear stress
on the back of the wall is 1/2 x 1.2 x 0.3 x 100 x 6 for the
6m high wall. This amounts to 108 KNm/m run of wall. To put
this into perspective compare this with the minimum soil
pressure requirements of the code for a hydrostatic force using
a density of 5 KN/m3 then the moment at dredge leveI would be
6 x 5 x 6/2 x 6/3 = 180 KNm/m
duction does the horizontal pressure return with time due to
drainage ar because of creep? The drainage case can be
studied by using drained elastic constants, ie E' and V' (E'
taken as being close to O). The wall shear stresses reduce
and displacements increase causing the bending moments to
increase to values which are more in keeping with conventional
calculations.
The creep case cano in principIe. be studied using models
such as the visco-plastic model described in chapter 5. but the
writer is not aware of its application to this type of problem.
There is good reason to suppose that some of the insitu
stress will return with time. With a free cantilever wall
the problem reduces to answering the question: "t)pw large a
movement can be tolerated". For propped walls then the build
up of stress with time must be a major consideration in the
designo On selected sections of the cantilever wall for this
case history measurements of insitu earth pressure coefficients
(Ko) were made prior to construction using the Camkometer and
the results are awaited with interest. It is intended that
these readings be continued for some years after construction.

Therefore the net moment making allowance for wall shear 11.4 Oil tank on normally cansolidated deposits
{' 19
\, - As part of the expansion plans at Grangemouth Oil Refinery
( 180 - 108 = 72 KNm/m a series of oil tanks were to be founced on reclaimed land near
C the banks of the Firth of Forth. Below 2-3m of fill lay an
\
\...
- only 40% of that predicted using conventional theory. extensive thickness of soft normally consolidated,very silty
( laminated CLAY. (Some reporters described the material as
\..... This conclusion from a simple analysis reflects exactly SILT). A typical borehole log together with a plot of index
what the finite element method predicted. The simple analysis
l also agreed with the f.e. method by predicting that over the
upper portions of the wall the moments were such that bending
properties is shown in figure (11-5).

,\ A preliminary analysis based on undrained strengths ind-

'-- was into the soil. ie the tension was on the front face.
~~
At first the finite element results appeared inconsistent
( with field measurements. However 1t 15 difficult to obtain
good movement measurements in the early stages of construction.
L Those that are ava11able often 1nd1cate that dis~lacements are
averpred1cted.
l from the mean.
( It would be useful 1f tubes for deflection measurements
were 1nstalled 1n cantilever walls in over.consolidated clays.
icated that the factor of safety for the tank loading of nearly.
122 KN/m2 would be close to unity. This was concluded from
the stress profile based on field vane tests and laboratory
teste which gave a mean undrained cohasion ~~ptoximated by the
equation Cu = 15 + 1.35d KN/m2 where d i5 the depth in metres
below ground leveI. Upper and lower bounds were ± 10 KN/m2
Using Cu = 23 KN/m2 which is approximately
the mean value at depth of 5m. and using a bearing capacity
coefficient of 5. gives a collapse prassure of 115 KN/m2•
 (
( J
'e ." I

( 200 201

'(' The most promising techniqu8 for the analysis which todk
into account dissipation betwe8n stages was a finit8 element
(, mo istur e co n t e o t
(
study using the critical state modelo This would not only
offer prediction of pore pressures but indicate zones of yield.
G 10 20 ,o "O 50 60 70

,(
'-' A coupled solution whereby consolidation could be calcul-
ri ated as each loading stage was applied would have been ideal,
"- however at that time no techniques were available using a
coupled critical state modelo An acceptable alternative was
<:»
to manually abstract the excess pore pressures from the crit-
t o I 1\ \ ical state f.e. analysis and use these as input to a three
I{
{
> • I
I
1-
J pias t i c
\ liquid
limit
dimensional finite difference consolidation analysis. After
dissipation was allowed over the period of one loading stage
the final pressures were fed back into the critical state
analysis for the next stage of loading. Although this "un-

,"'
--!....\.

i(
<.( -5
I
I \ coupling" of the problem violated certain theoretical require-
ments it modelled the real situation reasonably well.

(
I
I
I
\ \ The site investigation for the project was conventional
in almost alI respects with no special measurements made to

\
'( "oo ,
I
I. , \,. 1
provide parameters for the critical state analysis. These
parameters have been described in section 7.8 where the point
is made that they can be obtained from conventional tests.

( .•••
-I
,
I \ \
The derivation of suitable values is given below.

Chapter 7 has already indicated that the criticel stete

~ I
y •• : m1i<ture
model is best suited to the solution of problems involving
E normally consolidated deposits under increasing mean effective
'(
,-'
(
-15
I
I
I
cont.nt- I-
I stress. Problems which do not falI into this category may
not be suitable for analysis using the model as it is currently
formulated. For heavily overconsolidated deposits yielding
'-.'
/
v
I
I
I
I
I I
I
may be on the Hvorslev surface where the model is only a
tentative hypothesis.

J
,~

(
'-- '
-20
I
I
I I I The analysis here is axi-symmetrical, consequently the
plane strain formulation given in chapter 7 is not appropriate.
The formulation used here, however, is essentiaIIy the same as

1
( in chapter 7 but with 0s,Od replaced with 0m and Oq respectively.
'-/ Also Ev replaces Es (they are now no longer equal as in the
It 50ft
and
lominat.,d
s i l ty clays
o r q c ruc clayey ~ plane strain case) and Eq repIaces Ed' As the clay i5
assumed to be normelly consolideted only sub-criticel yield1ng
1 is involved.

1 Figure 11-5 Typical borehole log for Grangemouth site Conversion from the plane strain form requires the con-
stant 5 = 2sin* to be replaced by "M" which in general varies
1 Prior to proceeding w1th construction it.was decided to with the third stress invariant 6(i). For the triaxial test
~ verify the factors of safety by means of staged water tests.
The preliminary analysis indicated that if loading was instan-
~ taneous then failure would occur but if excess pore pressures (ilDividing equation (5-14) by the coefficient of Oq
gives M as the c08ffici8nt of 0m' i.8
were allowed to dissipate'between stage loading a stable con-
-\ dition could be maintained. Provided stability could be M = 35in*
ensured then settlement may become the overriding factor
'\ I3Cos9 - 5in6 5in*
affecting the viability of the scheme.
'\
(
y

Y' 202
e = 300
203

r stat8 0
1
> O2 = 03 and or À = 0.182. K was assumed equal to À/4 or 0.0456.

~:' F.rom the site Lnvas t í.get on the average cjJ'was 26.25.
í

6sin4>'
M
3-sinq,'
(11-1 ) Substituting in equation (11-1) gives M = 1.03. M was estim-
ated at 1.07 by an alternative method. and the average of 1.05
~~ The form of the model used here assumes M to be the con- was used.
( stant defined by eqUatio~ (11-1). This implies the yielding.
o as in the Von Mises and Drucker Prager models described in The shear modulus G was determined from initial values of
l'0 s8ction 5.3. is ~ot indep~ndent of O2, the bulk modulus K' (which depends upon the mean effactive
stress) and an assumed Poisson's ratio v'.
A further differ~nce, is that instead of using the plastic
G
compressibility maasure i = (À-KI/(1+eol ita components (ie Wroth
(19751 has proposed a tentative relationship between
À. K and eol are sp~cified. A variable elastic bulk modulus. v' and the plasticity index (PII. Using a measured PI of
{
K'. is implied by the ass~mption of a constant K. The shear 18% this gave v' = 0.28.
'--- modulus. G. however. ia taken as constant.
To obtain G for a given effective stress o~. we first
~ 11.4.1 Material property specification compute
« The perameters required to define the model are:- K' =
(1 +el a (7-17 bisl
« À.K: the slopes of the yirgin consolidation and swelling
--K- m

Q lines respectively,in e:logeOm spaca (NB if plotted and then

('---,
in e:logeos space. as in chapter 7. the lines have the 3K' (1-2v' I
\( same slopeJ G = (11-31
2 (1 +\!' I
(,
M the slope of critical state line as defined by
~-, equation (11-1) (To aeeord with the eonventions of As an illustration we compute G for the so~l at Sm depth.
chapter 7 this should be notated Mes as it corresponds Taking the ground water at ground surfaee and the submerged I

((' to Ses' However. as is noted in that chapter it is unit weight. Yb' to be 10 KN/m3 gives,01 = 50 KN/m2• Using
'I
\-\ eonvenient to set S c Ses' i.e. cjJ= q,es. for normally
consolidated soil. No ambiguity therefore arisesl
the empirical relationship

Ko = 1-sincjJ
~I G the elastic shear modulus. This was assumed to vary
(J with depth. but no~ with stress. for the eosfficient of earth pressure
Ko = 0.558. This allows the initial
at re~t w~ obtain
value of O~ e~rresponding
(:J the pore fluid equivalent bulk modulus (see 3.2.11 to 01 = 50 to be ealeulated as
Kf :
A
l;iJ
a the measure of initial elastie wall size. ie half a'
m
= ~3 (1+2K I a'
o 1
= 35.3 'KN/m
eo
G the mean effective strass at the end of isotropic
eonsolidation (note that as = 0m for isotropie stress With a measured initial voids ra~io e • 1.3 and K as
~ state. eonsequently 0e is the same as in chapter 7) ealeulated then equation (7-171 gives'K' = 1780 KN/m2• Sub-
stituting this with v' = 0.28 into (11-3~ wa finally obtain
~ a ' a ' a ' T • U : the initial effeetive stress eomponents G = 917 KN/m2•
xo yo zo o o
and1pore pressure.
~.' The pore fluid equivalent bulk modulus ~as taken arb1t-
~ Ce(=2.303À) was assessed both directly from consolidption rarily as 100 MN/m2 for the undrained ene lyaí,s. AI though some-
tests and from tha empirical relationship (aquation 6.38 in
(L Sehofield and Wroth. 19681:
w~at less than tha aetual modulus of water (i200 MN/m2) t~e
results will not be affeeted 50 long as it is large eompared
Ci. with the soil skeleton stiffness.
cc = 0.83(LL-0.09) (11-2)
Q The stress oco is obtained from the condition that sinee
in whieh LL is the liquid :11mit. Both methods gave Ce = 0.42 tha soil is normally eonsolidated the initial stress point
(C
G
 '-:i

