th

The 12 International Conference of

International Association for Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics (IACMAG)
1-6 October, 2008
Goa, India

Numerical Modeling of Smooth Geomembrane – Soil Interaction

S. Kazempoor
Dept. of Civil Engineering, Power & Water University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

A. R. Mahboubi
Dept. of Civil Engineering, Power & Water University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

A. Noorzad
Dept. of Civil Engineering, Power & Water University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

Keywords: discrete element model (DEM), geomembrane, interaction, direct shear test

ABSTRACT : Geomembranes are one of the most widely used geosynthetics in various civil engineering
applications. Smooth geomembranes are frequently used in combination with different soils, and due to their low
surface roughness, are challenging to design to ensure adequate shear strength along the smooth
geomembrane-soil interface. It is important to use the appropriate values of interface shear strength parameters
in the design of slopes incorporating one or more geomembrane in contact with soils. This paper deals with study
of smooth geomembrane-soil interfaces with distinct element method (DEM). The various factors that affect the
2D
interface shear behaviour are also studied. The models were conducted using direct shear box with PFC code
that is a distinct element program. We tried to model the interface by DEM which is capable of modelling the
interface and the obtained results show a good concordance with the experiments.

1 Introduction
Geomembranes are commonly used as barriers in waste containment facilities and landfills due to various
benefits associated with their use(s) and because of regulatory requirements. Geomembranes are also
increasingly being used in reservoirs, ponds, lined canals and other geotechnical projects. Geotechnical
engineers often characterize the shearing resistance along interface between geomembranes and soils using
results from interface direct shear tests. The results of these tests are used in an analysis of stability against
sliding along the given interface. Interface shear testing between soil and geosynthetics has now become an
essential part of the design process in geotechnical and geo-environmental engineering.

In March 1988, a slope stability failure occurred at the Kettleman Hills Class 1 hazardous waste treatment and
storage landfill at Kettleman Hills, California (Byrne et al. 1992). This failure developed by sliding along the
interfaces within the composite multilayer liner system beneath the waste fill. This and other similar landfill failures
have led to research into the interface friction behaviour for various interfaces at the liner and cap of the landfill.
Many researchers have conducted research work on the interface shear behaviour of geomembranes and soils
over the last 20 years. Interface shear strength of non-textured geomembrane and soil represents a significant
portion of the research work conducted related to geosynthetics.

This paper deals with study of smooth geomembrane-soil interfaces with distinct element method (DEM). The
various factors that affect the interface shear behaviour are also studied. The models are conducted using direct
shear box with PFC code that is a distinct element program.

2 Geotechnical shear tests

The interface shear tests were conducted at the Geotechnical Engineering Laboratory of the University of
Saskatchewan using a conventional direct shear apparatus. A square base direct shear box (100 mm x 100 mm)
split horizontally at mid-height was used. The geomembrane used in this study was a 60 mil (1.5 mm thick) non-
textured, high density polyethylene (HDPE) geomembrane manufactured by GSE Inc., Houston TX, USA.

A sand bentonite mixture was used having 3 % and 6 % bentonite in combination with Ottawa sand. The grain
size distribution for these materials and direct shear test apparatus are as shown in the Figure 1.

2158
The interface shear tests were conducted at the Geotechnical Engineering Laboratory of the University of
Saskatchewan using a conventional direct shear apparatus (Clockhouse Engineering Ltd. England, Type-K12). A
square base direct shear box (100 mm x 100 mm) split horizontally at mid-height was used. The total height of
the box was 79 mm. Normal stress is applied by placing dead weights on a hanger. Vertical and horizontal
displacements are monitored using two Linear Variable Differential Transformers (LVDTs). The rate of shear
displacement can be accurately controlled between 0.32 and 48.5 mm per hour. The direct shear box is capable
of a maximum shear displacement of 14 mm. Although ASTM D5321-02 (ASTM, 2002) recommends a shear box
having base dimensions of 300 mm x 300 mm, the use of the box described above can be justified based on the
fact that only a non-textured, smooth, geomembrane was used in the present study.
Direct shear testing was carried out on the various soils used (soils only) as well as on the several
soil/geomembrane interface combinations. Each test series was performed under 4 normal stresses of 5, 12, 20
and 30 kPa. This range of normal stresses is representative of the range of normal stresses commonly
encountered in landfill cover systems, lagoon liners and other common applications.

100

90

80

70
% Passing

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0.001 0.010 0.100 1.000 10.000
Grain Size (mm)

3% bentonite-sand mixture 6% bentonite-sand mixture DEM Model

(a) (b)

Figure 1. (a) The grain size distribution of materials, (b) Direct shear test apparatus

3 Discrete modelling of direct shear test

2D
In this study, to numerical modelling of the direct shear box test, we used the PFC V 3.1 (Particle Flow Code,
ITASCA Consulting Group).

