Effects of Using Different Constitutive Soil Models for the Cavity

Expansion Problem
E. Şengün
Yıldırım Beyazıt University, Turkey
M. M. Berilgen
Yıldız Technical University, Turkey
M. M. İncecik
İstanbul Technical University, Turkey

ABSTRACT: In this study it is aimed to investigate the changes in stresses, porewater pressures and
displacements caused by the expansion of a cylindrical cavity utilizing different constitutive models. Boston
Blue Clay is assumed as the soil surrounding a cavity and the behavior is analyzed through finite element
modeling with Plaxis 2011 2D involving Modified Cam Clay (MCC), Soft Soil (SS) and Hardening Soil (HS)
constitutive soil models. The results of axisymmetric numerical modeling are compared with the solution
provided by Randolph et al. (1979a). While the changes of stresses and porewater pressures by the SS and HS
models are reasonably acceptable, the results with the MCC model agree quite well with those provided by
other researches. Moreover, the findings assuming a cylindrical cavity expansion are similar to the
measurements of radial soil displacement around a cavity mid-depth in the field (Cooke and Price, 1973;
Pestana et al., 2002) and in the laboratory model tests (Randolph et al., 1979a; Randolph et al., 1979b;
Steenfelt et al., 1981) as well as the analytical solutions of cavity expansion.