/\...,.)
204 205
I,-:» 11.4.2 Results

L 1/ The tank was initia11y ana1ysed as being 10aded under

undrained conditions to nearly 77 KN/mz.
L
,(
Oq y~
M Critical stole tine
The computed excess
pore water pressure distribution is shown in figure (11-7J.
C
~ Inilial yietd surfcce

1 I
f a~o °mo°';'
77 KN 1m2

q-
I{

f Figure 11-6 lnitia1 stress condition

~'
1ies on the yield surface. The initial stresses are fully
r" defined by Oyó = O~ (determined from the weight of overburden
X less the pore pressureJ and 0x~ = 0z~ = o~ = Ko O~.
fÇ!l Ko also has been defined (=1~sin.'J. 0m' is then ob-
-40m
-L
tained as above. With 02 • 3
0 then 0q simpli~ies to the
~rl ~~~~ator stress °1-03' Using Ko· O~/O~ it is readily shown
(;, ~ Figure 11-7 Excess, pore pressures aft,er ini tial
( °qo no 0m~ (11-4 J undreined loeding KN/mz,
() where
,( 3(1-KOJ
t:J The tank stability was caleulated using eonventional slip
{ n o = 1 +2K cirele methods with a shape eorreetion being applied. (A more
G o refined technique could h~ve expressed the factor of safety
tS With amo and 0go fixed it is an exerci se in the geometry
in cri tical state terms based on the par-cant ege yield around
a failure are. The centre and radius used for this analysis
of the ellipse to f1nd oco' The reader can verify that
L can initially be predicted using the sl í.p circle me thcd l ,
This gave a factor of safety greater ,than 2' which was cons-
a (oz )/(Mzo
L 20
co mo
+
qo mo
J (11-5 J idered adequa te for the proposed staged loading.

~,

Taking Ko = 0.558 as before, we obtain no • 0.627. Using the predicted pore watet pressures as the starting

~ lntroducing amo = 35.3 KN/mz we obtain 0qo = 22.1 KN/m2 whence point for a cdissipation analysis the Tesulting pore pressures
by (11-5J with M,c 1.05 oco = 24.3 KN/m2• lf variation in after the load was maintained for a period of one month were
({ the term (1+e) i6 neilected o 9 will vary linearly with the calculated.
vertical effective pressure w~1ch in this case means it varies
(( linearly with depth. The full water test pressure of 122 KN/mz was then sim-
ulated with the pore pressures at the end of th€ preceding
(( dissipation stage be1ng used as datum for th1s load1ng. The
This completes the derivation of the parameters needed
pore pressure contour plot is shown 1n figure (11-8J which also
f for this case study. The reader should note'that the pr9-
cedures are the same in essentials as used for example 1 in shows a well defined zone at full pIastic Y1eId.
('" section 7.9.
'\ The factor of safety under these condit10ns was assessed
f at approximately 1.75 but of greater s1gnificance was a com-
puted settIement of nearly 500mm near the centre line of
f
~\
\...."1

f'J 207
t
V
206

,( Horizontal displacements mm
\,../
50 100
-(
\:../
..0;:0"
~
1
"-
"- ,,
\
CI ,
\

(( 10 I
I
I

I
r- I
\( / Measured
Q~ E
:Ea. /
I
/

I
-40m
<t'
U> I
----L- o
f;7ff4W,?I7$A')/J,W4W»W/////h'/A'/&ffH1 ,- "
({' 20 I
I
"i:'
I i
~ Figure 11-8 Exces~ pore pressures at full water test
I
I
t
(:::) lo~dirig I i
\ I
I 1

!
Ç\ the tank. Re-analysing the problem for drained conditions by
setting the bulk modulu~ for water to zero the final settle-
I

i
t2,J
ment of approximately 1.5m and a differential of nearly 0.75m
A were calculated. Whilst these values are large they did not 30
\V require any special design changes to the proposed structure.
;~

(j Figure 11-9 Short term movements at tank, edge

c,(, Instrumentation consisting of settlement gauges, pie-
'-.:/ zometers and slope inclihometers is being used to monitor the
movementsand pore pressures. 11.5 Caver~ analysis
GL
The inclinometer raedãngs indicated the displacement pro- A large,number of finite e.lernerrt ene l.yse s we:r:eundertaken
~ file was wellpredicted by the analysis although the magnitude to Lnvas t í.ge'ta the stress distribution erriund,the:caverns and
<'( was in error by a facto~ of 2. (Figure 11-9). tunn~ls forming partof'the Rio Grande Hyqro Electric scheme
'C-- in A~gentina:. . ,',
(l The ppre pressures observed were in close agreement and
for those;cases where thf measurements were h±g~er than.the :The most comprehensive study centredon the main generator
~ design limits then the s~ability was re-assesse~ ~sing the cavern. In this case a "no tension" ene Iys a was carried out í

to predict zones of potential crackingand plan the rock

(! slipcircle method with the field values as inp~t to the
analysis. bolting. (This work was done at the University of Swansea
using a non-linear finite element program incorporating the
G visco-plastic technique described in chapter 8). An important
The g,eneral conclusion was that ths predictions were
~ extremely useful in guidKng the water test and confirmed the parameter in the analysis was the assumed value of Ko. the
rF' stabilit~ at alI .tages of construction. ratio of the horizontal to vertical initial 'str-eas , A range
(( of values were studied.
The computer predic~ions provided a valuable reference
against which ~o judge the field measurements. This combin- A plot of stress vectors around the cavern is shown in
(~ ation of sophisticated ahalyses and the observational approach figure (11-10) for the no-tension analysis with Ko ; 1. From
, I
this plot the regions which would crack if tension could not be
q
(-:,
allowed the successful construct10n of oil tanks which, for
uncontrolled loading, may have been disastrous. sustained can be seen. A linear elastic analysis was also
carried out (results not presented) to show the tensile zones
~ assuming nocracking.
q
;''':'
 '..:. I

(
,_o,
208 209
(
'-' With insufficient information non-linear methods may not

,(
l offer significant advantages over linear elastic solutions
whilst the cost of an'alysis may be 5 to 10 times greater and
'-, require computer programs not readily available to most
practising engineers. In any case it is desirable to carry
C out a linear elastic analysis first to obtain a feel for the
problemo
L x -r + -I- -!- y..

«r:
x x As an illustration of the use of conventionallinear
elastic methods for cavern analysis, a finite element analysis
X-+-+ +-t- y..
~ x for the design of the tailrace tunnel will be consideredo
X A'.-r-+- -+--+- ~ The tunnel profile is illustrated in figure (11-11).
~
1(' )<
X
----------
/~~~"
/'
....--1-.............
...•.•
. X

~
r:'( f- ;t I I,IA.~ ~~~ '" '>( ~

\-) I I 1111/ ~\ \ \
\:, I I I 11,11 \\ \ \ ..•. ..•.
.' I 11\ ,\ \
f \
, - I I I I 1I 11 I\ \ \
'( 111I I11 I
(
( t I I 1111 /11 I t
i , \ I I 11 11 I I
t I E
~ \ \ 1111 + '"
~'
.( *\ \ 1\111 ",111 I
G
~ \ \ I I 1\ ~7/,;I I
;/1/ I
f
f- f
G ~
.••.
•••••••• \ 1i
I. " " ,; I / / / I I-
f-
((
'..J
\ '\ "o .: ,,' // I I
'" \ \ \'" /,// / I I I I
')ç
~ \ " \: o ' 7"/ /
X 'l\ ", //
'f.
X X
~ 'X. 'X. ~-t ,A'/' X ~
'X. ')t... -I-. r-
( )(..
'- 'f... -I- + + + -+-+ -+--1- X x
(l )(..
'f..
"'f.. -I- + + -+- ++ + -\- X
X
Figure 11-11 Tailrace tunnel, part of f.e. mesh
rJ 'f.. x
« 'f..
+ + +++++-\- ..l(
As a first step it was necessary to obtain the magnitude
of tensile stresses due to the formation of the opening under
various values of Ko' Since at the early stages of the pro-
Ú KEY
ject no insitu measurements of Ko were availabl~; it was
Tenslle zone
l(' Compression zene
--#-
-+- important to test the sensitiv1ty of the analysis to the var-
iations in this parameter.
c~
- A second parameter study exemined the variations of crown
\.t stresses with rock bolt support pressure.
r,
,{ Figure 11-10 Principal stress vector plot for no- It was first determined that Ko = 0.5 resulted in the
\! tensiorl analysis with Ko = 1 highest value of tensile stress. A series of f.e. analyses
r,
\
 210 211

