ABAQUS UMAT Crystal Plasticity
finite element method implementation

© All Rights Reserved

248 views

ABAQUS UMAT Crystal Plasticity
finite element method implementation

© All Rights Reserved

- UMAT Construct 2 Emotional_Des
- User Subroutines Summary
- 1-UMAT @ABAQUS-User Subroutine Instruction (Reference Manual)
- Umat Guide
- Abaqus Training Material2
- ABAQUS for Geotechnical Engineers
- Abaqus-umat Program Example
- ABAQUS User Subroutine
- Parametric Study on Reinforced Concrete Beam Using ANSYS
- 24 Stress Concentration
- UMAT
- MedEntry UMAT Practice Exam Questions With Worked Solutions
- Case Studies Plastic Analysis
- FEA 2 Marks
- The UMAT
- UMAT
- ABAQUS User Subroutines Overview[1]
- Umat Resources
- FORTRAN77 Subroutine for matrix inversion
- umat practice test 2.pdf

You are on page 1of 23

www.emeraldinsight.com/0264-4401.htm

EC

30,1

74

Received 9 September 2011

Revised 6 February 2012

9 February 2012

Accepted 15 February 2012

Implementation of an

elasto-plastic constitutive model

for cement stabilized clay in a

non-linear finite element analysis

N.N.S. Yapage and D.S. Liyanapathirana

School of Engineering, University of Western Sydney, Penrith, Australia

Abstract

Purpose Several constitutive models are available in the literature to describe the mechanical

behaviour of cement stabilized soils. However, difficulties in implementing such models within

commercial finite element programs have hindered their application to solve related boundary value

problems. Therefore, the aim of this study is to implement a constitutive model, which has the

capability to simulate cement stabilized soil behaviour, into the finite element program ABAQUS

through the user material subroutine UMAT.

Design/methodology/approach After a detailed review of existing constitutive models for

cement stabilized soils, a model based on the elasto-plastic theory and the extended critical state

concept with an associated flow rule is selected for the finite element implementation. A semi-implicit

integration method (cutting plane algorithm) with a continuum elasto-plastic modulus and path

dependent stress prediction strategy has been used in the implementation. The performance of the new

finite element formulation of the constitutive model is verified by simulating triaxial test data using

the finite element program with the new implementation and predictions from constitutive equations

as well as experimental data.

Findings The paper provides the implementation procedure of the constitutive model into

ABAQUS but this method is useful for the implementation of any other constitutive model into

ABAQUS or any other finite element program. Simulated results for the volumetric deformation of

cement stabilized soils show that the cement stabilized soils do not obey the associated flow rule at

high confining pressures. The parametric study shows that the influence of cementation increases the

brittle nature and the bearing capacity of treated clay. In addition the results show that proposed finite

element implementation has the ability to illustrate key features of the cement stabilized clay.

Originality/value This paper presents an implementation of an elasto-plastic constitutive model,

based on the extended critical state concept, for cement stabilized soils into a finite element

programme, which has been identified as an important and challenging topic in computational

geomechanics. This implementation is useful in solving boundary value problems in geomechanics

involving cement stabilized soils, incorporating key characteristics of these soils.

Keywords Cement stabilized soils, Constitutive modelling, Finite element method,

Cutting plane algorithm, Triaxial tests, Modelling, Soils

Paper type Research paper

Engineering Computations:

International Journal for

Computer-Aided Engineering and

Software

Vol. 30 No. 1, 2013

pp. 74-96

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited

0264-4401

DOI 10.1108/02644401311286017

1. Introduction

Soft ground improvement using cement stabilization has been widely used in coastal

and low lying regions since 1970s. Although there is a wide range of ground

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support for this research provided by the

Australian Research Council and Coffey Geotechnics Pty Ltd under the Linkage project

LP0990581.

solution for soft ground related problems due to advantages such as:

.

cost-effectiveness;

.

better stiffness, strength and deformation properties of the treated ground than

the surrounding soil; and

.

suitability for fast-track construction.

When soils are mixed with cement, soil behaviour is totally different to natural or

reconstituted states as soil and cement form a new material. Then these soils are called

artificially structured soils. Therefore, classical constitutive models such as Modified

Cam Clay are inadequate to predict the behaviour of this new material. Hence new

constitutive models are required to model the induced soil-cement structure.

Constitutive models describe the mechanical behaviour of engineering materials

in the form of a relationship between stresses and strains. Constitutive models are

essential for all numerical calculations of routine boundary value problems in

geotechnical engineering. Basically constitutive models consist of a number of

mathematical equations and controlling parameters depending on the complexity of

the model and the ability of the model in describing the different facets of the soil

behaviour. Majority of the models are developed considering the behaviour of naturally

structured soils (Baudet and Stallebrass, 2004; Kavvadas and Amorosi, 2000; Rouainia

and Muir Wood, 2000; Taiebat et al., 2009; Wheeler et al., 2003). In artificially cemented

soils, size of the yield surface is predominantly related to the bond strength between

soil particles in addition to the void ratio. Hence cement stabilized soils possess a

tensile strength. Recently few constitutive models have been developed especially for

artificially cemented soils (Lee et al., 2004; Horpibulsuk et al., 2010; Kasama et al., 2000;

Suebsuk et al., 2010; Vatsala et al., 2001) within the framework of Modified Cam Clay

model. Accuracy and efficiency of these models are mostly verified simulating the

behaviour of a single gauss integration point of a soil element within the context of the

finite element method. Their implementation into finite element programs and then

application to boundary value problems are rather limited.

Numerical modelling using the finite element method has been carried out by many

researchers to study the behaviour of cement stabilized soft ground in the form of

deep cement mixed (DCM) columns in different geotechnical applications such as

embankments for railways and roads (Filz, 2007; Han and Gabr, 2002; Huang et al.,

2006), bearing capacity and settlement of treated soil (Dong et al., 2004) and seismic

mitigation applications (Namikawa et al., 2007). To model the cement stabilized soil,

Mohr-Coulomb model (Filz, 2007; Huang et al., 2006; Dong et al., 2004) and

Drucker-Prager model (Han and Gabr, 2002) have been used. However, neither

Mohr-Coulomb model nor Drucker-Prager model has the ability to describe the key

characteristics such as the strain softening behaviour of cement stabilized soil and may

lead to unsafe and uneconomical designs. The main reason for using these simple

models to simulate the cement stabilized soil behaviour is the lack of availability of

advanced soil models suitable for the simulation of cement treated soil in many

commercially available finite element programs.