1 INTRODUCTION doubling of the initial radius of the cavity existing in

The cavity expansion theory is widely used to solve
many problems in geotechnical engineering, such as
the soil stress-strain nonlinearity (Ladanyi, 1972;
Palmer, 1972; and Vesic, 1972). Furthermore, in the
past 20 years, much of the important work in
relation to cavity expansion theory has been
undertaken by Randolph et al. (1979), Yu and
Houlsby (1991), Collins et al. (1992), Salgado et al.
(1997). In recent decades, cavity expansion methods
have been utilized in interpreting in-situ soil tests,
predicting end-bearing and shaft capacity of driven
piles, ground settlements due to tunneling, and
borehole instability. It can also be applied to the
design and construction of tunnels and underground
excavations in order to provide stability and
serviceability (Yu, 2000).
Randolph et al. (1979a) provided a numerical
solution for an undrained expansion of a cylindrical
cavity by using the Modified Cam-Clay constitutive
model (Roscoe and Burland, 1968; Schofield and
Wroth, 1968) and presented the state of stress in the
surrounding soil during cavity expansion. In this
study, the cavity expansion methods were studied
and the changes in stresses, pore-water pressures and
displacements caused by the undrained expansion of
cylindrical cavity were investigated during the
a clayey soil. The soil surrounding the cavity was
assumed to be Boston Blue Clay and was
numerically investigated by using Plaxis 2011 2D
finite element software and the already available
models describing the stress-strain behavior of soils,
namely Modified Cam Clay (MCC), Soft Soil (SS)
and Hardening Soil (HS) constitutive models.
2 CONSTITUTIVE MODELS
Randolph et al. (1979a) provided a numerical
solution for an undrained expansion of a cylindrical
cavity by using the Modified Cam-Clay constitutive
model (Roscoe and Burland, 1968; Schofield and
Wroth, 1968) and presented the state of stress in the
surrounding soil during cavity expansion. In this
study, cavity expansion analysis was used in Plaxis
finite element code’s soil models to describe the
stress-strain behavior of soils. These are Modified
Cam Clay (MCC), Soft Soil (SS) and Hardening Soil
(HS) models. The Modified Cam Clay model
represents the hardening behavior of the elasto-
plastic materials based on the critical state concept
and involves a logarithmic relationship between
mean effective stress and void ratio.
The MCC constitutive model requires the During the modeling of cavity expansion, the
specification of parameters, which can be obtained expansion took place by assigning a prescribed
from standard laboratory testing: the isotropic displacement in the radial direction along the side of
logarithmic compression index on e-ln p' plane (λ), the initial cavity. Plastic calculation was used to
swelling index on e-ln p' plane (κ), initial void ratio carry out elastic-plastic deformation analysis for
(e0), tangent of the critical state line (M), elastic undrained behavior in the expansion step. During the
shear modulus (G), Poisson’s ratio of unloading- plastic phase, the undrained behavior using effective
reloading (ʋur) (Atkinson,1993; Plaxis 2011 2D). parameters for stiffness and strength was used in all
The Soft Soil model is based on the MCC model material models (defined as Undrained A in Plaxis).
especially meant for primary near-normally During the cavity expansion soil behavior was taken
consolidated clays, clayey silts and peat. It can also as undrained assuming sufficient time for excess
be utilized to describe the non-linear stress-strain pore pressure dissipation.
behavior of soils. Alongside the Cam Clay model,
the pseudo-elastic (hypo-elastic) type of model has
been developed. The Soft Soil model requires the 3.1 Soil Parameters
modified compression index (λ*), modified swelling
index (κ*), cohesion (c), friction angle (ϕ0), dilatancy The MCC constitutive model of Randolph et al.
angle (ψ), the friction constant (M), coefficient of (1979a) was defined by using the soil parameters of
lateral stress in normal consolidation K0nc and Boston Blue Clay (Table 2).
Poisson’s ratio (ʋur) (Plaxis 2011 2D). Table 2. Parameters of the MCC constitutive model
The Hardening Soil model is an advanced model for for Boston Blue Clay (Randolph vd., 1979a).
simulation of soil behavior such as different types of
soil both soft soils and stiff soils and is based on the OCR K e λ κ G/c G/σ M c /σ
0 0 u v u v
well-known hyperbolic model (Duncan and Chang,
1 0.55 1.16 0.15 0.03 74 25 1.2 0.33
1970). Basic feature of the HS model is the stress
dependency of soil stiffness so that all stiffnesses
increase with pressure. Basic parameters of In order to investigate the effect of cavity expansion
Hardening Soil model are failure parameters (c, ϕ0, problem by constitutive models, the parameters used
ψ), soil stiffness parameters (E50ref, Eoedref, Eurref, m), in the Soft Soil and Hardening Soil constitutive
Poisson’s ratio (ʋur) and advanced parameters (Plaxis model for normally consolidated Boston Blue Clay
2011 2D). are listed Table 3-4. The program of Soil Test
3 NUMERICAL ANALYSIS OF CAVITY Module in Plaxis 2011 2D was used to derive
EXPANSION PROBLEM parameters of SS and HS models, corresponding to
stress-strain relationship of MCC model for BBC.
The cavity expansion problem is modelled as an
Moreover, the suggested settings of the Plaxis
undrained expansion of an existing cavity with an
program were used and also the parameters λ* and κ*
initial radius of 1 m, and a length of 10 m, where an
were obtained by using relations given in Equation 1
axisymmetric geometric idealization was assumed
and 2:
and 15 node triangular elements were generated in
Plaxis 2D 2011. In order to minimize the boundary  Cc
effects and to arrange the numerical modeling by the *   (1)
infinite continuum, the geometry of soil medium 1 e 2.3(1  e)
was divided to two clusters, which are the correcting
 2Cr
cluster and the soil (Boston Blue Clay), having 64 m *   (2)
in both radial and vertical directions. Correcting 1 e 2.3(1  e)
layer properties is described by Burd and Houlsby
where Cc= compression index; Cr= recompression
(1990) (Table 1). To compare the results with the index; e= void ratio.
Modified Cam Clay analysis by Randolph et al.
(1979a), the expansion was achieved by doubling Table 3. Parameters of Soft Soil constitutive model
the radius from 1 m to 2 m. for Boston Blue Clay.
Table1. Correcting layer linear elastic parameters. OCR K0nc e λ* κ* ϕ' ν'ur c' γ'
0
E (kN/m2) eo ν γ(kN/m3)
1 0.6373 1.16 0.0694 0.0139 300 0,15 1kPa 18kN/m3
125 0.5 0.25 18
Table 4. Parameters of Hardening Soil constitutive
model for Boston Blue Clay.
power
OCR K0nc e E50ref Eoedref Eurref c'
0 (m)
3200 2400 45000 1 investigated by doubling initial radius of the cavity
1 0.6373 1.16 0.75 0.20 0.9
kN/m2 kN/m2 kN/m2 kN/m2
The parameters of MCC, SS and HS model also
were compared by simulating of Plaxis Soil Test
Module (undrained triaxial test) based on the
relationship between stress-strain, excess pore
pressure-strain and stress path. The result of these
comparisons for constitutive models parameters in
Boston Blue Clay were very close to each other
(Figures 1 to 3).
Figure 1: MCC, SS and HS model in BBC stress-strain
relationship obtained from Plaxis Soil Test Module.
Figure 2. MCC, SS and HS model in BBC excess pore
pressure-strain relationship obtained from Plaxis Soil Test
Module.
Figure 3. MCC, SS and HS model in BBC stress path diagram
obtained from Plaxis Soil Test Module.
4 THE RESULTS OF NUMERICAL ANALYSIS
OF CAVITY EXPANSION PROBLEM
In the first part of the study, the changes in
ν'ur Rf displacements of mid-depth cavity caused by
undrained expansion of the cylindrical cavity were
existing in Boston Blue clay for different
constitutive models and this numerical analysis
showed good agreement with measurements of
radial soil displacement around a cavity mid-depth
in the field (Cooke and Price, 1973; Pestana et al.,
2002) and in the laboratory model tests (Randolph et
al., 1979a; Randolph et al., 1979b; Steenfelt et al.,
1981) and cavity expansion analytical solutions
(Figure 4).
Figure 4. The result of numerical analysis and comparison of
the measured and theoretical soil displacement in radial
direction around a cavity mid-depth.
In the last part of the study, as a result of the
analysis, the change of stresses and pore-water
pressures during the radial expansions in soil were
obtained from carried out by the MCC, SS and HS
constitutive models. These results were compared
with the results of the similar studies of the literature
made in the mentioned area such as Randolph et al.
(1979a) who provided numerical analysis for an
undrained expansion of a cylindrical cavity by using
BBC parameters and MCC constitutive model and
presented the changes of stresses and pore pressures
in the surrounding soil of cavity during cavity
expansion (Figure 5-6-7). The effective radial (σr'),
tangential (σɵ') and vertical (σv') stresses normalized
by initial undrained shear strength (cu) are presented
as a function of normalized radial distance from
cavity center.
Figure 5. Normalized effective stress distribution in the
surrounding soil during radial cavity expansion for Modified
Cam Clay constitutive model.