( were therefore undertaken with Ko = 0.5 and various support 11.6 Acknowledgements
pressures. This set of analyses showed that with no support
~ pressure a tensile principal stress of 50 KN/m2 occurred at The analyses discussed in this chapter were alI under-
the tunnel crown. This decreased linearly with increasing
'-( support becoming zero when support pressure was approximately
taken by Geocomp U.K. Ltd., the computing subsidiary of Soil
Mechanics Ltd., and thanks must go to the membars of staff who
\...:,.
51 KN/m2•
assisted in alI aspects of the studies.
!
'-' The "support pre99ure" cauged a pre-stressing of the rock
11.7 References
/<:» above the arch. A uniform set of forces was applied to the
side of the tunnal balancad by an equal and opposite force CARSLAW,H.S. and JAEGER,J.C. (19591, "Condu.cüon 06 Hea..t -<.n
( positioned at the anchorage points within the rock mass as
illustrated in figure [11-12J.
Solidl,", 2nd ed., Clarendon Press, Oxford.
l HINTON,E. and OWEN,O.R.J. [1979], "An In;tJtodu.cüon to F-<'nUe
EtemeYLt Compu..tCtÜoYLó", Pineridge Press, Swansea, U. K.
'-
<t JUMKIS,A.R. [1966J, TheNna1. SoU Mec.ha.n-tCÁ", Rugars Univarsity
.( Fo~ce opplied to \ \ I Press .
011 onchor \
~ SCHOFIELD,A.N. and WROTH,C.P. [1968J, "CJU;üc.a1. S:ta.:teSoU
Mec.ha.n-tC6", McGraw-Hill.
{
11

-,
zente of infl~2\.~\ \ \ WROTH,C.P. [1975J, "Ins1tu measurement of initial strasse5 and
o force ~ \ \
~ deformation characteristics", State of the art report on
i

'Í '-- -,
'-..'--7 <, -,
~
\
\
\ Measurement of Soil Properties, North Carolina State
University.

<, "n "-

<,

1~~~
1

)
-~-
L,
(
-----...,[>
-- ----
l
'- '1

J Figure 11~12 Arch "support pressure"

'c.....
'

It must be emphasised at this point that support dssign

.{ still relies heavily on empirical methods and that any f.a .
solution must be ussd in conjunction with these.
<:»
,(
G The other point to be considerad is the case of secondary
'\ bolting. Whereas primary bolting will take care of ·the
'-' requirement to generally reduce the leveI of tensile stresses
i and eliminate minor block failures it will not necessarily
cater for the massive rock collapses resuIting from major
~ joint planes intersecting at unfavourable angles. These need
:1. to be considared individually with reference to geological
data, and the support required calculated using established
,
.J. principIes.

-.i
-Á

l
 213
1
~i,)

'-
I

'- ,)
CHAPTER 12
L-
I
":
< FINITE ELEMENTS IN DESIGN
1\'-./ with particular reference to deep basements in London Clay
by
"
"-'
!\
o
Brian Simpson

(
"--' 12.1 Introduction
~,
The application of finite element techniques to
..{ practical problems requires a knowledge of the fundamentaIs
of the method and an understanding of the properties of the
~ materiaIs involved. In addition. experience in creating an
adequate finite element model and interpreting the output
,
I'
from the computationsis needed.
\ IndividuaIs or small groups of engineers have tended to
develop expertise for a particular class of problems. for
'I
example tunnel construction. embankments on 90ft clay.or
( offshore structures. Finite elements have also been used
\
extensively in the study Df deep excavations in the London
, Clay. and in this chapter the progress of this work is
\
described and some of the lessons that have been learnt are
discussed. Reference to Burland (1978) is also recommended.
y:J One of the first uses of the finite element method in
lu
the study of London Clay was to facilitate a back-analysis
I
of a deep basement which had been monitored during construction,
\.- -"
This provided parameters that were used in analyses of.other
,(
excavations as an aid to designo In this latter role. the
v method has proved useful in the quantitative estimation of
v deformations. and has also been very helpful to the
)., qualitative understanding of material behaviour. modes of
\.J overall deformation and the influence of construction detal1s.
~ The development that has taken place has required studies
{ of methods of modelling the geometry of excavations and of the
<:»
,( material propert1es of the clay. In parallel. with this. the
\:... types of finite element in use have improved.and the ab11ity
to man1pulate the computed results 50 that they can·readily ..
~ be used in des1gn has increased. Thus t hís t op c rs'a" gQQd
í

illustration of both the development and pract1cal use of

l finite element techniques.
~
~
 214 215
t:
~J
12.2 Back-analysis

~
1:,
Possibly the first'major use Df finite elements in the
study of London Clay was,publ1shed by Cole and Bur Iend (1972).
'i They used the method to derive an estimate of the undrained
0:,)
I
stiffness of the clay from the results of monitoring the ~Fjll

.sv excavation for Britannic: House in the City of London, which

had been completed some years earlier. B BrownClay
,
b .~~-- -- -,- -'--
l'
? . ~ '?
roerres

"-'
I
IV
'(
'-
t J
I
I Di.phragrn
I W.II
~ Figure 12-2 Britannic House: section A-A (Fig. 12-1)
AJ after bulk excavation and construct1on
f of raft.
Towet
J t35storiesl
12.2.1 Computational Technigues
(j
In order to carry out this ;tudy several questions
(O' had to be answered.
(f" !
'\ o
o
a) How should a rectangular or L-shaped excavation
:l
((":, õtuee be modelled? Two-dimensional plane strain and
, Block axi-symmetric elements were available, and it was
fI e,torl ••
decided to use both of these and compare the
results with measurements along section A-A
)
(Figure 12-1) for which the most complete set of
... ) measurements was available .

~'I') ~~ b) What form of stress-strain behaviour should be

(.; \\ assumed for the clay? The excavation was carried
out in seven weeks, and.three more weeks were

o required to cast the raft Defore the first struts

(

Figure 12-1 Plan ,of excavation for Britannic House were placed. In view of the short time scales
it was considered that the London Clay wou1d
~ bBheVB 1n en undreinBd mennBr. Isotropic lineer
The main features ,of the scheme and the ground
~ conditions are shown in,Figures (12-1) and (12-2). An elastic behaviour was assumed, with a Poisson's
excavation roughly 110m,by 60m was required, extending to a ratio of 0.49. It was considered that even if
L depth of about 17m. A diaphragm wall was constructed around this did not give a very accurate representation
of the true behaviour it would form an adequate
<L the perimeter and excavation was then carried out very rapidly
in the centre of the site, leaving berms to support the . basis for extrapolation to other designs.
(( diaphragm wall, as showm in Figure (12-2).The computations
'- were carried out for th~s rapid excavation. Subsequently a c) What were the initial stresses in the ground
CL raft was cast over parts of the central excavation and the before excavation? It was assumed that the
r- berms were progressively replaced by struts. effective vertical stress could be obtained by
~ subtracting the measured water pressure from the
total overburden pressure at any depth. The initial
~ horizontal effective stress was obtained by
r;-
~
H
 y
fl
~il
216
multip1ying theivertica1 effective stress by K o ,
217
,
the coefficient;of earth pressure at resto The 12.2.2 Results
0:1 variation of Kolwith depth was estimated from
earlier measurements for sites in which London Clay The purpose of the study was t~ abtain ~alues for the
~) apparent undrained Youngs modulus of the cl1ay,,EU' , whí, ch was
I extended to thejground surface. More recent work
by Burland, Sim~son and St. John (1979) has expected to increase with depth. Anal'yseslwere carried aut
~ both'for the end of excavation and the en~ of~construction
1:v suggested that the use of K can be misleading
because it is g~eatly influ2nced by drainage af the raft, before the'first struts,were.~laced. By ' a
, 1" ", ' ,
/:'1 and reloading of the clay. It might have been process af tr-í.e
l and errar, the pr:o<'fiil,e!'l
Çl:f' Eu wet;'ea~j usted
W better for thislsite, which was subject to until the computed displacements of ths.diFiphx;agmwall
d underdrainage, to extrapolate the horizontal matched the field measurements. The results af one such
~ effective stress directly from other si'tes,ratlier computation are shown on Figure (12-4).
( than
, assuming Ka to be similar.
I

1
'<..Y dl How could the remove l of the excavated -sodI be 15
modelled? Theionly technique available was fuMN/m'
l ~o caicúlate th~ initial stresses on 'the inter-
e:
10

5
200 4po eoo
LONDON CLAY
[ face be~ween th~ material to be excavated and ;;
f o
~hat remainir:lg,!andthen,apply these ta~ trc!!ctions
( to the finite e!ement mesh, as shown in Figure, L j.
-10
(12-3). It was!necessary to model only chengas ~
f' af stress,'and therefore' gravi ty loads ',werenot' -15
--"- ..•----- ---..
".m

IwóOLWlcR &
AEAOING BEOS
I
i
(:(7 app1ied to the ~lements of the mesh. The procedure
is that of strategy 1 described in Section 3.5.
The only finite1elements availab1e were three-node
f' constant strain'triangles.
Figure 12-4 Britannic Hause: Computed and observed
IÍF' displacementand corresponding variation
~(

~Eu with depth.