When implementing new constitutive models into finite element programs,

algorithms are used to numerically integrate the rate constitutive equations and

then update the stress state. Existing approaches can be mainly classified as explicit

An elasto-plastic

constitutive

model

75

EC

30,1

76

integration methods and implicit integration methods. Explicit schemes are simple and

the implementation is straightforward. However, the calculated stresses may not

satisfy the yield criterion automatically. When stress state changes from elastic to

plastic, intersection of the stress state with the yield surface should be computed.

Accuracy of these schemes can be improved by introducing error control and

sub-stepping in the finite element formulation (Sloan, 1987, 2001).

Conversely, the finite element formulation of the implicit scheme is complicated.

The derivation of the consistent tangent modulus involves solution of a system of

equations but the advantage is the resulting stresses will automatically satisfy the

yield criterion to a specified tolerance (Sloan et al., 2001). However, the major

drawbacks of the implicit scheme when used for advanced constitutive models are:

.

there is a possibility for divergence; and

.

the difficulty of deriving the consistent tangent modulus.

To overcome these complexities of the implicit schemes, Oritz and Popov (1985) and

Simo and Taylor (1986) have introduced a semi-implicit return mapping approach

called the cutting plane algorithm (CPA), which bypasses the calculation of consistent

tangent modulus.

The aim of the present study is to implement the constitutive model developed by

Lee et al. (2004), which has the capability to simulate cement stabilized soil behaviour,

into the finite element program ABAQUS through the user material subroutine UMAT

(ABAQUS Inc., 2010). A semi-implicit algorithm based on CPA with a continuum

tangent modulus has been used. Although the implementation presented in this paper

is focused on ABAQUS, the steps involved in the integration process are applicable to

any other finite element program.

General steps used for integrating the stress-strain relationship with an isotropic

hardening law have been discussed. The implemented material subroutine is verified

by simulating the behaviour of cement stabilized soft clay presented by Lee et al. (2004)

based on the constitutive equations and drained triaxial test data. Also the paper

presents finite element simulations carried out for drained triaxial tests for cement

stabilized Ariake clay presented by Suebsuk et al. (2010).

2. Constitutive model for cement stabilized soil

The constitutive model selected for the finite element implementation is the model

developed by Lee et al. (2004) for artificially cemented clays. The model is formulated

within the framework of the critical state theory. The concept behind this model is that the

strength of bonds between soil particles increases by adding cement. When there is no

added cement, there is no added bond strength component in the model, and hence the

model behaviour is similar to the MCC model. With the increase in plastic deviatoric strain,

soil will reach the critical state due to breakage of cementation bonds between soil particles.

This model has assumed that the failure state line of cemented clay is parallel to that

of the reconstituted clay and the intercept of the failure state line exhibits the tensile

strength due to the effects of cementation similar to Horpibulsuk et al. (2010) and

Suebsuk et al. (2010). Therefore, cement stabilized clay has an elliptical yield surface in

the p 0 2 q stress space similar to that of the reconstituted clay, where p 0 is the mean

effective stress and q is the deviatoric stress. This concept has widely been employed by

many researchers (Horpibulsuk et al., 2010; Kasama et al., 2000; Suebsuk et al., 2010;

Liu et al., 2006; Muir Wood, 1990) and graphically shown in Figure 1.

It is assumed that the plastic potential, G, and the yield loci, F, change with the

plastic strain. The model follows associated flow rule obeying normality condition.

Considering cementation effect, modified effective stress concept is employed to get the

yield function by rearranging the yield function of the MCC model, as shown below:

0

0

G F q 2 M 2cs p 0 pt p 0 pc

1

0

An elasto-plastic

constitutive

model

77

parameter, which

where pc is the size of the initial yield surface, pt is the cementation

0

takes into account the effect of bonding between soil particles. pt controls

the size of the

0

yield surface in conjunction with the plastic deviatoric strain. pt is given by the

following equation:

0

pt pt;o e 2kp 1q

where 1qp

0

Mcs is the critical stress ratio. pt;o is the initial value of the cementation

parameter.

0

According to equation (2), when plastic deviatoric strain increases, pt decreases and it

becomes zero after complete elimination of bonds due to shearing. This stress state is

equivalent to the reconstituted state of the soil. Cumulative plastic deviatoric strain

component is calculated by getting the summation of all incremental plastic deviatoric

strain terms at each step. Incremental plastic deviatoric strain is calculated by

subtracting the total elastic deviatoric strain component from the total deviatoric strain

component. Equations (3)-(5) give the total plastic deviatoric strain, total deviatoric

strain and incremental elastic deviatoric strain components, respectively:

n

X

1pq 1q 2

d1eq

3

i1

Figure 1.

Graphical representation

of the constitutive model

EC

30,1

78

p

1=2

3

2

1q

1rr 2 1zz 2 1zz 2 1uu 2 1uu 2 1rr 2 12rz

2

3

21 vk

d1eq

dqi

i

91 2 2v1 ep 0

4

5

where v is the Poissons ratio of the soil, k is the swelling index of the soil, p 0 is the mean

effective stress, dqi is the increment in deviatoric stress during the increment i, e is the

void ratio, 1rr, 1zz and 1uu are, respectively, the radial, vertical and tangential

components of the total direct strains and 1rz is the total shear strain component for an

axisymmetric situation. The number of strain increments is denoted by i and varies from

1 to n.

The bonding effect of cement stabilized clay increases the size of the yield surface

exhibiting tensile strength. Therefore, yield surface crosses the q axis and has a

negative value for p 0 in the p 0 2 q stress space, when q is zero. With the elimination of

bonds, yield surface shifts to the origin of the p 0 2 q stress space. In the model

proposed by Lee et al. (2004), it is assumed that l changes with the p 0 and the

corresponding void ratio, e.

Since the model uses associated plasticity, the vector of plastic strain increment d1 p

is in the direction of the outward normal to the yield surface. Therefore, the flow rule

can be defined as:

0

0

2

d1pv F=P t M cs 2p 0 2 pc pt

6

2q

F=q

d1pq

This model uses an isotropic hardening rule to describe the enlargement and shifting of

the yield loci and it mainly depends on the plastic volumetric strain increment as

shown below:

0

dpc

1 e 0

p d1pv

l 2 k c

This model is developed assuming that the cement stabilized soils behave in a drained

manner. This assumption is reasonable for cement stabilized soils created by the

dry mixing method, where dry cement is in situ mixed with soil. At the same time

the model has been developed assuming that the cement stabilized soils behave in

an isotropic manner. Haung and Airey (1998) and Rotta et al. (2003) showed that the

variation in mechanical properties in cement stabilized soil is fundamentally isotropic.