Figure 6. Normalized effective stress distribution in the
surrounding soil during radial cavity expansion for Soft Soil
constitutive model.
Figure 7. Normalized effective stress distribution in the
surrounding soil during radial cavity expansion for Hardening
Soil constitutive model.
When compared with the results provided by
Randolph et. al. (1979a), SS and HS constitutive
models show an acceptable level whereas MCC
Model results obtained match quite well results for
the stress distributions during radial expansion.
Moreover, when constitutive models were compared
with each other in the critical state region (plastic
zone), while MCC and SS model show quite close,
the plastic zone around the cavity for HS
constitutive model was observed to be occupying
larger area.
5 CONCLUSIONS
Two dimensional numerical analyses developed to
investigate of changes in stress, porewater pressures
and displacements in the radial direction due to
cavity expansion are presented which are compared
with the results from similar studies. Despite some
restrictions and simplifications in geometric
idealizations and soil properties during the cavity
expansion approaches and related numerical
modelling solutions, the result of cavity expansion
numerical analysis of axisymmetric modeling by
using the finite element code Plaxis 2D showed a
good agreement with the field testing, laboratory
model test and cavity expansion analytical solutions.
In particular, in the agreement with the field-testing,
the results of numerical analysis were consistent
with the results of the similar studies found in the
literature and numerical modeling also once more
demonstrated the importance of constitutive models
selected for the description of soil behavior.
6 REFERANCES
Atkinson, J.H. 1993. An introduction to the mechanics of soils
and foundations, McGraw-Hill.
Biringen, E. 2005. “The effects of cylindirical pile insertion on
the vertical stiffness and strength of the surronding soil.“
2005 Deep Foundations Institute Student Paper
Competition Winner presented at the 30th Annual
Conference on Deep Foundations, Chicago, 22-24
September,2005
Biringen, E., Berilgen, M., Edil, T.B. 2006. “Numerical
Modelling of PreloadTM Pier by Cavity Expansion.“ Seventh
International Congress on Advances in Civil Engineering,
Yildiz Technical University, İstanbul, Turkey.
Brinkgreve, R.B.J. 2005. “Selection of soil models and
parameters for geotechnical engineering application.“
Geotechnical Special Publication No.128: Soil constitutive
models: evaluation, selection, and calibration, A. Y.
Yamamuro and V.N. Kaliakin, eds., ASCE, 69-98
Bishop, R.F., Hill, R. and Mott, N.F. 1945. “The theory of
indentation and hardness tests.“ Proceedings of Physics
Society, 57, 147-159.
Burd, H.J. and Houlsby, G.T. 1990. “Finite element analysis of
two cylindirical expansion problems involving nearly
incompressible material behaviour“ International Journal
for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics,
Vol.14, No.,pp. 351-366
Carter, J.P., Randolph, M.F., and Wroth, C.P. 1979. “ Stress
and pore pressure changes in clay during and after the
expansion of a cylindirical cavity.“ International Journal
for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics,
Vol.3, No.,pp. 305-322
Collins, I.F.and Yu, H.S. 1996. “Undrained cavity expansions
in critial state soils.“ International Jurnal for Numerical
and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 20, 485-516.
Plaxis 2011. “2D- 2011 Material Models Manual.“ R. B. J.
Brinkgreve, W. Broere, and D. Waterman, eds., Delft, the
Netherlands.
Randolph, M.F., Carter, J.P., and Wroth, C.P. 1979a. “Driven
piles in clay-the effects of installation and subsequent
consolidation .“ Geotechnique, Vol.29, No.4,pp. 361-393.
Randolph, M.F., Steenfelt, J.S., and Wroth, C.P. 1979b. “The
effect of pile type on design paremeters for driven piles.“
Proc. European Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering, Brighton, Engl, 1979, 107-114
Roscoe, K.H. and Burland, J.B. 1968. “On the generalized
stress-strain behaviour of wet clay, in Engineering
Plasticity.“ J. Heyman and F.A. Leckie, eds., Cambridge
University Press, Cambringe.
Schofield, A.N. and Wroth, C.P. 1968. Critical state soil
mechanics, McGraw-Hill, London.
Vesic, A. S. 1972. “Expansion of cavities in infinite soil mass.“
Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division,
ASCE, Vol.98, pp. 265-290.
Yu, H.S. 2000. Cavity Expansion Methods in Geomechanics,
Kluewer Academic Publishers.
Yu, H.S. and Houlsby, G.T. 1991. “Finite cavity expansion in
dilitant soil: loading analysis.“ Geotechnique, 41, 173-183.
Yu, H.S., Hermann, L.R. and Boulanger, R. W. 2000.
“Analysis of steady cone penetration in clay.“ Journal of
Geotechnical and Geoenviromental Engineering, ASCE,
126(7).