é?
("
i\ 80th plane strain and axisymmetric computat1ons were
q-l carried out. and an approximate average was adopted as the
best estimate for a section perpendicular to the diaphragm
(I we11 c!!t1ts m1dpo1nt (eect1an A-A 1n Figure (12-1)). Th1s
\ required reducing the Young's modulus derived from the plane
(J stra1n ana1ysis by 15%.
A
lSJ
From this work the profiles af E shown 1n Figure
G (12-4) were deduced. It was considere~ that the difference
(y between the profi1es obtained for the two stages, three weeks
apart, was due to softening of the c1ay and passible creep
effects. The results implied an increase of stiffnes~ with
~ depth, which would be expected. the va1ue of E' increasing
0, to 400 MN/.m2 towards the base af the Landon Cl~y and 1n the
Woolwich and Readin~ 'Beds. The most important conclusion
~ was that the apparent undrained Yaung's modulus of the London
Clay was very much greater than that measured in laboratory
L Figure 12~3 Rinite[el~ment mesh used for analysis
of Br1tann1c House
tests.
t
f'
~
(C
"
\l
"
'-é)

G
,{
218 219
12.3 Underground car park at the Palace of Westminster.
v 12.3.1 Oetails of the project
l One of the major and,most publicised practical
applications of the finite'element method in London Clay ~as The ground conditions consisted of 10m of alluvium
,1 related to the design of t~e underground car park at the and graveI overlying London Clay to ,a'depth of 45m. The pore
"--' water'pressures were found to be in hydrostatic equilibrium
House of Commons in London. This project, illustrated in
([ Figure (12-5) required an excavation up to 18.5m deep with with the water table in the alluvium. A number of fine sand
diaphragm walls 16m from tbe foundations of the Big Ben clock and sllt partings were found in thé clay unper~ying the
({ excavation leveI. The diaphragm retaining,walls were taken
tower and only 3m irom Westminster Hall.
rr down through 'these partings to a depth of 30m to cut off
Q horizontal seepage and eliminate the possibility of hydraulic
1';-
uplift.
"(i'
The car park was constructed first by installing the
diaphragm walls and foundation piles (Figure 12-6). Steel
r'
'Í'

f A,ver
T/llm'$
t columns for supporting the floors were lowered into the
lined 'boreholes above each pile and grouted into position.
The ground ftoor slab was then cast on the groJnd surface.
~'\
I{

ç'
\ 81gB,<,\
tloClclOW,t
Excavation took place beneath the ground floor slab and the
next floor was then casto The process was repeated until the
lowest slab had been casto
q\ KEY PLAN

(- New Palaee Vard

1 I~ YOUNG'S MODULUS"Eu(MN/m2) IN SITU STRESS (kN/m2)
'(
Çl
cc::JJ
UnCl8'9I!')un(J ra.1w.llv
O
s•.....•
'
C.r P8rk
MaOF9rouRd
Sa"d~9'a •••1
\0
o 100 200 o 200
I
400
I
600
I
800
I
20 ~
Original G.L.
eAST-weST SECTlON 100 Sand and
~O"donelev ~ 30
~J gravei
()
,( WOOIwlCh •. l
'0

50 m s London
Readlng 8.a. Vl 90 Clay
U E
(;
-.
..J
Weslmlna,.,Hall W

::::'==~-:'=:=:'-:"':';:====:=':.':===
Gj
..J
80
C
W

cL U
;;,
fil 70
~v

~ '" '''',
(i Figure 12-5 Underground car park at the Palace 60
Woolwlch and
ofiWestminster.
(L !
Readlng Beda

Usini the data obta1~ed from analysis of the Britannic

Ci House excavation, Ward and!Burland (1973) published Figure 12-6 Underground car park: assumed
undréined Young'smodulus and in situ
Cl predictions 'of the movements around the excavation'before
construction took place. Burland and Hancock (1977) later 'stresses.
r-
'\.( reviewed the predictions and site measurements, and the data
,-o nave been discussed further by St. John (1975), Simpson, 12.3.2 Assumptions of the computations
'.1.
O'Riordan and Croft (1979) .anc Burland, Simpson and st. John
I, \ (1979). ' Figure (12-6) shows the distribution of E with depth
'\ used in the analysis. An upper limit of just o~er 200 MN/m2
was adopted for depths in excess of 30m even though the
'{
Britannic House analysis yielded values greater than
\'
(-,
400 MN/m2 for the basement beds of the London Clay and the

"\
'(

220 221
Woolwich and Reading Beds (see Figure 12-4). The upper occurred at most of the monitored sections.
~ limit on E was adopted in the belief that the predicted

'~
\
~) behaviour ~ould be conservative.
J J\
\.
I /original Mo~ementtowards excavation -
The distribution Df initial horizontal effective stress ~I.evel O 4 8 12 16 20 24 28mm
r=- i ' , , , , , ,

T
Ir 104
"--' wee oelculeted teking into eccount the fact that the surface
of the cley had been reloaded by deposi tion of 10m cf sand
l I I
C
!,
and graveI; the results of the calculation are shown in
Figure (12-6). Details Df this are discussed by Burland
L • 100

~18mL
c:i 96

l
\J et aZ (1979) and Simpson et aZ (1981), and may be summarised
L as follows. L "l
-1 cri
E 92
,{ a) The horizontal stresses that ·would exist at the ãi
"-' end of erosion of the clay are first calculated.
~ 88
...J
{
\.,..- In the case of the London Clay these are governed 84
by the coefficient of passive earth pressu~e,
t K , for most of the depth Df the clay relevant ~ 80
\f tB the computation.
I 76

f b) The effects of reloading are then calculated

eesum1ng thet the cley responds in e dre1ned,
~.
elastic manner, This calculation is sensi~ive o 20m
to assumptions about the anisotropy of the cla~
f'
r" ,
(Simpson et aI., 1981), but the effects of reload-
ing provide a comparatively small modification Figure 12-7 Computed and measured wall movements
'\ to the horizontal stresses calculated in step (a). at the end Df excavation for the underground
.:
\ The techniquesused for this computation were largely
car park.

y';:-. similar to those employed in the analysis Df Britannic

House, constant strain triangular elements again being used.
This over-prediction Df movement at depth could be
explained by Ward and Burland's decision to limit the value
It was very important to model the process Df excavat~on Df E assumed for the basement beds of the London Clay and

;\..._J
in stages, inserting springs to represent the floor s:abs
as the excavation proceeded. Using this step-by-step approach
the finite element model can represent the sequence of
the ~oolwich and Reading Beds to a value below that inferred
from the observations at Britannic House, This decision
was thought to be conservative, but Bur1and and Hancock
( excavation and construction followed in practice, and this (1977) considered that it had led to an underestimate of the
....... )
has a profound influence on the final movements and stresses. bend1ng in the wall. This type of consideration requires
i\'0! (An alternative approach to design of diaphragm walls has careful attention when parametric studies are carried out
sometimes been followed in which the wall is represented using finite elements. In a subsequent back-analysis, St.
\ as a multiply propped beam subjected instantaneously to John (1975) found that an increase in the stiffness assumed
~umed final earth pressures. Because this fails to take for the deep layers led to a significant overall reduction
. ,,--./ account of the construction sequence, the calculated pattern in computed displacements .
\ of displacemen~s is very different from that found in practice.)
x.>
"Computed" and "predicted" movements at the ground
J~ 12.3.3 Computation, predictions and measurements. surface published by Ward and Burland (1973) are compared
with the measured values (Burland and Hancock, 1977) in
~ Measurements of ground movements around the excavation Figure (12-8). The distinction between the results of a
showed that Ward and Burland's computations had led to good finite element computation and the engineer's prediction is
i predictions of ground movements. The final deformation Df an important one which is too often forgotten. The finite
« the diaphragm wall, computed using plane strain elements,
is compared with measurements for the midpoints Df the south
element method tncorpor-et ee a highly idea1ized mathematical
model of a structure. Whilst this wi11 in some respects
:J. and east walls in Figure (12-7). It can be seen that the add to the engineer's insight into how the structure will
overall magnitude of horizontal displacement was well predicted, behave, there will often be some aspects of the computation
~( but the computation suggested larger movements at depth than which do not match reality very closely. It is essential
:.;
Y'
~\
222 • 223
( \ linear elastic model with stiffnesses derived from previous
'r '.
(.,
Ward &
Burland (1973)
back-ana1ysis.
\ '

/J
'( _ '\.._ __
Distance Irom wall(m)
30 40 50 60 70
12.4 The work of St. John.

v
"
/
L:
- °1 ~
E
..§
, A·· '.' · __
... '
A....
-<:P;edicted
...~>
St. John (1975) reported the resu1ts of a research
study of both measured and theoretica1 behaviour of ground
around deep excavations 1n London C1ay. He reviewed the
,{
\:'J
~E 10
• : ~-------~--~ predictions that had been made us~ng finite element techniques
and considered both the material properties of the c1ay and
AA Computed
L ~11>
VI
A •
the techniques available for mode:ling three-dimensiona1
excavations.
,(
~. 20 •• LEGEND
12.4.1 Stress-strain behaviour.
{ • South,wall } measured
~
A East wall Eu(MPal
~ o 50 100 150
E O k r I i I
~-
E
-20
f
V
~'
L
n;
•• ••
A
• -;;;
e,
:.
!'(' ~
Õ ~ 0.2
:x: 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 UJ
a:
~ f-

~lr""""\"
(/)
Dlstance lrom wall (m)
'(
Figure 12-8 Computed. predicted and measured :rl 0.3
x movements ai ground leveI for the
u,
u,

JJ underground car park. "