This model is simple and

it requires only eight model parameters

0

0

M CS ; pt;0 ; l; k; k1 P; v; eo ; pc , which can be derived using standard laboratory tests.

3. Stress integration algorithm

The updating scheme for the path dependent materials like elasto-plastic materials

requires a numerical algorithm to integrate the plastic rate constitutive equations. It is

important to mention that the accuracy of the overall non-linear finite element scheme

depends on the accuracy of the numerical algorithm adopted to formulate the state update

procedures and this is currently an active research area (Clausen et al., 2006; Simo and

Taylor, 1986, 1985; Nazem et al., 2006; Simo and Hughes, 1998; Wang and Atluri, 1994).

When the stress integration method is robust, accurate and fast, then the performance

of the finite element program significantly improves, especially with advanced

elasto-plastic constitutive models. Stability, consistency and simplicity are the other

factors which contribute to the superiority of integration schemes.

The CPA used in this study is a special return mapping algorithm developed to

bypass the calculation of second derivative of the plastic potential as it uses a

continuum tangent modulus. Thus, it makes the implementation easier when dealing

with complicated constitutive models. However, Simo and Hughes (1998) showed that

the CPA method limits its use in practical finite element implementations with

Newton-Rhapson solution strategy due to lack of consistent linearization. Nevertheless,

Huang and Griffiths (2009) showed that this can be overcome using a path dependent

strategy and with that strategy, CPA can be made more stable and efficient. Therefore,

in this study, the CPA with the continuum elasto-plastic modulus in conjunction with a

path dependent strategy is implemented.

This algorithm consists of two major steps. They are the elastic predictor and

plastic corrector steps. Next sections describe the development of the stress integration

algorithm to update the new stress state using the strain increments computed within

the main finite element program and transferred to the UMAT.

3.1 Derivation of the continuum elasto-plastic tangent modulus

In this section the derivation of continuumum tangent modulus relating incremental

strains and stresses is discussed. Since the aim is to implement this model into a finite

element program, all derivatives, strains and stresses are given in the matrix form.

The yield function, F, for the model is given by equation (1). When the material is

plastic, the stress state should be on the yield surface and hence it should satisfy the

condition, F 0. Further loading will cause plastic deformations and changes the

stress state directing outwards the yield surface. If the hardening parameter remains

unchanged, this will make F . 0. However, plastic definitions are accompanied with

increasing hardening and the yield surface expands in such a way that the yield

surface passes through the current stress state of the material. Therefore, loading and

hardening together satisfy the condition that the material remains on the yield surface.

Hence dF 0 and using the chain rule of differentiation, the incremental change of the

yield function can be written as:

F T

F

F

dF

{ds 0 } p d1vp p d1qp 0

8

0

s

1v

1q

where d1pv is the plastic volumetric strain increment, d1pq is the plastic deviatoric strain

increment and {ds 0 } is the corresponding stress increment.

This implementation is explained for an axisymmetric condition. Therefore, {ds 0 }

is given by:

8 09

d sr >

>

>

>

>

>

>

0 >

>

=

< d sz >

9

{ds 0 }

0

>

d su >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

;

: dt 0 >

rz

An elasto-plastic

constitutive

model

79

EC

30,1

80

where dsr , d sz and dsu are, respectively, the 0 radial, vertical and tangential

components of the effective stress increment and d trz is the shear stress increment.

The incremental plastic strains d1pv and d1pq are related to the plastic potential

function, G. Since the material model follows associated plasticity, G F.

Consequently, the plastic strains are given by:

F

{d1 p } l

10a

s 0

F

10b

d1pv l

p 0

F

p

d1q l

10c

q

l is the scalar multiplier, which represents the magnitude of the plastic flow.

Constitutive behaviour can be written using the incremental stress {d s 0 } and the

incremental elastic strain {d1 e } assuming only the component of the elastic strain can

generate stresses through the elastic constitutive matrix as shown below:

{d s 0 } D e {d1 e }

11

4 4 matrix given by:

De EMBED equation3

12

1 ep 0

k

31 2 2v

m

K

21 v

K

13

14

For the case of a small strain increment, the total strain increment {d1} consists of

elastic, {d1 e} and plastic, {d1 p} strain increments. Hence {d1 e} can be written as:

{d1 e } {d1} 2 {d1 p }

15

(10a)-(10c), (11) and (15):

F

0

e

p

e

{ds } D {d1} 2 {d1 } D {d1} 2 l

16

s 0

Using equations (8), (10), (11), (15) and (16) following equation for l can be derived:

{F=s 0 }T D e {d1}

{F=s 0 }T D e {F=s 0 } 2 F=1pv F=p 0 2 F=1pq F=q

17

Finally the continuum tangent modulus relating incremental stresses and strains is

given by:

h

{ds 0 } D e 2 D e {F=s 0 } 0 {F=s 0 }D e ={F=s 0 } 0 TD e {F=s 0 }

i

2 F= 1pv F=p 0 2 F= 1pq F=q {d1}

18

Equation (18) is the elasto-plastic constitutive equation in the form of

{d s 0 } D ep {d1}, where [D ep] is the continuum elasto-plastic tangent stiffness

matrix (continuum Jacobian).

When deriving the tangent stiffness matrix, the stress gradients of the yield

function are calculated as follows:

9

8

F p 0 F q >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

p 0 sr0 q sr0 >

>

>

>

>

>

>

> F p 0 F q >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> 0

0

0 >

>

=

<

s

z

z

F

19

0

F p

F q >

>

s 0

>

>

>

>

0

0

>

>

>

p 0 s u q su >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

F q

>

>

>

>

>

>

;

:

q trz

where, for an axisymmetric problem, p 0 and q are given by:

0

0

0

sr s z s u

0

p

3

1=2

0

2 0

1

0

0 2

0

0 2

2

q p

sr 2 sz sz 2 su su 2 sr 6trz

2

20

21

Derivatives of the yield function with respect to p 0 and q are given below:

h

i

F

0

0

2

0

M

2p

p

2

p

t

c

cs

p 0

22

F

2q

q

23

p 0

p 0 p 0 1

0

sr0 su sz0 3

0

24

0

q

2 s 2 sz 2 su

q

2s 2 sr 2 sz

q

2 sz 2 su 2 sr

;

;

r

u

0

sr0

2q

sz0

2q

2q

su

25

An elasto-plastic

constitutive

model

81

EC

30,1

82

8

0

0

0

M 2cs

>

>

> 2sr 2 sz 2 su 3

>

>

2

>

>

< 2s 0 2 s 0 2 s 0 M cs

F

u

r

z

3

>

0

0

0

s 0

M2

>

>

2sz 2 su 2 sr 3cs

>

>

>

>

:

6trz

9

0

0

2p 0 pt 2 pc >

>

>

>

>

>

0

0

0 >

2p pt 2 pc =

0

0

0 >

>

2p pt 2 pc >

>

>

>

>

;

26

A change in the yield surface updates d1pv and d1pq . Hence, F=1pv and F=1pq in the

continuum tangent modulus can be evaluated using the chain rule as shown below:

0

F

F pc

0

p

1v pc 1pv

0

27

p

F

1 e 0

0

2

0

c

pc

2M

p

0

t ;

cs

pc

1pv l 2 k

0

28

F

F p t

0

p

1q pt 1pq

0

29

p

F

0

2

0

0

p

t

0 M cs p 2 pc ;

p 2kp p t;o exp 2kp 1q

pt

1q

0

30

In this algorithm, the calculation of plastic strain increment and the occurrence of

convergence at the time tn 1 are completed at the end of the step and therefore the

integration scheme can be described as below.

At the beginning of each stress update step (n 1), the total strain increment

0

{d1n1 } as well as total strain {1n}, total plastic strain {1pn }, total effective stress {sn }

and state variables (void ratio, e and preconsoildation pressure, p 0c ) saved at the end of

previous stress update, n, are given as input parameters. In the elastic predictor step,

assuming total strain increment is completely elastic, a trial stress state is calculated as

shown below:

n 0 o n 0o

trial

n1

31

sn D e {d1n1 }

Then0 the yield condition is checked. If the yield function meets the condition

trial

# 0, then the trial stress0 state is inside the yield surface and the material

Fsn1

trial

behaviour is elastic. Therefore, sn1

is the actual stress state. Otherwise the stress

state is outside the yield surface and hence the stress state is plastic. Then the plastic

corrector step is employed. The Newton-Raphson method is used to iteratively return

the trial stress state to the updated yield surface by correcting the plastic strain

increment using the plasticity parameter l The derivation of plasticity parameter is

described in Section 3.2.

In the CPA algorithm, the yield function is linearized around the current stress state,

k

{sn1

}. Hence, the yield function at the iteration k 1 and k are related as shown

below:

k1
k
F

F

sn1 2 sn1 p d1pv p d1pq

F k1 F k akn1

1v

1q

An elasto-plastic

constitutive

model

83

32

parameter can be written shown below:

lk

n1 n

ak

n1

oT

F k

33

n

o

p

0 2 F=1p F=q

D e ak

F=

F=

p

2

v

q

n1

corrector

} is calculated as:

The plastic corrector, {sn1

n 0

o

F

corrector

sn1

ln1 D e {an1 }; {a}

s 0

Therefore, the corrected stress state is calculated as:

n 0 o n 0 o

trial

sn1 sn1

2 ln1 D e {an1 }

34

35

Initialization and elastic predictor step: initialize the input parameters at the

beginning of the iteration loop (k is the iteration number), and calculate the trial stress:

n

o

p

k 0 : 1p0

l0

36a

n1 1n ;

n1 0

(a) Hardening

(b) Softening

Figure 2.

Graphical interpretation

of semi-implicit

algorithm (CPA)

n 0 o

n

o

0

d sn1

D e {d1n1 } 2 d1p0

n1

n 0 o n 0o n 0 o

0

0

sn1

sn dsn1

EC

30,1

36b

36c

84

n

o

F k F sk

n1

37

Plastic corrector step: compute the plastic corrector (plasticity parameter), lk

n1

given in equation (33).

Obtain the stress correction:

n

o

k

{ds k } 2ln1

D e ak

38

n1

Update the plastic and elastic strains as well as the stress state:

n

o n

o

n

o

pk1

pk

} 1pk

1pk

1n1

n1 {d1

n1 ln1 {an1 }

n

o n

o

n

o

ek1

pk

1n1

} 1ek

1ek

n1 {d1

n1 ln1 {an1 }

n 0

o n

o

0

k1

k

sn1

}

sk

n1 2 {d s

39a

39b

39c

k k 1, go to equation (37).

This iteration loop continues until the convergence is achieved.

3.3 Development of subroutine, UMAT

The numerical procedure described in the previous section can be used to implement

any constitutive model into a finite element program. In this paper, the numerical

procedure has been used to implement a constitutive model for cement stabilized soils

(Lee et al., 2004) and incorporated into the finite element software, ABAQUS/Standard

through the user material subroutine (UMAT). Implementation of the material model,

stress updates and tangential modulus computation (material Jacobian matrix) are

carried out within the UMAT subroutine.

UMAT performs two main functions necessary for an analysis:

(1) Computes incremental stresses based on the strain increments passed into

UMAT from the main program.

(2) Computes the updated tangential stiffness modulus based on the constitutive

model used for the material modelling, for the global Newton-Raphson iteration

employed by main program to solve non-linear problems.

The total stress, strain and the user-defined solution-dependent state variables

(STATEV) from the last converged equilibrium state and the total strain increment for

the current step, total analysis time, time increment and other predefined field

variables are passed into the UMAT subroutine. From the equilibrium state at time tn,

based on the applied incremental

ABAQUS computes the total strain increment d1total

n

loading at the time increment Dtn to find the updated stress state according to the

constitutive law used for the material behaviour. After that the convergence is checked

using the updated stresses and this procedure is performed iteratively until the

convergence is reached. The maximum number of iterations and convergence tolerance

used in the subroutine are 50 and 102 3, respectively.

Within the UMAT subroutine, increments of total stress, plastic strain, state

variables and tangential stiffness matrix, which is called the material Jacobian matrix

(DDSDDE), are computed. The steps involved within the ABAQUS user defined

material subroutine, UMAT, from time tn to tn 1 can be illustrated using the flow chart

shown in Figure 3.

An elasto-plastic

constitutive

model

85

at t = tn

Total strain total

n

Total stress total

n

Total strain increment dtotal

n

Time increment tn

Call UMAT

Specify new t in UMAT

Obtain stress increments dn

p

Update plastic strain n+1

total

Update total stress n+1 using semi

implicit integration method

Convergence

No

Yes

Calculate the material tangent modulus

total

total

total

n+1 = n + dn

Compute the global stiffness matrix

Generates new strain increment

dtotal

n+1 at tn+1

Figure 3.