3.1 The distinct element method

The discrete method used is the Distinct Element Method (DEM) pioneered by Cundall (1971). The DEM keeps
track of the motion of individual particles and updates any contact with neighbouring elements by using a
constitutive contact law. The DEM runs according to an explicit time difference scheme. Each calculation cycle
includes two stages: the application of a simple interaction law at all particle/particle or particle/wall contacts
involving contact force and relative displacement; and the application of Newton's Second Law to determine the
particle motion resulting from any unbalanced force. The DEM program used is PFC2D.

The particles are circular, their mechanical interaction is characterized using the soft contact approach. In this
approach, although the particles are assumed to be rigid for purposes of shape definition, elastic deformation is
allowed to take place at the contacts. The constitutive contact law used in simulations consists of two parts: a
stiffness model - providing a linear elastic relation between contact force and contact relative displacement in
normal and shear directions - and a slip model - enforcing a relation of Coulomb’s type between shear and
normal contact forces. Due to the dynamic formulation of the model, energy dissipation through frictional sliding
may not be sufficient to reach a steady-state solution.

Additional dissipation can be introduced by using a local non-viscous damping force and moment in the particle
equations of motion. This damping is controlled by a constant, which recommended value for quasi static
problems will be used in the simulations presented hereafter.

The DEM is based on a granular model approach. Materials are built up by an assemblage of spherical particles,
e.g. discs, spheres, or cylinders, which interact at common contact points in accordance with simple physical
contact laws (e.g., Cundall & Strack, 1979; Mora & Place, 1998; Morgan, 1999; Burbidge & Braun, 2002). In the
case of elastic-frictional contact laws, particles deform elastically under a defined load at a contact point

2159
generating a repulsive normal force ( FN ) perpendicular to their contact plane. This normal force can be
calculated from the particle normal stiffness value ( k N ) and the magnitude of elastic deformation which is
estimated from the amount of particle overlapping (Mindlin & Deresiewicz, 1953; Cundall & Strack, 1979; Cundall
& Hart, 1989; Morgan & Boettcher, 1999). This concept applies to shear forces ( Fs ) as well. FS increases until it

exceeds the critical shear force ( FS max )

FS max = C + μ σ N (1)

This leads to frictional sliding. In this case, slip along the contact occurs and FS drops. σN defines acting normal
force, C the cohesion, and µ the coefficient of friction for each single particle. The progressive breaking of
contacts along discrete planes reproduces fracture and fault propagation (Strayer & Suppe, 2002). The critical
shear force leading to faulting is analogous to the critical shear stress that governs material strength ( τ crit )
through the Mohr-Coulomb criterion in natural systems (e.g. Morgan & Boettcher, 1999).

τ crit = C + μ σ N (2)

At the end of each time step, summation of all inter-particle contact forces ( FN ) acting on a single particle
enables the calculation of particle acceleration and thereby the new position of this particle using the Newtonian
equation of motion (Cundall & Strack, 1979).

As a consequence of the particle approach, material properties are attributed to each individual particle ( μ p )
determining particle-particle interactions (Cundall & Strack, 1979). Hence, macro-properties of a material
package, e.g. "overall" coefficient of friction of a particle assemblage ( μ ), have to be calculated from shear box
experiments (e.g. Morgan 1999). As we used cohesionless, elastic-frictional particles (C=0), the strength of the
numerical assemblage is defined primarily by the coefficient of particle friction.

3.2 Model configuration

We developed a numerical shear box in accordance with analogue experiments which was a 2D cross section to
the 3D box shear apparatus. Our model consisted of a bottom box with additional length in order to avoid the of
surcharge fall. The top box was 10cm length with 4cm height.

Approximately 8000 particles depending on the ‘sand’ composition were generated randomly within the shear box
to create a heterogeneous material layer and with Grain size distribution curve similar to laboratory test.
Afterwards this particle assemblage was compacted due to increase of radii.

Two distinct initial states are generated, one is quite dense (void ratio e = 0.20) and another one quite loose (void
ratio e = 0.27). Initial states are created by random deposition under gravity of the particles into the shear box.
The top plate on the upper half of the box applies a vertical stress s = 30 kPa. During shear, the vertical
displacement of the top plate is servo-controlled so as to keep the vertical stress s constant. The material is
sheared at a low speed (v = 0.005 mm/s) in order to maintain a quasi static state, controlled by the calculation of
the ratio of the mean unbalanced force to the mean contact force within the sample. This ratio keeps a value of
the order of 10-5 all along the test.

This model configuration enabled the calculation of large strain rates equivalent to the deformation rates that can
be reached with analogue box shear tests. In this type of simulation particle fracture was not allowed. In addition,
fluids are not taken into account. Restrictions based on these model assumptions will be discussed below.