UJ

z
<t
G that engineers review the results of computations very
UJ
:::;; 0.4
(( carefully. and they should be prepared to trust their own
\_-)
judgement in preference to the computer printout when LEGEND
<-
\---./ necessary. Too often. intelligent and experienced engineers -- Vertical field
measurements
( abandon their previous wisdom when faced with computed results osj- -- HOrizontal field
LI and accept "predictions" which are fairly obviously irrelevant. measurements
((
\J
In this case study. the computed resu1ts were based on
;'\
'-.J the unreal assumption of plane strain. It was judged that Figure 12-9 Undrained Young's modu1us for
(
this had led to unreasonable results at distances greater London C1ay'deducéd from laboratory
,"'-" than 30m from the wall. and the predicted settlements were and field dâta.
!1 therefore modified accordingly. and thereby carnecloser to
the subsequent measurements. ,It can be seen that the overall Figure (12-9) based on St. John'swor.k.,shQws c leer Iy
CL magnitude of movement was predicted reasonably well. but the the large difference between stiffnesses measured in labora-
measured movements had a rather different distribution. tory tests and those backfigured from field measurements.
'J, In more recent work. Creed. Simons and Si1ls (1980) have
In summary. this work has advanced the methods of obtained similar results from a back-ana1ysis using an
\l. ca1cu1ating in situ stressesl it has demonstrated the power anisotropic modelo The reason for this disparity has been
({ of step-by-step model1ingl and it has shown that movements of hotly debated. and many workers have concluQed that. because
the right magnitude could be predicted using an isotropic
r:
'--l
fi
'--)
j 224 225
~J of sampling disturbance, laboratory stiffness tests can give St. John carried out computations assuming constant
,1 Young's modulus with depth and remote boundaries at about
no useful information about field behaviour, at least in the
V undrained phase. Parry (1980), however, considers that by ,six times the sxceve t í.cn depth from the excavation itself.
.{
cycling the stresses on the specimen a good indication of The value of the,ratio of total horizontal stress to total
ci field behaviour can be derived from laboratory tests. Costa- vertical stress (K T) was taken to be O, 1 or 3.
1 o
v Filho (1980) has produced data which suggest that the magni- -0.1
J
,< tude of the stress qr strain increment is of great importance, /
'-l...- end Simpson et aI (1979) a~9umed this in deve10ping the / 0.1
numerical model presented later in this chapter.
~ /
«
--1"'L~~...
O~"-- .• /
'<- In the computations discussed 50 faro linear elasticity ..•.......
-'0 /
~{ was assumed, making no allowance for the limited shear S1r1ln <. /
~ strength of real soi1. St.' John suggestéd that this " P1lne 0.2
Str • .,

r simplification
of computations.
was having a significant effect on the results
He considered that a more realistic
~. distribution of movement might be obtained if passive yield
0.3
and clay softening in front of a wall were correctly modelled.
-< This would ocdur progressively at different levels as the
r: excavation proceeded.

"
\(
12.4.2 Modelling rectangtilar excavations
(a) Vertical movements (b) Horizontal movements
~'
1n order to atudy the differences between 2-dimensional (settlement p09itive)~
and 3-dimensional models of excavations, St. John stud1ed
an unsupported square excavation of depth equal to one third Figure 12-11 Comparison of computed surface movements
':( of the length of a side. He modelled this 1n three dimensions
, '1 for excavations as shown in Fig. 12-10
using linear elast1c elemen~s and compared the results with
1I
',j plane strain and axi-symmet~ic approximations. The equivalent
Figure (12-11) shows a comparison between computed
~1
,)
square, circular and infinitely long excavations are shown in
Figure (12-10). horizontal and vertical movements at the ground surface for
the plane strain, axisymmetr1c and 3-D cases, alI for
,\ KoT = 1. Good agreement was found between ~he movements
v ( computed in the axisymmetric analysis and in the 3-D analysis
"v on a plane normal to the side of the excavation and passing
( through the midside. The plane strain analysis gave fairly
<..J similar vertical movements, but the main horizontal movements
.( Axisymmetric solution were up to 100% too large;- Even though'the 'excavation' had no
\.../'
support, the 3-0 analysis gave much reduced horizontal
~ movements towards the corners of the excavation.
, (
-.../
Three dimensional computations are likely to be
unreasonably expansiva for practical designs. It therefore
l seems sensible to use axisymmetric.analyses to compute the
'(
~ behaviour normal to the wall at its midpoint. St. John
suggested an alternative procedure using both plane strain
1 and axisymmetric analyses, but this 15 not considered·
c necessary by the writer.'
\.\.

\{ It is important to note that for a concrete diaphragm

wall, for example, the stiffness assumed in the circumferential
-J.. Figure 12-10 Geometrical configurations direction must not be that of concrete. If it were, the
,,.--.., compared by St. John. program would model a perfectly circular wall of soild concrete,
'-Í.. which would have very great resistance to radial movement. In'
practice diaphragm walls are neither perfect1y circular nor
"'1
'V
q' 226 different ••
227
rt;1 formed of continuous concrete: Either a very low value
'r should be us~d for Young's modulus in the circumferential d) St. John,has suggested that yielding or softening
~.'l direction, or plane stress elements could be used to of the passive wedge in front of the wall is
rapresent the wall. sometimes important. In particular, if a
relatively small toe-in is available at the base
~ 12.5 A further development " Df a diaphragm wall linear elastic assumptions
) would over-estimate the strength and stiffness of
"""
v. Engineering science uses theories and 'laws' to the clay.
II extrapolate from establishe~ facts and 50 produca pradictions.
V Tha mora raalistid the engi~aer believas a theory to ba, the e) If computations ara raquirad axtending beyond
(( tha short-term phase, which is assumed·to ba
(y further he will be preparedlto extrapolate. In those araas
,(
where ha considars its·raalism debatable, he must consider undreined, significantly different material
'CY alternative theories, not l~ss realistic, 'and compare properties will be raquired, basad on effective
predictons. These points were of concern in 1977 to engineers stress behaviour.
1
"--" at Ove Arup end Partners, working on the design of the deap
basament for the proposed B~itish Library at Euston. They 12.5.1 Model 'LC'
~ daoidBd thBy muet reooneidet oriticelly the teohniques employed
J in tha computations discussed above, in ~rticularthe use Df
linear elasticity. '
Simpson, O'Riordan and Croft (1979) suggasted that the

« For axample, tha pred+cted displacements for the

Cf Underground Car Park at theiPelace of Westminster were
derived using assumptions of linaar alasticity, and were in
good overall agraement with!tha measured movements. Two
.''''
particular problems wa.re no~ed, however:
'\
tê .,
'{ a) Although the mov~ment of the diaphragm wall
( . was pradicted fairly well, tha computed distribution
~.\
of strain bahindithe wall was not 50 good. The
r-, measured strainslwere generally larger than
predictad . cIosa to the excavation and smallar
~ I
behaviour of the clay at very small strains is Df particular
importance. They pointed out that around large, stable
excavations, shear strains in tha ground ara usually less than
about 0.2% except at local concentrations of strain. This is
similar to the range Df strain used by Marsland to datarmine
tangent moduli from plate bearing tests, but much las5 than
tha strains normally studied in the laboratory for
determination of stiffness parameters.
Many workers, including Lewin (1970) and Som (1968)
have reported 'threshold affacts' in London Clay and other
soils. In soma Df his oedometer tests, Som held samples at
constant stress for many deys andthan recordad axcaptionally

)l et graeter dietenoe. Th1e lBrgely eccounts for high stiffnass as tha next 5mall increment Df strain was
the settlement trrough apparent in the observations applied. Lewin reported a similar high stiffnass whan the
(' ) shown in Fig. (l2~8). direction Df straining wes changad.
,(
,-i
b) Tha elastic moduli used in tha computations wara Reviewing these and other data. Atkinson (1973)
sv' much largar than ithose consistently measured in concluded that for a small stress incrament following a delay
.\ high quality laboratory tests on specimens cut at constant stress tha stiffnass is much graater than would
'-./ be the case for continuous straining. Similarly. high
( ;~~;l~~~~kh::m~!~~~te~I:t~~~~~::~~ ~:::~~:~ in stiffness is found when an abrupt changa in the direction
~, large diameter (a65mm) plata baaring tests fairly of tha stress path occurs. This implies that for small
-( close to the back-figured values). stress increments in the fiald, whera tha thrashold valua
'-..Y
is not excaaded, laboratory measurad parameters will over-
-1 Three further problam~, not apparent in the analysis estimate the actua1 strain. By comparing laboratory and
v'
(( for the Underground Car Park, are considared significant. plate bearing test rasults, howevar, Simpson et at (1979)
v
I
suggested that for 1arge stress increments the stiffnesses
( c) Since tha .tiffn~ssas usad in tha computations measured in the 1aboratory might be r~levant.
G were derivad from study of other excavations of
~L similar aLze , it lis not cartain what her- r:
computations usí.rrgtha sarnalinaar proparties
The considerations outlined above led to'th~ development
Df a stress-strain model for haavily ovarconsolidated clay,
1 are appropriate t'oaxcavations of significantly
diffarant siza. A similar doubt may axist if
Model LC, with tha following main featuras:

J geological stratification or in situ strasses are

a
J
,y
~":1\
228 229
f (a) Three ranges of strain are considered.
I named 'elastic', 'intermediate' and 'plastic'.
{\ (b l At alI stages. incremental stiffness ana strength 2000

Ã'~) are functions of current mean effective stress.

~u (c) The 'intermediate' range corresponds to the
1000

~
TYPICAL STRAINS FOR:

Deep exavatlons
t
! ap,proximately line~r behaviour 'norma11y measured 500 Plale bearong leais
& in the·laboratory. T~e parameters of anisotropic
b,( elastiçity., as measurrd in lc:boratory tests, are
used. but the,behaviour i! not entirely reversible.
"I"
wu
~
Z
200
)x Laboralory tests
«
o
"-"
-( (d l The 'elastic' range app1ies to straíns up to 0.02% ~ 100

<:» shear strain. Stiffnesses are taken to be ten times

50
1 greater than in the 'intermediate' range. which gives
a stress threshold of the magnitude suggested by Som.
r'- 20
(e) In the "plastic' range. at 1arge strains. behaviour
I is governed by a flow!rule. work hardening and 10'
o 2
I J
4
I
6
[
e
I
10
subsequent work softe~ing.
I
1": •••••
SHEAR STRAIN %
I

":1" 200
Figure 12-p Model LC: Variation of secant
Young's modulus with sheàr 'strain.