Flow chart for the UMAT

in ABAQUS/Standard

EC

30,1

After the solution is converged to 0the correct stress state, the degree of cementation, pt ,

and the size of the yield surface, pc , are updated at the end of each time increment using

equations (2) and (40) (Borja and Lee, 1990), respectively:

1 en1

0

0

40

d1pv;n1

pcn1 pcn exp

ln1 2 k

86

Then the continuum Jacobian is calculated using equation (18). The Jacobian should be

accurate to achieve the fast convergence and the accuracy of the overall solution as the

main finite element program needs this constitutive matrix to compute the global

tangent stiffness matrix, which is used to estimate the strain increment for the next step.

Performance of the UMAT and the constitutive model are investigated in the

following sections using the drained triaxial test data reported by Lee et al. (2004) and

Suebsuk et al. (2010).

4. Verification of the formulation

The performance of the new finite element formulation of the constitutive model is

verified using an Excel spreadsheet program developed by the authors to compute the

stress paths and variation of volumetric strain with the axial strain at a single Gauss

integration point. This is the only possible method we can use to verify the formulation

because results given by Lee et al. (2004) are incorrect due to some errors in the equations

(derivatives) in Formulation of the Constitutive Model section of their paper.

Due to the symmetry of the triaxial specimen, finite element mesh is developed only

for a quarter of the cylindrical specimen of 5 cm in diameter and 10 cm in height. The

element type used for this analysis is an eight-node axisymmetric continuum element

and reduced integration (four Gauss integration points). Table I shows the material

properties used for the finite element analysis carried out using ABAQUS/Standard.

Figure 4 shows the variation of deviatoric stress with axial strain and Figure 5 shows

the variation of volumetric strain with the axial strain for a triaxial test with confining

pressures of 20 and 160 kPa obtained from the finite element analysis and the Excel

spreadsheet program based on the constitutive equations for a single Gauss integration

point. Finite element simulation results overlap with the Excel spreadsheet results

calculated for a single Gauss point. These results confirm that the numerical

implementation presented in the paper is in agreement with the cement stabilized soil

behaviour described by the constitutive model.

5. Effect of confining pressure on the cement stabilized soil behaviour

Drained triaxial tests are simulated using the constitutive model implemented in

ABAQUS/Standard by varying the confining pressure from 50 to 400 kPa. The model

parameters used for this simulation are given in Table II.

Figure 6 shows the variation of deviatoric stress with axial strain when the

confining pressure increases. According to this figure, the deviatoric stress developed

Table I.

Model parameters for the

drained triaxial test

v

0.25

k

0.003

MCS

kp

p 0t (kPa)

Confining pressure (kPa)

1.9

10, 45

250

20, 160

1,200

Simulation-160 kPa

1,000

Simulation-20 kPa

800

Experimental-160 kPa

600

Experimental-20 kPa

An elasto-plastic

constitutive

model

87

400

200

0

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.2

0.25

Figure 4.

Variation of deviator

stress with axial strain

0.01

0.005

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0

Simulation-160 kPa

0.005

Simulation-20 kPa

0.01

Experimental-160 kPa

0.015

Experimental-20 kPa

0.02

0.025

Single Gauss-20 kPa

0.03

v

0.25

k

0.01

MCS

kp

p 0t (kPa)

Confining pressure (kPa)

1.4

200

within the soil sample increases with the increasing confining pressure. However, the

rate of destructuring decreases with the increasing confining pressure. Therefore, the

cement stabilized soil shows highly brittle behaviour under low confining pressures

and the ductile behaviour under high confining pressures. Furthermore, at higher

confining pressures, the soil can undergo large strains before failure.

Figure 5.

Variation of volumetric

strain with axial strain

Table II.

Model parameters used to

investigate the effect of

confining pressure

EC

30,1

1,000

88

Figure 6.

Effect of confining

pressure on deviatoric

stress

Confining Pressure

50 kPa

100 kPa

200 kPa

400 kPa

800

600

400

200

0

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

Axial strain (ea)

0.2

0.25

Figure 7 shows the variation of volumetric strain with axial strain when the confining

pressure is increasing. This figure shows that the soil samples subjected to low

confining pressures behave more dilatantly than the samples subjected to high

confining pressures. This is due to the higher bonding degradation at low confining

pressures and lower bonding degradation of samples at higher confining pressures.

Furthermore, the volume change characteristics during drained shear are largely

influenced by the confining pressure. These results explain that the cement stabilized

soil behaviour is similar to the behaviour of highly overconsolidated clays or soft rocks.

6. Cement stabilized soil vs same soil at the reconstituted state

In order to investigate the influence of additional structure due to cementation

bonds

0

on the soil behaviour, another set of simulations were performed using pt 0, which

depicts the reconstituted state of the cement stabilized soil (i.e. when the cementation

bonds are completely removed from the cement stabilized soil). The model parameters

used for this study are given in Table III. According to Figure 8(a), after breaking all

Figure 7.

Effect of confining

pressure on volumetric

behaviour

Table III.

Model parameters used

for cemented and

remoulded clay

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.01

Confining Pressure

50 kPa

100 kPa

200 kPa

400 kPa

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

v

0.25

k

0.01

MCS

kp

p 0t (kPa)

Confining pressure (kPa)

1.85

50

0, 200

100

An elasto-plastic

constitutive

model

700

600

500

400

Cement treated

clay

300

89

Uncemented

clay, OCR = 1

200

100

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

Axial strain (ea)

0.2

0.25

0.2

0.25

(a)

0.005

0.01

0.05

0.1

0.15

Cement treated

clay

Uncemented

clay, OCR = 1

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

(b)

Notes: (a) Deviatoric stress vs axial strain; (b) volumetric strain vs axial strain

cementation bonds, cemented sample reaches a state, which is exactly similar to the

failure state of the reconstituted soil. However, the cement stabilized soil can sustain

higher loads than the reconstituted soil. Figure 8(b) shows the higher peak values for

the volumetric deformation than that of the reconstituted clay because the cement

stabilized soil contains larger void ratio within the same volume compared to the same

soil at the reconstituted state. After breakage of bonds created by the added cement,

additional void ratio sustained by the cement stabilized soil diminishes. Hence only the

cement stabilized sample shows dilatancy behaviour.

7. Simulation of the experimentally observed behaviour of cement

stabilized clay

In this section, the experimentally observed behaviour of cement stabilized soil is

simulated using the finite element formulation presented in Section 3 to investigate the

Figure 8.

Comparison of model

simulations for cement

treated and untreated clay

EC

30,1

90

applicability of the constitutive model as well as the numerical implementation for the

simulation of cement stabilized soil behaviour. The experimental results given by

Lee et al. (2004), Horpibulsuk et al. (2010) and Suebsuk et al. (2010) for drained triaxial

tests carried out for cement stabilized soils are used in this section.