2160
 Figure 2. Schematic description of direct shear test

4 Direct shear tests and DEM observations

The simulation results in terms of macroscopic behavior are presented for the two initial densities. Some results
are compared to the experimental ones obtained by Jogi (2005). Figure 3 shows the evolution of the ratio of the
shear stress on the horizontal split plane to the vertical stress and of the vertical displacement of the top plate of
the box during shear. The maximum shear stress achieved by the dense sample is higher than the experimental
value and, for a small displacement; this sample exhibits a stiffer behavior than the experimental one. The
increase of volume observed during shear is significant of a dilatant behaviour. The loose sample provides a
shear stress curve very similar to the experimental one and exhibits a contraction behavior. Even if a perfect
plasticity state is not strictly reached, especially in the dense case, a residual friction angle of about 23 degrees
can be estimated. In conclusion, the simulations provide macroscopic results which are representative of loose
and dense materials. Moreover, the response of the loose sample is quite close to the experimental one. Figure 3
shows the force versus ratio of horizontal displacement to shear device width for dense and loose sample.

2161
 3.0

shear stress to normal stress

loose sample
2.5 dense sample

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
horizontal displacement to shear device width (%)

(a)
0.01
0.008
0.006
dense sample
0.004
dh (mm)

loose sample
0.002
0
-0.002 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

-0.004
-0.006
u/L (cm)

(b)

Figure 3. a) Ratio of shear stress to normal stress vs. horizontal displacement to shear device width, b) vertical displacement
(volume change) vs. horizontal displacement to shear device width

2162
 3000

2500

shear force (N)

2000

1500
dense sample
1000

500

0
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10
horizontal displacement to shear device width (%)
(a)

25000

20000
shear force (N)

15000
loose sample
10000

5000

0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
horizontal displacement to shear device width (%)
(b)

Figure 4. Shear force vs. ratio of horizontal displacement to shear device width in dense sample, a) dense
sample, b) loose sample

5 Conclusions
Both experimental settings, numerical as well as analogue, supplied comparable results of coefficient of friction
for dry ‘sand’. In all dry experiments a typical strain hardening behaviour, characterized by a slight increase in the
coefficient of friction pushing towards a mean friction value, could be observed.

The work briefly presented here is a part of a numerical study, in which main objective is to better understand the
fundamental mechanisms governing the shear behaviour in granular materials. The results for direct shear
appear a strong correlation between stress and strain rotations. During shear, there is a gain of contacts of
normal direction corresponding to a compression direction, and a loose of contacts of normal direction
corresponding to an extension direction. The contact forces distribution is strongly linked to the stress tensor. Due
to interparticle friction, the contact force direction may be different of the contact normal direction. Thus, stress
and strain principal directions may be different in a frictional material.

6 References
ASTM D5321-02. 2002. Standard Test Method for Determining the Coefficient of Soil and Geosynthetic or Geosynthetic and
Geosynthetic Friction by the Direct Shear Method, American Society for Testing of Materials, West Conshohocken, PA,
USA.
Bulgern, William. G. 1982. Discrete System Simulation, Englewood Cliffe, Prentice Hall.
Cundall, P. A. 1994. Alternative User Interfaces for Programs That Model Nonlinear Systems, in Applications of Computational
Mechanics in Geotechnical Engineering, pp. 343-352. Vargas et al., Eds. Rotterdam: Balkema.
Cundall P.A. 1971. A Computer Model for Simulating Progressive, Large Scale Movements in Block Rocky Systems, Proc. Int.

2163
 Symp. On Rock Fracture, Nancy France
FHWA. 2001. Performance Test for Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil Including Effects of Preloading, FHWA-RD-01-118, McLean,
VA 22101-2296.
ICOLD 2005. Geomembrane Sealing Systems for Dams, Design principle and return of experience, Bulletin 78
Jiang. M. H.-S. 2006. Application of Discrete Element Method to Geomechanics, Department of Geotechnical Engineering
Tongji University, Shanghai, China
Jogi, M. 2005. A Method for Measuring Smooth Geomembrane/Soil Interface Shear Behaviour Under Unsaturated Conditions,
A thesis in the Department of Civil Engineering, University of Saskatchewan, SK Canada.
Lanier, J. and Calvetti. F. 1997. Evolution of Microstructure in Granular Materials, Powders and Grains 97, R.P. Behringer and
J.T. Jenkins (eds), Balkema, Rotterdam.
Love. A.E.H. 1927. A Treatise of the Mathematical Theory of Elasticity, Cambridge University Press
Masson, S. Martinez, J. 2005. Micromechanical Analysis of The Shear Behaviour of a Granular Material Using 2D Discrete
Simulations of a Direct Shear Test, Laboratoire Ma2g, INSA Rennes
Olivari. G. 1989. Contribution of Micromechanics to Modelling the Behaviour of Granular Materials Response of Schneebeli’s
Material to a Cyclic Isotropic Loading, Powders and Grains, J. Biarez and R. Gourves (eds), Balkema, Rotterdam.
PFC2D, 1999. User’s Manual, Itasca Consulting Group, Inc., Minneapolis, USA.
Shimizu. Y. Hart. R. D. and Cundall P. Eds. (2004) Numerical Modelling in Micromechanics Via Particle Methods. (Proceedings
nd
of the 2 International PFC Symposium, Kyoto, Japan
Thallak G. Sitharam. 2000. Numerical simulation of particulate materials using discrete element modelling Department of Civil
Engineering, Yamaguchi University, CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 78, NO.7

2164