-(
--.-
(j~-crhl A typical atreaa-atrain curve der1ved from the model

-Çi"
.'- is shown in Figure (12-12). The inset to the figure
(kPa)
~ shows the higher stiffness assumed at smaI1 strains and
applied again when the stress path is changed. The concept
cri
'i 100 h of a 'kinematic yield surface' was used to achieve this
effect. If required. secant Young's moduli could be derived
1.,) Inltially rI'" D 200 kPa
CTh'_ 400 kPa Ko·2
from the model as a function Df strain. Values derived from
Figure (12-12) are shown in Figure (12-13)and are found to
) compare wel1. in the appropriate ranges of atrain, with
(.)
(
.::, ...)
O" I
4
I
6
I
a
I
10 12
I
both field and 1aboratory measurements.

t,- th % 12.5.2 Calibration against field measurements

A
'-./
,( It was anticipated that the model wou1d require
e, - c. %
J calibration against field measurements. just as the linear
o 0,2 0.4
A -100 o I ':;;;»> elastic mode1 has been. In the evento it was not found
o I I necessary to change the parameters which had been derived
,( C1'v"'CTh
as described above. principally from 1aboratory measurements.
"'-'
"\
2
(kPa) ! DETAJl AT VERY
C/

C!.- -100
•...•..•.
_t .•.
I SMAll STRAIN To check the model, computations were carried out for
comparison with several sets of field measurements~ including
the Underground Car Park at the Palace of Westminster. For
(L- this. an axisymmetric idealization was used~ as suggested by
St. John's work. The main results are shown in Figure .(12-14)
ei. Figure 12-12 Model LC: Uridrained plane strain behaviour. (movements at ground leveI) and Figure (12~15)(horizontal wall
movements) . It can be seen that the shap.e bf the .settIement
1 distribution outside the site is differeRt from that comoutad
using linear elastic assumptions: the settlement 'trough
1
I.

noted on this and other projects is correct.ly predicted.

J
(

(
y
~.-
(
230
dimension is 1arge. lhe pressuremeter ~as therefore
231

( mode11ed using a plane strain finite E1ement mesh. representing

\. the test in p1an as shown in Figure (12-16).

j
Ccmpulod by ,
( j Ward and Burland(197J)
v., '
\ Distance from wsll!m)
í \w w ~ ~ ~ ~ 70
C o'
(
\._,
Ê
f .\ \
/{
\
~ 10
/ Constant
(
'-' j 20
~""5("-
\. ./
South wall durlng excaY8tion!measured)
e.s! wall totllljmaa5ured)
\_ ....•.·•..••..••••
South w.1I total (measu(8d)
pressure

{ (a)

(
~
~ Southwan
South Wl!llIt0;d81 during constructlon(m •• surad)
(meBaurad) --o{
f,{ _. ,-,_.
_.... Jw Comput,dbV
ard.nd8urland1lg'31

I( ,-;:.,... "-'----
..-'-"-ç_
'/;;-~;;...._ .:::::.~._ Ea'twalltotar
Imeasured)

\J
1~ 20 J~ 40 :~---- ajo /Õ - Figure 12-16 Finite e1ement mesh used to mode1
Oistance from wall(ml

(b) pressuremeter in plano

l(
Figure 12-14 Palace Df Westminster. Comparison Df
\(
measured and Mode1 LC Computed ground
i{ surface displacemsnts.
I
1°, i i i, I
'(

~~#~oJ;.'-::''' A~~rt~~~er~~

\ Movement tcwards excavauon -

4 8 12 16 20 24 28mm /. _ ' 15

(~-
100 / ~ _====-lF~
1.
( 96
,IJf;/"~/~---- .,'. 17

'-' o 92
10
\ CI)

E 88
\,.
~
.!l 84
t~,
( 80
In ~r.S9uremeter
\.:/ p. preSlIl1'B

."---( 76

72
cu·undnlined sh.ar strength
trom1C2mm UU Irla.lal
tests

~
\...:.,
4 6 6 7 8 9 10
CHANGE QF DIAMETB1 (%)
<l Figure 12-15 Palace Df Westminster. Comparison Df
measured and Model LC Computed horizontal
({ wall movements. Figure 12-17 Comparison Df measurements from a
sslf-boring pressuremeter with Model
li As a further check. computations have been carried out LC results.
to model tests using a self-boring pressuremeter. lhe model
~ is designed for 2-dimensional situations and does not deal
(i adequately with situations in which the strain in the third

((

\
\J
,r
233
v 232
(
-.....;J Some of the results are shown in Figure (12-17) 12.6.1 Type of analysis
I( and it is clear that ths model is able to prediet the shape
'0 of ths complets load-displacement curve. Since both stiffness The work discu~sed in section 12.2 to 12.4 showed that
( and strsngth are assumed to bs related to mean normal strsss, an isotropic linear elastic model, with Young's modulus
the value assumed for K affscts the results, as can be seen. varying with depth, can gensrally be used to obtain a
.( It might bs tempting toOuse this as a means of dsriving K reasonable estimate of the scale of movements around a deep
'- from the pressuremeter test, and for thsss data this proc~ss excavation. Values for Young's modulus can be estimatsd
.~( from Figure (12-9).
would give a rsasonabls resulto However, such an approach
"--
would requirs unreasonable reliance on the detaile~ accuracy
? of the modelo Typical computed and measured unload/reload Results from non-linsar computations should be compared
'-'
a. cycles are shown in Figure (12-18). Agreement is again if the design is critical or if it differs significantly
satisfactory. from the case histories upon which Figure (12-9) is bassd.
J It must be rsalised, howsver, that non-linsar computations
will be more costly and will make greater demands on the
J Depth time and skill of the enginssrs.

~
oltut
,.
Iml
The techniques described in section 3.2 for modelling
effective stress behaviour have become more widely available
,-( in the last few years. 80th undrained and fully drained
behaviour can be modelled and the consolidation phass can be
'( modelled approximately by specifying the pore pressures in
the data as the computation proceeds. The effective stress
'\ technique is generally to be preferred to total stress
~i analysis, especially for non-11near work 1n which dilation,
, pore pressure and shear strength are alI related. Programs
'~ are also available for computing behaviour throughout the
consolidation phase directly, but 1t will be rare that the
'( 00 , 3 • permeabi11ty of the ground and the timing of construction
CHANGE OF OIAMETER 1:1;)
\:.......:i will be known to 'sufficient accuracy to merit such
( sophistication and expense.
~~I
Figure 12-18 Computed and measured unload/reload
( cycles for the pressuremeter. It must be emphasized that the ca11brations which led
-..:...'
to Figure (12-9) were based on total stress, isotropic
é\
\...-J 12.6 Use of the finite element method in design of deep linear elastic models using constant strain triangular
( basements. e1ements. Some of the known inaccurac1es in thsse assump-
'-../ tions may hav8,cancelled each other, and whensvsr one assump-
,-1
\
An eng near dssigning a desp basement might decide to
í tion is changsd the calibration against monitored
\../
embark on finite ~lsmsnt computations for a number of excavations must be re-checksd.
1 different reasons. Probably the most common reason is the
nead to predict ground movements around the excavation, but In ear1y computations the process of excavation was
J estimates Df prop forces, bending moments and other quantities modelled by applying tractions to elements representing the
might also be sought. In addition, an indication of the 6c11 that rsmainsd. Ncwadays althcuih th1a methcd 1a atill
3 effecte of elternetive construction sequences, rate of perfectly satisfactory for single stage excavations with
excavation and other details might be needed.
:1 simple boundaries the alternative stratsgy 2 described in
Section 3.5, whersby the unbalanced stresses on the sxeavated
The purposs of each eomputation must be clear before boundary are relaxed in a less cumbersome manner, may bs
~
•r
it is begun, since this will influence the design of the mesh prefsrred .
J, and the choiee of suitable stress-strain properties and
r: e1ement types. These in turn will determine in what respects Whilst mueh of the ear1y work on exeavationsin London
~ the computation can be expsctsd to be realistie and which used plane strain analysis, 1t was arguad 1n sect íon 12.4
.~
features of the output might tend to be misleading. that axisymmetrie eomp0tations are often more rea1istie. The
'r-Ó.
-< alternative of using full thrse-dimensional computations will
,,(
,,--- \

q
\.
'r
r
'( )
234 .
usuaIIy be too expensive, mainIy because anaIysis of
235

excavations must be done in a step-by-step manner requiring

u
,(
,-i
fonnation of a new stiffness matrix at each stage.

An impression of the effects near corners can sometimes

t Excavation Diaphragmwall
Fixed boundary
at 300m----.