Figures 4 and 5 show the drained triaxial test data given by Lee et al. (2004). The soil

type used to prepare the cement stabilized soil or the cement content used to prepare the

soil samples are not given in their paper. These figures clearly show the capability of the

finite element implementation as well as the constitutive model in describing the key

characteristics of the cement stabilized soil. It is clear that after the deviatoric stress

reaches the peak value, it starts to decrease due to the crushing of the soil-cement

structure. After that soil reaches a residual value at the critical state condition

while the axial strain further increases. This is because the cement stabilized soil reaches

the reconstituted state due to the complete elimination of its structure. Figure 5 shows

the dilation behaviour of the cement stabilized soil after the peak volumetric strain.

Another simulation was carried out to simulate the behaviour of Ariake clay with

cement content of 9 per cent given by Suebsuk et al. (2010). The cement content Aw is

defined as the ratio of cement to clay based on the dry mass. In the constitutive model,

l is not a constant. It varies with the mean effective stress and the void ratio. Isotropic

consolidation curves in the e 2 ln p0 space for different soils are different. The

constitutive model uses a third-order polynomial equation to get the void ratio at

different mean effective stresses as shown in Figure 9. Therefore, equation (41) is

derived to fit the experimental data given by Horpibulsuk et al. (2004) for Ariake clay

with cement content of 9 per cent:

0

41

l0

de

de

0 p0 24 1026 p0 2 27 10211 p02 p0

0

dln p dp

42

where p0 is in kPa and the equation (41) is derived using p0 in the range of 0-1430 kPa.

Comparisons of simulated model results with experimental data for Ariake clay

with Aw 9 per cent are shown in Figures 10(a) and (b). According to Figure 10(a),

4.5

Void ratio, e

Regression line

Figure 9.

Regression method for the

variable l 0 for isotropic

compression behaviour of

the cemented Ariake with

Aw 9 per cent

Aw = 9%

3.5

Aw = 0%

3

2.5

2

1.5

100

1,000

10

Mean effective stress, p' (kPa)

10,000

900

An elasto-plastic

constitutive

model

Confining Pressure

800

50 kPa

700

100 kPa

600

200 kPa

500

Simulations

91

400

300

200

100

0

0

10

15

20

Deviatoric strain, ed (%)

25

30

25

30

(a)

10

15

20

0

Confining Pressure

50 kPa

100 kPa

6

200 kPa

Simulations

10

12

14

16

18

(b)

strain vs axial strain

Source: Experimental data by Suebsuk et al. (2010)

simulations have given the same peak deviatoric stresses as in the experimental results

for the range of confining pressures considered for the analysis. For high confining

pressures, the experimental results show high strain softening behaviour but the

simulations do not show any softening. At low confining pressures, model simulations

agree well with the experimental results demonstrating the softening behaviour of the

Figure 10.

Comparison of simulated

model results

with experimental

data for Ariake clay with

Aw 9 per cent

EC

30,1

92

cement stabilized soil. Although the experimental results given by Suebsuk et al. (2010)

show strain softening at high confining pressures, the experimental results given by

Lee et al. (2004) does not show softening at high confining pressures. The contradictory

experimental results given by Suebsuk et al. (2010) and Lee et al. (2004) needs to be

further investigated by carrying out drained triaxial tests for clay soils with different

percentages of added cement by varying the confining pressures applied to the soil

samples.

According to Figure 10(b), model simulations successfully describe the dilation

behaviour of cement stabilized Ariake clay. However, some discrepancy in volumetric

deformation can be seen especially at high confining pressures. This deviation

inherently comes from the MCC model as all models belonging to MCC family follow

the associated flow rule and according to Lee et al. (2004), volumetric strain at high

confining pressure does not exactly follow the associated flow rule. However,

Suebsuk et al., 2010 has stated that this is because of the influence of anisotropy. This

has become a controversial point and needs further development of constitutive models

for cement stabilized soils with non-associated flow rules, taking into account the

influence of anisotropy on the volumetric behaviour.

In order to understand the effect of cementation on the maximum shear stress,

another simulation was carried out changing the cement content of Ariake clay. The

relationships between void ratio and mean effective stress of the cement mixed Ariake

clay at different cement contents are shown in Figure 11 and the model parameters for

Ariake clay with different cement contents are given in Table IV.

The following equations describe the isotropic consolidation regression lines for

cement stabilized Ariake clay with cement contents of 6 and 18 per cent, respectively:

4.5

Void ratio, e

Aw = 0%

2.5

Aw = 6%

Figure 11.

Isotropic compression

behaviour of Ariake clay

with different cement

contents

Table IV.

Model parameters for

cemented Ariake clay

with different cement

contents

3.5

1.5

Aw = 18%

10

100

1,000

Mean effective stress, p' (kPa)

10,000

Aw

6%

9%

18%

v

0.25

0.25

0.25

k

MCS

Kp

p 0t (kPa)

Confining pressure (kPa)

0.06

0.024

0.001

1.6

1.45

1.35

30

30, 45, 50

30

50

100

650

50

50, 100, 200

50

43

44

where p0 is in kPa and for equation (43), p0 varies from 0 to 760 kPa and for equation (44),

p0 varies from 0 to1500 kPa.

For the Ariake clay with cement content of 9 per cent, regression line is shown in

Figure 9 and the relationship between the void ratio and the mean effective stress is

given by equation (41).

0

The parameter describing the bond strength, pt , increases with the increasing

cement content. Figures 12(a) and (b) show the variation of deviatoric stress and

volumetric strain with deviatoric strain. According to Figure 12, with increasing

cement content, an increase in the peak deviator stress as well as dilation behaviour are

predicted for the same confining pressure. However, according to Figure 11, the

additional void ratio sustained by the clay-cementation structure of the Ariake clay

with cement content of 18 per cent is much lower than that of 9 per cent cement content.

Therefore, it can be seen from Figure 12(b) that the maximum volumetric strain for

Aw 18 per cent is lower than that of Aw 9 per cent.

With the increasing degree of cementation, the compression index should increase

due to the sudden breakdown of clay-cementation structure (Horpibulsuk et al.,

2004a, b; Lorenzo and Bergado, 2004). Nevertheless, the experimental curve of cement

content of 18 per cent shown in Figure 11 shows some discrepancy based on

this concept. However, this parametric study shows that with the increasing cement

content, maximum shear stress that can be applied to the clay sample before failure

increases. Furthermore, at low cement percentages, post-peak stress decreases

gradually with strain showing ductile behaviour. Conversely, post-peak stress

suddenly drops with increasing strain, demonstrating the brittle nature of treated clay

at higher cement percentages.

