Professional Documents
Culture Documents
e-mail: mcud@pg.gda.pl, web: www.pg.gda.pl/~mcud/ phone.: 58 347 2492, room: 302/Hydro, tutorial: Friday 11.15-13.00
Literature Literature
Geotechnical Engineering Handbook, Editor: Urlich Smotczyk, Ernst & Sohn, Darmstadt 2002. Helwany S.: Applied Soil Mechanics with Abaqus Applications. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., USA, 2007. Duncan J.M., Wright S.G.: Soil Strength and Slope Stability. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., USA, 2005. Material Models Manual Plaxis version 8, Balkema, The Netherlands, 2006. Derski W., Izbicki R., Kisiel I., Mrz Z.: Rock and soil mechanics , PWN, Elsevier, 1988. Terzaghi K., Peck R.B., Mesri G.: Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice, John Wiley & Sons, USA, 1996. Muir Wood D.: Geotechnical Modelling, Spon Press, Taylor & Francis Group, 2004.
Magazines:
Inynieria Morska i Geotechnika (polish) Gotechnique ASCE Geotechnical and Environmental Engineering Computers and Geotechnics Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics Canadian Geotechnical Journal Geotechnical Testing Journal Soils and Foundations Geotechnik (german)
2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Strain:
Triaxial apparatus
Oedometer
Why we concentrate on the behaviour of small samples ? Application of soil constitutive models in numerical simulations of real geotechnical problems
10
11
M=
12
1
elastic model
Yield surface
& ij =
e e &kl Dijkl
F ( ij ) = 0
Flow rule:
& F = ij &ijp
2 3
Coulomb-Mohr model the most popular elasto-plastic model implemented in geotechnical software
100
compression
80
1 [kPa]
60
t sta dro hy
ic
ax
is
40
20
extension
0
20
40
60
80
100
23 [kPa]
Coulomb-Mohr
et d ij = Dijkl d kl , et = Dijkl
E0 1 2 0 0 ij kl + ( ik jl + jk il ) 2 (1 + 0 )(1 2 0 )
Hooke
13
et ijkl
=D
es ijkl
1 2 E ( ij kl + ik jl + jk il ) = (1 + )(1 2 ) 2
Dilatancy and its influence on the soil behaviour Dilatancy is the observed tendency of a compacted or loose granular material to dilate (expand in volume) or contract (shrink in volume) respectively as it is sheared. This occurs because the soil particles in a compacted state are interlocking and therefore do not have the freedom to move around one another
14
Dilatancy and contractancy, drained triaxial test on dense and loose sand samples
volumetric strain v deviatoric stress q=1-2
at ID=0.3 at ID=0.5
15
Numerical shear box experiment shearing and volume vhanges (bonded particle model of jointed rock sample)
Direction of shearing
n = 0.65 x UCS
Microcracks from shear failure (GREEN) Microcracks from tensile failure (RED)
Rough joint shear stress vs. shear displacement vertical displacement vs. shear displacement
normal displacement (dilatancy / contractancy) maximum dilatancy angle
shear displacement
shear displacement
Possibilities of stress paths obtained with Coulomb-Mohr model for different drainage conditions
cuA cuB
A , c, E, , undrained A , c, E, , drained B u=0, cuB, E, , undrained C u=0, cuB, Eu, u=0.495, total stress analysis
B C
u=0
16
Pore water changes for undrained triaxial compression with Mohr-Coulomb model
q 1 3 1
undrained path
cq
Changes of strength and stiffness observed during deposision history deposition history normal consolidation void ratio e sedimentation
erosion
17
cu1
stress increase
cu 2
'
c2'
! Simple criterion where overconsolidation ratio is taken into account parameters: , c,cu effective friction angle, effective cohesion and undrained cohesion s - total friction angle, c consolidation stress (normal to the shearing plane)
c1'
Real undrained behaviour in triaxial compression of overconsolidated and normally consolidated clay sample
clay
clay
18
Calculations of pore water pressure Stiffness of soil grains Ks, stiffness of soil skeleton (effective) K1 and stiffness water Kw
Assumption of incompressibility of water in numerical calculations is not possible, hence stiffness of water and soil skeleton are taken parallely. stiffness of water:
u = K w v
or tensorially
w &kl & ij = K w ij kl
total stiffness :
tot e &kl & ij = ( Dijkl + K w ij kl )
19
B B A B B A 0 0
Kw K + w Kw 2G 0 0 0 0
Kw Kw Kw 0
Kw Kw Kw 0
A= E
How to estimate Kw ?