,{ be gained by using an axisymmetric computation with a small

1~,.....
V
,(
radius for the excavation face. A plane stress analysis in 25
plan may also be used to give an indication of the
"""
,(
~
distribution of movements. In the example shown in Figure
(12-19) the properties of the elements inside the excavation
~Jhtllr--r-
were changed in three stages in an attempt to represent the
1 removal of a layer of soil and subsequent insertion of the Thanet sands
I concrete slab. lhe th1ckness of the diaphragm wall was
varied as shown 50 as to givs it high compressive stiffness
145m ·1 Chalk
i but low bending stiffness in plano
Figure 12-20 Mesh used in analyses of
~ excavation for British Library,
-{ Euston.
..( Eight node isoparametric elsments were used throughout.
Fixed It was proposed to model the diaphragm wall using only one
,( bouodaries elemsnt across its width, and a check was made on the validity
aI 250m
Diaphragm wall o f this. ' A single column of elements was subjected to
'(
(cne element thick I concentrated and distributed loads similar to the expected
strut forces and earth pressures, and the overall
1 deflections and bending moments compare well with those of a
'\ more complex mesh subjected to the same loading. A similar
conclusion was reached in Chapter 3 where the wall shown in
'1 Figure (3-10) was idealized by a single co1umn of 8 noded
elements. A separate study using a finer mesh aga1n proved the
'( accuracy of the bending moments. In both cases "reduced
~) integration" (~ee e.g. Zienkiewicz, 1977) was used. It
-} cannot be 8xpsctsd, however, that the single element width
J w1ll give any useful infonnation about the detailed stress
( distribution close to a strut .
...y'

:(
..J CORNER DETAIL Although Model LC was used to include non-11near effects
in the analysis, no special allowance was made for slip
L Figure 12-19 Mesh used in plan to study between the wall and the soil. lhis.decision was subsequently
( relative movements of mid-sides shown to be justified since the computed shear stress on the
and corners of square excavation. interface was too small to cause slipping in practice.
}
12.6.2 Oesign of the mesh As excavation proceeds there is always a stress concent-
} ration in the passive wedge in front of the wallat
Some of the main points to be considered in des1gn of excavat10n leveI. Accurate model11ng would require a fine
1 a finite element mesh will be illustrated in this section mesh at this point and for non-linear laws good 'convergence of
by means of an example. Figure (12-20) shows a mesh used the iterative processes. Unfortunately neither of these was
1 for some of the computations in the design of the poss1ble. Because the excavation leveI keeps changing, a
-l proposed British Library, Euston. lhe mesh was designsd fine mesh would be needed at alI levels and this would become
1nitially for the study of ground movements, but use was unreasonably expensive. It was found that, using Model LC,
J. also made of other features of the output. convergence in the passive wedgs is rather slow. lhe
change in the overall pattsrn of behaviour is not, however,
-\
-r-,
usually significant after the first four or five iterations.
~~
'y !

I I

236
X 'wall by a factor of 3. The mesh used was shown in Figure
() It can be inferred that the linear elastic model, since it
does not provide the iterative'corrections, gives
~J
( particularly doubtful results in the passive wsdge.
( Many of the computations show the diaphragm wa11
c moving down, mainly due to to drag from ths soil behind it.
( In this process the soil around ths toe suffers a bearing
<:»
capacity fai1ure. The mesh employed around the toe of the
( wall may well be too coarse to model this propsrly.
,./
237
(12-20). This comparison demonstrates the important point
that the stiffness of ths wall has very little sffect on the
deformations, which are controlled by the behaviour of the
soi1 and the struts. However, the stiffness assumed for the
wall does change the computed bending moments considerably.
A non-linear model of the behaviour of the reinforced
concrete wall could be used to advantage to gain greater
insight into this problem.

( The way in which these results are used will depend

12.6.3 Computation, prediction and designo
considerab1y on design phi1osophy. The most conventional
approach would be to estimate a probabls stiffness of the
,-( In section 12.3.3 the distinction between the resu1ts
wall, computs bsnding momsnts, and use these in calculations
.f of comput~tions ~nd the engineer's predictions was
together with factors of safety. An alternative method,
discussed. In the view of the writer a similar distinction
which accepts the fact th&the stiffness of the wa1l has
( is necessary between prediction and designo
<x little inf1uence on its curvature, would be to design the
reinforcsd concrste for imposed dsflections rather than
,( Predictions are usually intended to give the best
imposed loads. Another, simp1er,~lternative would be to
estimate of what will most probably occur when an excavation
,( ignore the computed bending moments, which are derived on
is made, for example. The design process, howsvsr, is more
the assumption of uniform stiffness down the profile of the
concerned with checking that possible adverse events wi11 not
--( wa1l, and carry out a plastic design using the computed
occur. Use of the finite element method can aid this process
external wall pressures. This would,givs a wall which is
--( b'y providing parametric studies. For deep excavations paramsters
safe but might crack excessively. A good designe r wil1 take
which may be varied include the soil stiffness and stress-
account of each of these approaches.
strain characteristics, the initial strssses in theground, the
~ stiffness of the wall and struts, ths construction sequence,
12.6.4 Analysis of details.
,{ the state of drainage,etc.
Besidss g1v1ng en est1mete af the avere11 behev10ur
'(
of a deep excavation, finite element computations can be
f used to study design details. Figure (12-22) shows the
resu1ts of a study of the use of berms to reduce movement
:I whilst excavating ths lowsst bassmsnt of ths mesh in
Figurs (12-20). The results indicate that so long as a small
'"-'
( berm remains the movements that take place only amount to
_/ about 50% of the movemsnts that would occur with no berm.
( It could be inferred that if the berm can be removed in short
lengths and rapidly replaced by a stiff prop the final
( displacements will be much reduced. This is in line with
J
field observations (St. John, 1975).
(
.J

(
hc,vltlCln

.'" The computed distributions of principal stresses around

the berm is shown in Figure (12-23). It is clear that,
J besides the effscts of ths berm's own we1ght, 1t forme en
important shear connection with the diaphragm wall and adds
J considerable surcharge to the soi1 providing passive restraint.
Figure 12-21 Parametric study Df effect Df wall
J stiffness showing effect Df factor
12.6.5 Output

J of 3 change.
The resu1ts Df finite e1sment computations usua11y
j consist of both printed and graphica1 output. The need for
Figure (12-21), p Lot t ad by the computer, shows the
graphica1 repressntations at alI stages including pre'paration
effects of changing the assumed stiffnsss of a diaphragm
~( Df the data, appreciat10n of the patterns of behaviour and

.(
(

\
'(

( 235
239
Ol5P '(

DI.pI.c_nl(mm! SCALE ,eM: 2.000 M. P I. ~ rs ~ 1 •• 1'1 .nn , ., 1: 10e,(0 UNIT 1: .luonr. .. Ol

00 20 40 60 80 100
~/ j •••••• i I I -;:(.1j-Z)Q -ZZ6 -ZZJ .,11/ .6:\

( -S!
_F!!_ -9l
-"
.r
'- 10 ...•. ,
~
10
lond""
·'ov
." f- ,
-36
."
] ",~.~.- !20 'ou"h ·lJ
.1" "\\
7m
boi,,,,
\15m
""''''''''''11 -ao
-1S ."
1;'\- ao !M,m
-10
20 / ! -H -li o"~
1/ I
.{ h/// -5~ _"
2. tV-t -.,
'd ~
."~\-u -" -li -,H ~ 11.

~p;."// ."
J 30' /
~. of reac:tloo "
01 ground ancho"
-1l

"\' ." ." ."

1.1 -10
(

-(
a)
b)
c)
Excavation to 15m,struts inserted during excavation.
Excavation to 24.4m 1eaving 15m berm.
As f'or,(b ) 1eaving 7m be rm ,
36 , H ·4 I 1 • 4 -, - .
\' .,
-{ d) No beriÍl. .) .) .)

Figure 12-22. The inf1uence of berms on disp1acements

(

'( \ ·1 ·1

Dlaphragm wall
'( Figure 12-24. Use of OILPO output showing vertical

I
displacements around an anchored
'( excavation. Contours in mm hand drawn:
Floorslab
',( settlement negative.
1(

'( "" ••••• ><, tbroughout this chapter,andan example of another style,
"' ..... "- ..•" General levei 'diagrammatic line-printer output' (OILPO), is shown in
'(/ ~'" 'K" 'K" lt
Figure (12-24). This provides a rapid and inexpensive
:x,"K" ••••.• •••••• of excavation
~
! :x, ~ ~ ,
""-
~
picture on the line printer which can usually be made
available well ahead of plotted output. Any scalar quantity
'-.../ ':::I-..'/-..'/.... 'f.... -I- (inc1uding componenffiof vectors) can be represented and
( contours are easi1y drawn by hand.
~ 'I...~ ~ '+-- -+- -+-
( 12.7 Conc1usions
'-' '{.... -J- -+- -~
J 1. Avai1able finite e1ement programs and the
"'"'i-.. -I- -+- -I- understanding of modes of behaviour.of deep
J excavations in London C1ay have both deve10ped
J '""'i-... "f..... "'"'i-.. ....,.. significant1y in the 1ast ten years. Each has
contributed to the other.
J -+-100kN/m2
2. Knowledge of the stress-strain pro~erties of
J London Clay has also developed. 8ack-analyses
Figure 12-23. Computed principal stresses for case (c) have made it clear thatits undrained stiffness
1 in Figure 12-22. is much greater than is ncrrne Ll y measured tn the
..\ laboratory .
communication of design information cannot be toa strongly
~ ·emphasized. 3. This work has shown that it is essentia1 to
calibrate proposed models of stress-strain
-( Examples of various styles of output have been used behaviour, however simp1e or complicated, against
'-\
 j'
(.J
240 241
I"-J fie1d measurements.
12.9 References
(/ 4. An assessment of overall magnitudes of disp1acement
.'(
around stab1e excavations ean often be made ATKINSON, J.H. (1973), "The deformation of undistupbed London
\..J
using an isotropic linear e1astie mode1. Cl.au", Ph. O. Thesis, University of London.
~
5. A non-1inear mode1, Mode1 LC, has been proposed BURLANO, J.B. (1978), "App1ications of the finite e1ement
,(
and shows promise of good correspondence not method to prediction of ground movements", Chap. 3 in
r( on1y with fie1d measurements but a1so with in situ "Devel.opmentie in SoU Nechanice'', Ed. C.R. Scott,
.~ Applied Seienee Pub1ishers, Eng1and •
and 1aboratory test results.
J 6. When mode11ing deep excavations, assumptions BURLANo, J.B. and HANCOCK, R.J.R. (1977), "Underground car
({ ofaxia1 symmetry are often more appropriate park at the House of Commons: Geotechnica1 aspects",
than plane strain. The StruaturaZ Engineer, (55), 87-100.
j
7. The purpose of each computation must be c1ear1y BURLANO, J.B., SIMPSON, B. and St. JOHN, H.O. (1979),
,( "Movements around excavations in London C1ay", Proa.
understood, and great care is needed if other
--.{ features are 1ater extracted from the output. 7th Euro. Conf. SMFE, Brighton, 1, 13-30.