8. Conclusions

This paper presented a finite element implementation based on the CPA for the

constitutive model developed by Lee et al. (2004) for cement stabilized clays. Variation

of volumetric strain and deviatoric stress with the axial strain predicted by the finite

element implementation agrees well with the model predictions simulated for a single

Gauss integration point using constitutive equations.

Some discrepancy in volumetric deformation simulated by the model and the

experimental data could be seen, especially at high confining pressures, due to the fact

that the cement stabilized soils do not obey the associated flow rule under high

confining pressures as assumed in the model development and the model does not take

into account the anisotropy of the cemented clay. The parametric study showed that

the influence of cementation increases the brittle nature and the bearing capacity of

treated clay.

The applicability of the model to predict behaviour of the cement stabilized soils

are investigated by simulating drained triaxial test data published by Lee et al. (2004)

and Suebsuk et al. (2010). Although deviatoric stress vs axial strain agrees well

with the data provided by Lee et al. (2004), at high confining pressures, deviatoric

stress vs axial strain deviates from the data for Ariake clay presented

An elasto-plastic

constitutive

model

93

EC

30,1

Deviatoric stress, q (kPa)

94

1,400

1,200

Aw = 6%

1,000

Aw = 9%

800

Aw = 18%

600

400

200

0

10

15

20

25

30

25

30

(a)

Deviatoric strain, ed (%)

Figure 12.

Simulated consolidated

drained test results

of cemented Ariake

clay under confining

pressure, 50 kPa

with cement contents

of Aw 6-18 per cent

10

15

20

Aw = 6%

Aw = 9%

Aw = 18%

4

5

6

7

8

9

(b)

deviatoric strain

by Suebsuk et al. (2010). It was observed that the experimental data provided by

Lee et al. (2004) and Suebsuk et al. (2010) also contradict each other at high confining

pressures. Hence this needs to be further investigated using experimental data.

Finally, the results presented in the paper showed that the proposed finite element

implementation has the ability to illustrate key features of the cement treated clay such

as softening with destructuring and the dilation behaviour after the peak stress state.

Therefore, this numerical implementation is a valuable tool for geotechnical engineers

to solve boundary value problems related to the structures founded on ground

improved with dry soil mixing.

References

ABAQUS Inc. (2010), ABAQUS Version 6.10 Users Manual, ABAQUS Inc., Providence.

Baudet, B. and Stallebrass, S. (2004), A constitutive model for structured clays, Geotechnique,

Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 269-78.

Borja, R.I. and Lee, S.R. (1990), Cam-Clay plasticity, part I: implicit integration of elasto-plastic

constitutive relations, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engieering, Vol. 78,

pp. 49-72.

Clausen, J., Damkilde, L. and Anderson, L. (2006), Effcient return algorithms for associated

plasticity with multiple yield planes, International Journal for Numerical Methods in

Engineering, Vol. 66 No. 6, pp. 1036-59.

Dong, P., Qin, R. and Chen, Z. (2004), Bearing capacity and settlement of concrete cored DCM

pile in soft ground, Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 105-19.

Filz, G.M. (2007), Load Transfer, Settlement, and Stability of Embankments Founded on Columns

Installed by Deep Mixing Method, National Technical University of Athens School of Civil

Engineering Geotechnical Department Foundation Engineering Laboratory, Athens.

Han, J. and Gabr, M. (2002), Numerical analysis of geosynthetic-reinforced and pile-supported

earth platforms over soft soil, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,

ASCE, Vol. 128 No. 1, pp. 44-53.

Haung, J.T. and Airey, D.W. (1998), Properties of an artificially cemented carbonate sand, Journal

of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 124 No. 6, pp. 492-9.

Horpibulsuk, S., Bergado, D.T. and Lorenzo, G.A. (2004a), Compressibility of cement admixed

clays at high water content, Geotechnique, Vol. 54 No. 2, pp. 151-4.

Horpibulsuk, S., Miura, N. and Bergado, D.T. (2004b), Undrained shear behaviour of cement

admixed clay at high water content, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental

Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 130 No. 10, pp. 1096-105.

Horpibulsuk, S., Liu, M., Liyanapathirana, D. and Suebsuk, J. (2010), Behaviour of cemented clay

simulated via the theoretical framework of structured Cam Clay model, Computers and

Geotechnique, Vol. 37 Nos 1/2, pp. 1-9.

Huang, J. and Griffiths, D. (2009), Return mapping algorithms and stress predictors for failure

analysis in Geomechanics, Journal of Engineering Mechanics, Vol. 135 No. 4, pp. 276-84.

Huang, J., Han, J. and Porbaha, A. (2006), Two and three-dimensional modelling of DM columns under

embankments, in DeGroot, D.J., DeJong, J.T., Frost, J.D. and Baise, L.G. (Eds), GeoCongress

2006: Geotechnical Engineering in the Information Technology Age, ASCE, Atlanta, GA.

Kasama, K., Ochiai, H. and Yasufuku, N. (2000), On the stress-strain behaviour of lightly

cemented clay based on an extended critical state concept, Soils and Foundations, Vol. 40

No. 5, pp. 37-47.

Kavvadas, M. and Amorosi, A. (2000), A constitutive model for structured soils, Geotechnique,

Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 263-73.

Lee, K., Chan, D. and Lam, K. (2004), Constitutive model for cement treated clay in a critical state

framework, Soils and Foundations, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 69-77.

Liu, M.D., Carter, J.P., Horpibulsuk, S. and Liyanapathirana, D.S. (2006), Modelling the

behaviour of cemented clay, Proceedings of Sessions of GeoShanghai 2006: Ground

Modification and Seismic Mitigation. ASCE (GSP 152), pp. 65-72.

Lorenzo, G.A. and Bergado, D.T. (2004), Fundamental parameters of cement-admixed clay: new

approach, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 130

No. 10, pp. 1042-50.

An elasto-plastic

constitutive

model

95

EC

30,1

96

Muir Wood, D. (1990), Soil Behaviour and Critical State Soil Mechanics, Cambridge University

Press, Cambridge.

Namikawa, T., Koseki, J. and Suzuki, Y. (2007), Finite Element Analysis of Lattice-shaped Ground

Improvement by Cement-mixing for Liquefaction Mitigation, Soils and Foundations,

Japanese Geotechnical Society, Tokyo, June, pp. 559-76.

Nazem, M., Sheng, D. and Carter, J.P. (2006), Stress integration and mesh refinement for large

deformation in geomechanics, International Journal for Numerical Methods in

Engineering, Vol. 65, pp. 1002-27.

Oritz, M. and Popov, E. (1985), Accuracy and stability of integration algorithms for elastoplastic

constitutive relations, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, Vol. 21

No. 9, pp. 1561-76.