a)
K w 2 GPa
b) multiplying of the average of effective stiffness normal components so-called head (ex. 100 times) c)
u 0.5,
G=
E 2 (1 + )
Kw =
2G 1 + u 1 + 3 1 2 u 1 2
20
h 2 w t << t98 k M0
< 0.01
h=D hight of the consolidating layer or simply length of drainage path, Ev stiffness modulus to calculate short time settlement
ij = ij '+ u ij
isotropic compression:
0 P 0 = P 1 = 0 P 0 P 0 0
B=
u = f ( Sr ) P
' = P u = P BP 0
21
Skempton parameter A
steel :
soil :
& K p = & 0 q
&v 0 & 3G q
& K p = & Q2 q
&v Q1 & 3G q
dilatancy:
d=
&v &q
Skemptona parameter A
u = A 1 3 = A q
Parameters A and B (undrained behaviour)
1 u = A q + B tr ( ) 3
undrained
undrained
22
0 F=
nst G=co
c
F= - n tan - c (yield function), G= - n tan (plastic potentialfunction)
23
Alternative Alternative shear shear strength strength criteria criteria for for soils soils
Drucker-Prager shear strength criterion
standard version:
q Mc 1 cq p
1 Me
1=2=3
Mc=Me
3
Drucker, Prager (1952)
24
Drucker-Prager criterion is a q=const contour (Mc=Me) and Mohr-Coulomb criterion is a =const contour (Mc=Me) Ex. choosing M=Mc(=30o) in Drucker-Prager criterion results in very large strength for axisymmetric extension (ex. passive earth pressure) which is equivalent to the activation of =48.6o
3 3J
- 1
=0 =30 b=0.0
= 30 = b= 0 0.5
60 0 = -3 = 1.0 b=
oraz and sij = ij + p ij - dewiator naprenia stress deviator 1 p = kk 3 axisym. compression: Sciskanie trjosiowe: = 0o lub * = 30o Rozci ganie trjosiowe: = 60o lub * = 30o axisym. extension:
-3
compression extension
-2
b=
2 3 1 = 1 + 3 tan ( 30o ) 1 3 2
25
Stress invariants p, q,
3p 2/3q
1
Rendulic plane
p 2 3
r= t=
K=1.0
K=0.9
K=0.8
26
SMP =
3I 3 , SMP = I2
I1 I 2 I 3 9 I 32 SMP = I2 SMP
I1 I 2 9 I 3 9I3
I1 = kk = 1 + 2 + 3 , I 2 = I 3 = det ij = 1 2 3
1 ( ii jj ij ij ) = 2 3 + 1 3 + 1 2 , 2
I1 I 2 = const or I3
f =
I1 I 2 const = 0 I3
FM N =
FLD =
FLD = 0
FMN = 0
= 20o cm
FDP ( K = 1.0 ) = 0
FDP ( K = 0.9 ) = 0
27
2 = 3
Some differences between presented shear strength criteria for soils and rocks
1
= 20o cm = 30o cm = 20o cm
1 = 30o cm
3 = 40o cm
= 40o cm
p = 200 kPa
p = 50 kPa
p = 150 kPa
1 m = 0.5 m = 0.8
K = 0.778
= 40o cm
2 = 3
Modfied Drucker-Prager
Lade (1977)
28
Differences between responses of elasto-plastic models built with presented shear strength criteria for biaxial compression (plane strain)
CM DP
-0.01
MN
t [kPa]
v [-]
LD MN CM
-0.02
LD
-0.03
DP
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
-0.04
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.10
yy [-]
yy [-]
c=30, c=0 kPa, =5, E=10000 kPa, =0.15; initial stress is isotropic p=100 kPa; symbols: t=(1-3)/2, v=1+3
29
Homogeneous soil: c=30, c=1 kPa, c=0, Eoed=80000 kPa, =0.2 (E0=72000 kPa), =18 kN/m3
force-displacement curves
shearing
extension
yielding zones
30
Homogeneous soil: c=30, c=1 kPa, c=0, Eoed=80000 kPa, =0.2 (E0=72000 kPa), =18 kN/m3
31
*) Eoed=M0
32
wysoko n.p.m.