COLE, K.W. and BURLANO, J.B. (1972), "Observations of retaining

'i 8. To make predictions, engineers must be ready to
wall movements associated with a larga excavation",
amend the resu1ts of computations in the 1ight
'-( of their own judgement and experience. Proa. 5th Euro , Conf. SMFE Madrid, 1~ 445-453.
( I

) 9. Oesigners may need to check conditions other COSTA-FILHO, L.M. (1980), Discussion, Proa, 7th ECSMFE,
than those considered to be most 1ike1y to occur. Brighton (1979), 4, 124-128.
::< The finite e1ement method can assist here,
particu1ar1y when used in parametric studies. CREED. M.J., SIMONS, N.E. and SILLS, G.C. (1980), "Back
) It shou1d be remembered that assumptions which analysis of the behaviour of a diaphragm wa11 supported
are known to be pessimistic in some respects may excavations in London C1ay". Proa. ênâ Conf', Ground
'"(
be optimistic from other points of view. Movements and Struatures, Session VIII, Cardiff.
'-..>"
-(
~) 10. The use of grephical output is vital at all LEWIN. P. I. (1970), "Stmeee deformation oharaatier-iet-ice of
--í stages of finite e1ement work. eaturaiied eoct", M.Sc. Thesis, Univers1ty of London.
o
{ 12.8 Acknowledgements MARSLANo, A. (1971a), "Large in situ tests to measure the
'-.J properties of stiff fissured c1ays", Lei: Austr-N. Z.
( The work in connection w1th the new British Library Conf. Geomechawice, Melbourne, (1), 180-189.
\..../

-( has been carried out by Ove Arup and Partners for the-
~ Property Services Agency for the Department of Education and MARSLANO. A. (1971b) , "Clays subjected to in situ plate tests',
Science/British Library. Ground EngineeringJ (5), 24-31.
(
~
PARRY, R.H.G. (19800, Discussion, Proa. 7th ECSMFE, Brighton
J The Author wishes to acknowledge the help of his
colleagues at Ove Arup and Partners in writing this paper (1979), 4. k29-131.

J and in developing and running several of the computer programs

deseribed. SIMPSON. B, O'RIORDAN, N.J. and CROFT, 0.0. (1979). "A
J computer model for the analysis of ground movements
London Clay", Geot.eohnioue, 29. 2, 149-175.
in

:]
...•.. SIMPSON, B, CALABRESI, G., SDMMER. H. and WALLAYS, M. (1981),
J "The measurement, selection and use of design parameters
for stiff c leys ", General report for the 7th Euro , Conf.
~ SMFE, Brighton, Vol. 5.
0.
1.;.,.. ••

(
-;» 243
( 242
~) SOM, N.N. (19f;>8),"The effeat of stress paib on the deformation
( and aonsolidation of London Clau", Ph.D. thesis,
<:»
University of London.
(
St. JoHN, H.o. (1975), "Field and tiheoret-ical: studies of the
,(
behaviour of ground around deep exaavations in London
SUBJECT INDEX
'-
ClaY"J Ph.D. Thesis, University of Cembr-í dg s ,
I
] WARO, W.H. and 8URLANo, J .8. (1973), "The use of ground strain
msasursments in civil engineering", phil Trans Royal Anisotropy, 176-178
I Soa., London, A274, 421-428. Associative plasticit'y, ses "Norma1ity"
8i-1~near mode1, 51-62, 65-66
J ZIENKIEWICZ, O. C. (1977), "The Finite El.ement: tâet had", McGraw Body force, 11, 25, 29, 35, 40-41, 42, 44
Hill, 3rd Ed. Case studies, 49-50, 51-57, 193-240
~ Constitutive 1aw, see "Variab1e 81astic laws", "Yie1d criteria"
{ Creep, 155, 199
Critica1 state mode1, 83, 113-148, 201-204
-( Critica1 state, 113, 145. C.s. line, ll7
Oams:
'( f.e. analysis Df, 38-40, 64-65 (See also "Fills")
flow through, 171
1 oiaphram wa11, 49, 196, 214-222, 225, 226, 234-239
oilatancy, 60, 78-81, 124, 183-184
~\
Oisp1acements in fi11s, 56-57
~' Orucksr-Preger, sse "Yiald critaria"
Effective stress:
~/ PrincipIe of, 29-30
) Methods, 29-40, 189-190
1,
,,/
E1astic moduli:
Compliance matrix, (chap.7)
( Modu1us matrix, 31
,
Relations between, 32
( Values Df, 50, 55, see a1so "Material constants"
\.....-
Elasto-plastic laws, 66-69, 84-86, S88 also ~Yi81d criteria"
,( Elasto-viscop1asticity, 86-91, 181
'--"
Elastic wall: (definition of), 115
(
'--7 Embank.ments, see "Fills"
':( Excavations, 29, 47-51, 196-199, 213-242
~ Extended Von Mises, see "Yie1d criteria"
J Fi11s, 29, 51-57
Finite e1ement(s):
J Assembly process, 23-25
Basic theory, 11-27
~ Coordinate transformations, 15-18
Meshes, 13-14, 50, 56, 164, 216, 231, 234-235
1 Stiffness matrix, 20-25, 165
r=:
Types of, 12-14
J Flowru1e, 73-75, 123-125, 183-184, see also "Normality"
~,

J Ground freezing, 193-195

r Hardening Law, 72, 82-83
~ Hvorslev surface, 117, 201
Hyperbolic mode1, 64-65
=z
,,-(
."".,.,,-~,-"':"._t~

l
l
':(
')
245
1 244
Von Mises, see "Yie1d cri teria"
'/.J Initia1 stresses, 2, 22, 29, 42-46, 47, 133, 195-197, 203, Yie1d criteria:
for Critica 1 state mode1, 121-123
204, 215-216, 220, 222
,.( Orucker-Prager~ 62, 78
Interpclation functicn, aBe "Shape function"
._../ Extended Von Mises, 62, 202
Invariants (definitions of), 4-8
~( Hvors1ev, 113
V
Jacobian matrix, 18
K-G mode1, 4, 62-64, 65-66 Mohr-Cou10mb, 3, 52, 60, 62-63, 66, 76, 146
~( Kinematic yield surfaces, 147, 229 for Multi-1aminate mode1, 182-183
.Y
-( LC model, 227-229, 235 Tresca, 4, 55, 66-67, 76, 82
~, Lode angle. 6-8, 62 Von Mises, 4, 78, 202
London clay, 49-50, 193-242 Yield function (definition of), 71, 75
J Lower Bound Theorem: Yie1d surface (definition of), 71-72, 118
} statement of, 101
application, 102-104, 109
:1 Material constants (determination of):
for Critical state mode1, 132-136, 202-204
'] for K-G mOdel, 63-64
,.( for London clay, 217, 219, 223, 236
Mohr-Coulomb, SBe "Yie1d criteria"
~" Non-linear techniques:
-,
-.{
General, 149-159
Initial strain method, 154
Initia1 stress method, 152-153
--( Secant stiffnes§ method, 158
""~'\ Tangentia1 stiffness method, 156-158
:i Visco-plastic method, 154-155
Normality, 95-99, see a lso "Flowru1e"
No tension material, 178-179, 207-208
~ Octahedra1 stresses, 7
j Over-stress ratio, 52, 55, 66, 176
:r) P1astic potentia1, 75, 124, 125
Pore fluid equivalent bu1k modu1us, 30, 34, 189
ic..: Pore pressure parameters, 33-34
Rendu1ic surf~ce (definition of), 117
~( Retaining well, 49-50, 196-209, gee also "Oiaphram wal1".
JI Rigid-plastic model, 93-95
-:-< Rock bo1ts, 209 ·210
J Seepage ana1ysis. 11, 161-172
-( Shspe functions, lI. 15-16
J
-( State boundary surface (definition of), 115
J Sub-critical (definition of), 117
~( Super-critica1 (~efinition of), 117
'-" Surface tractions, 11, 25-27, 29, 40-41, 46, 101
r(
.J
Tresca, see "Yie1d criteria"
Tunnels, 193-196, see a1so "Underground openings"
J Underground openings, 207-210, see a1so "Tunne1s"
Upper Bound theorem:
•...
~ statement of, 105
app1ications of, 106-108, 110-112
J Variab1e e1astic 1aws. 59-68, 118, see a1so "Si-linear mode1",
"K-G mode1", "hyperbolic mode1", "LC Mode1".
J Virtual work, 11, 21, 25, 26, 36
J. .
Visco-p1asticity, 86-90, see a1so u Non-1inear techniques "

J .~ j
':"d
(