Rotta, G.V., Consoli, N.C., Prietto, P.M.D., Coop, M.R. and Graham, J. (2003), Isotropic yielding in

an artificially cemented soil cured under stress, Geotechnique, Vol. 53 No. 5, pp. 493-501.

Rouainia, M. and Muir Wood, D.A. (2000), Kinematic hardening constitutive model for natural

clays with loss of structure, Geotechnique, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 153-64.

Simo, J.C. and Hughes, T.J.R. (1998), Computational Inelasticity, Springer Verlag, London.

Simo, J.C. and Taylor, R.L. (1985), Consistent tangent operators for rate independent plasticity,

Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 101-18.

Simo, J.C. and Taylor, R.L. (1986), A return mapping algorithm for plane stress elastoplasticity,

International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 649-70.

Sloan, S. (1987), Sub-stepping schemes for the numerical integration of elastoplastic

stress-strain relations, International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in

Geomechanics, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 893-911.

Sloan, S., Abbo, A. and Sheng, D. (2001), Redefined explicit integration of elastoplastic models

with error control, International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in

Geomechanics, Vol. 18 Nos 1/2, pp. 121-54.

Suebsuk, J., Horpibulsuk, S. and Liu, M. (2010), Modified structured Cam Clay: a generalised

critical state model for destructured, naturally structured and artificially structured clays,

Computers and Geotechnique, Vol. 37 Nos 7/8, pp. 956-68.

Taiebat, M., Dafalias, Y. and Peek, P. (2009), A destructuration theory and its application to

SANICLAY model, International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in

Geomechanics, Vol. 34 No. 10, pp. 1009-40.

Vatsala, A., Nova, R. and Sirinivasa Murthy, B.R. (2001), Elastoplastic model for cemented

soils, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 127 No. 8,

pp. 678-87.

Wang, L.H. and Atluri, S.N. (1994), An analysis of an explicit algorithm and the radial return

algorithm, and proposed modification, in finite plasticity, Computational Mechanics,

Vol. 13 No. 5, pp. 380-9.

Wheeler, S.J., Naatanen, A., Karstunen, M. and Lojander, M. (2003), An anisotropic elasto plastic

model for soft clays, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 403-18.

Corresponding author

D.S. Liyanapathirana can be contacted at: s.liyanapathirana@uws.edu.au

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

- UMAT Construct 2 Emotional_DesUploaded bytrantuanan123
- User Subroutines SummaryUploaded byHara Palleti
- 1-UMAT @ABAQUS-User Subroutine Instruction (Reference Manual)Uploaded bypcncku1215
- Umat GuideUploaded byNam Khoa Traill-Nguyen
- Abaqus Training Material2Uploaded byvenkiee
- ABAQUS for Geotechnical EngineersUploaded byAlexandru Plesca
- Abaqus-umat Program ExampleUploaded byhfathollahi
- ABAQUS User SubroutineUploaded byknan1
- Parametric Study on Reinforced Concrete Beam Using ANSYSUploaded bymiki156799
- 24 Stress ConcentrationUploaded byNagendra Varma
- UMATUploaded byshahriar_B
- MedEntry UMAT Practice Exam Questions With Worked SolutionsUploaded byMahbub Alam
- Case Studies Plastic AnalysisUploaded byYugandhar Damalla
- FEA 2 MarksUploaded byVenkatesh
- The UMATUploaded bycarina
- UMATUploaded byknightz5918
- ABAQUS User Subroutines Overview[1]Uploaded bySheng Lai
- Umat ResourcesUploaded byJeffrey Xie
- FORTRAN77 Subroutine for matrix inversionUploaded bySyeilendra Pramuditya
- umat practice test 2.pdfUploaded byAshraf Alhashimi
- Rev of b31 Equation for Sif and Flexibility Factors for IntersectionUploaded byEsapermana Riyan
- ME - SE (1)Uploaded byRavi Ayyavu
- Mechanism of Chip FormationUploaded byakjeevanantham79
- Plasticity Simulation Tips & Tricks _ CAE AssociatesUploaded bycris
- finite elements in solid mechanicsUploaded bypaulovribeiro
- FEA 2 & 16 marksUploaded byKishore
- ijmaerv5n1spl_26Uploaded byDaniel Navarro
- (El-Bahey, S., & Bruneau, M. 2011) Engineering Structures El-Bahey BruneauUploaded byLorenzo
- SAE_WORLD_CONGRESS.pdf-B0HuG.pdfUploaded byGilberto Perez Hernandez
- Plaxis 20Uploaded bySmail Zennouche

- Manuscript_IJCMR.pdfUploaded byakshuk
- CAT 011 TechnicalUploaded bydmt1905
- FAG Bearing Roller CagesUploaded byomni_parts
- CP PresentationUploaded byshettyavinashs317
- 3.9.2019.pptxUploaded byBharath Subramaniam
- Magic Equations Columns ArticleUploaded byAnonymous ciKyr0t
- I&TP Piping WorksUploaded bymesmerize59
- Accessible Vienna2011Uploaded byAleksandra Drenkovic
- 29800_03Uploaded bywearplay
- Furse Earth DetailsUploaded byrkss
- Classic Series F100 (Globe), F1100 (Angle) Specification SheetUploaded byWatts
- Ref Aircon1A ReviewerUploaded byperezismael
- 1. Welder WQT.xlsUploaded byKy
- Heat and Mass Transfer Through a Porous Medium in a Vertical Channel With Chemical Reaction and Heat SourceUploaded byAmitKumar
- 09 External Flows (1)Uploaded byFindo Triandhana
- Marco Recessed Lens Incandescent Downlight Catalog 7-84Uploaded byAlan Masters
- WS Chapter9 PrintUploaded bySujan Singh
- Pumps QuestionerUploaded bySabariMechy
- HazenWillian EqUploaded byatokku
- FelkerCatalog071406 WEBUploaded bybalarcmt
- Advanced Structural Design - Lecture Note 01Uploaded byChamil Mahagamage
- Bostik Seal N Flex (Technical Data Sheet)Uploaded bydep_vin
- Design_and_behaviour_of_concrete.pdfUploaded byjust me
- EN BS_UkUploaded byG H
- Waterstop-rx Techdata Nsf Sept01Uploaded byjbonvier
- Question Bank - Unit IIUploaded bySIVANESAN
- HW_1Uploaded bySambhav Jain
- 1-1} Typical Glass Balustrade PanelUploaded bydanieldumapit
- Goodyear 3V 5V 8V v BeltsUploaded byJorge Sousa
- Poli MerUploaded byika