post-failure
pre-failure
time
33
Quick-clay landslides
*) source: geopanorama.rncan.gc.ca
*) source: geopanorama.rncan.gc.ca
34
*) http://www.montrealgazette.com
*) Trondheim, 1999
35
Landslide has occurred 29 years after retaining wall instalation Former ground profile
probable analysed
} slip line
1. Methods based on the fundamental equations of continuum theory. 2. Methods where a potential failure mechanism is assumed.
36
Methods based on the fundamental equations of continuum theory Equilibrium (Navier equations):
ij , j + f i = 0
Boundary conditions:
ij n j = ti ,
Plasticity criterion (or constitutive law):
vi = vi0
f ( ij ) 0,
Strain-displacement compatibility:
&kl =
In practice, very often complicated boundary conditions are far from those which are assumed in the analytical solutions of fundamental equations.
*) Stability of a road embankment, hight 14.0m, reinforced by geotextiles, soft soil ground piled by jet-grouting columns. At the embankment toe a water reservoir is designed with sheet-pile walls (without anchoring !!!), Poland, Motorway A4, Ruda lska, 2004.
37
In complex and important engineering cases the fundamental equations of continuum theory can be solved by numerical methods ex. By finite differences method or by finite element method.
However, the application of numerical modelling requires good knowledge of their basis as well as it requires thorough understanding of continuum mechanics and geomechanics.
38
*) deformation
*) horizontal displacement
39
*) Pylon foundation of a cable stayed bridge at the highway ring road of Wrocaw (A8), 2009.
40
a)
b)
c)
41
Methods where the potential failure mechanism is assumed. General assumptions for the methods of slices
1.
Analysed boundary problem of slope stability is two dimensional with arbitrary shape of a slip surface. However very often only cylindrical slip surfaces are assumed. Slip occurs simultaneously in all points of the assumed slip surface. In standard calculations inertial forces are neglected.
2. 3.
Failure mechanism In the initial phase of slope stability calculations by methods of slices it is very important to choose an appropriate failure mechanism. Rotational shape of failure line
circular slip line (homogeneous soils)
source: http://www.dur.ac.uk/~des0www4/cal/slopes/
42
Translational mechanism
Compound mechanism
source: http://www.dur.ac.uk/~des0www4/cal/slopes/
F
minimum
source: http://www.dur.ac.uk/~des0www4/cal/slopes/
43
source: http://www.dur.ac.uk/~des0www4/cal/slopes/
source: http://www.dur.ac.uk/~des0www4/cal/slopes/
44
Influence of the soil type for the shape of critical failure mechanism
sand clay
source: http://www.dur.ac.uk/~des0www4/cal/slopes/
source: http://www.dur.ac.uk/~des0www4/cal/slopes/
45
Short term and long term slope stability (parameters ,c and u, cu) excavation
time
u construction time
embankment
u
construction time
time + compression
r s
r s r s
Average value : slip:
p > sr av > r av sr p
source: http://www.dur.ac.uk/~des0www4/cal/slopes/
46
source: http://www.dur.ac.uk/~des0www4/cal/slopes/
47
Bishop
F=
1 W sin
(W + X ub ) tan + cb
tan tan cos 1 + F
48
Janbu method Relates to the Bishop method taking into account lateral forces E. It allows for arbitrary non-rotational slip lines.
F=
1 (W X ) tan
(W X ub ) tan + cb
cos m
tan sin F
m = cos +
= const
X = tan E
const
X = f ( x) E
49
How to take into account the pore water pressure in slope stability calculations ?
ua=ust= h w
50
ua = w h H u ,
H u = 0 1
H u = cos 2
u a = ru v ,
ru = 0 1
Active pore water pressure is estimated as a fraction of the vertical total stress v component at the bottom level of analysed slice.
51
-c reduction method
F-c
Strength parameters (tan, c) are reduced in the incremental process up to the loss of static equilibium in the analysed boundary problem. This numerical method falls to the methods based on the fundamental equations of continuum theory.
52