FEM & Constitutive Modelling in Geomechanics

Lecture - 20
Modelling of Interfaces – Joint Elements

K. Rajagopal
Professor & PK Aravindan Institute Chair (Retd)
IIT Madras & Adjunct Professor of Civil Engineering
Andhra University, Visakhapatnam 530 003
E-mail: profkrg@gmail.com
 Joint Elements
Joint or interface elements are required to model the
separation/relative sliding between two dissimilar bodies, simulation of
joint planes within the geological media, etc.

Some examples:

▪ Skin friction developed along the pile length

▪ Pullout resistance developed along the geosynthetic reinforcement

elements,

▪ Rock joints in a geological medium Pullout of pile

▪ Slip between steel reinforcement and concrete

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 2

➢Pullout of geogrids (soil reinforcement) from the
reinforced soil mass

➢Sliding between facing blocks of reinforced soil

retaining walls Pullout of Geogrids

➢Jointed rock specimens

Joint Plane

Jointed rock specimen

under compression load
FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 3
➢In brick masonry and rock joints bonding is simulated
by introducing these joint elements.

➢Relative sliding between backfill soil and back surface

of retaining walls

Brick Masonry joints

Active case wall movement

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 4

 Different Types of Joint Elements
i. Nodal link elements (spring elements) - 1967

ii. Thin interface isoparametric continuum elements – 1970,1973, etc.

iii. Zero thickness isoparametric interface elements-1968

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 5

 Some references on Joint Elements
▪ Ngo, D. and Scordelis, A.C. (1967) Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Beams,
ACI Journal, March Vol. 64, 1967, 152-163
▪ Goodman, R.E., Taylor, R. and Brekke, T.L. (1968) A model for the mechanics of jointed
rock, ASCE J. Soil Mech & Found Eng., Vol. 94, 637-659.
▪ Zienkiewicz, O.C., Best, B., Dullage, C and Stagg, K.C. (1970) Analysis of non-linear
problems in rock mechanics with particular reference to jointed rock mass, Proc. 2nd Cong.
Int. Soc. Rock Mechanics, Belgrade, 8-14.
▪ Ghaboussi, J., Wilson, E.L. and Isenberg, V. (1973) Finite element for rock joints and
interfaces, ASCE J. Soil Mech. & Found. Eng., Vol. 99, 833-848.
▪ Desai, C.S., Zaman, M.M., Lightner, J.G., and Siriwardane, H.J. (1984) Thin-layer element
for interfaces and joints, Int. J. Num. & Ana. Methods in Geomechanics, Vol. 8, 19-43.
▪ Pande, G.N. and Sharma, K.G. (1979) On joint/interface elements and associated
problems of numerical ill-conditioning, Int. J. Num. & Ana. Methods in Geomechanics, Vol.
8, 293-300.
▪ Hueze, F.E and Barbour, T.G. (1982) New Models for Rock Joints & Interfaces, ASCE J. of
Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 108, No. 5, 757-776.
FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 6
NODAL LINK ELEMENT:

• Developed in 1967 to represent slip between steel reinforcement and concrete in

reinforced concrete beams (Ngo & Scordelis, Journal of ACI 1967).

• Interface between steel and concrete is assumed to be of zero thickness.

• Nodes on either side of the interface are connected through a tangential spring
and a normal spring.

H – tangential spring

V – normal spring

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 7

 Upper surface

Zero separation between two

surfaces

Lower surface

Nodes on upper and lower surfaces are linked (connected) through tangential and
normal springs – same coordinate values are give for both nodes on either side of the
interface
FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 8
Two deformations are defined at the interface

➢Shear deformation along the interface = u2 – u1

➢Relative normal deformation = v2 – v1

relative deformation between the two surfaces causes shear and normal forces.

Constitutive matrix/Stiffness matrix in local directions,

𝐾𝑆 0
𝐾𝑒 =
0 𝐾𝑁

𝐾𝑆 ⟶ Shear stiffness (kN/m3); 𝐾𝑁 ⟶ Normal stiffness (kN/m3)

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 9

 strains are defined as relative deformations between the two surfaces,

Shear strain, 𝜀𝑡 = 𝑢𝑡2 − 𝑢𝑡1

Normal strain, 𝜀𝑛 = 𝑢𝑛2 − 𝑢𝑛1

in terms of global displacements 𝑢𝑥 and 𝑢𝑦 , the shear and normal deformations can
be written as,
𝑢𝑡 = 𝑢𝑥 cos 𝜃 + 𝑢𝑦 sin 𝜃
𝑢𝑛 = −𝑢𝑥 sin 𝜃 + 𝑢𝑦 cos 𝜃

Two physically separated external nodes are defined to

determine the direction cosines of the element, cos & 𝜃
sin

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 10

 𝑢𝑥1
𝜀𝑡 − cos 𝜃 − sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃 sin 𝜃 𝑢𝑦1
𝜀𝑛 = sin 𝜃
uy1
− cos 𝜃 − sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃 𝑢𝑥2
ux1
𝑢𝑦2
𝑇
𝐾 = 𝐴 𝐶 𝐴 uy2
ux2

− cos 𝜃 sin 𝜃
− sin 𝜃 − cos 𝜃 𝐾𝑡 0 − cos 𝜃 − sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃 sin 𝜃
=
cos 𝜃 − sin 𝜃 0 𝐾𝑛 sin 𝜃 − cos 𝜃 − sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃
sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 11

 𝐾𝑡 cos2 𝜃 + 𝐾𝑛 sin2 𝜃
𝐾𝑡 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃 − 𝐾𝑛 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃
=
−𝐾𝑡 cos 2 𝜃 − 𝐾𝑛 sin2 𝜃
−𝐾𝑡 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃 + 𝐾𝑛 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃
𝐾𝑡 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃 − 𝐾𝑛 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃 −𝐾𝑡 cos 2 𝜃 − 𝐾𝑛 sin2 𝜃 −𝐾𝑡 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃 + 𝐾𝑛 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃
𝐾𝑡 sin2 𝜃 + 𝐾𝑛 cos2 𝜃 −𝐾𝑡 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃 + 𝐾𝑛 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃 −𝐾𝑡 sin2 𝜃 − 𝐾𝑛 cos2 𝜃
−𝐾𝑡 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃 + 𝐾𝑛 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃 𝐾𝑡 cos2 𝜃 + 𝐾𝑛 sin2 𝜃 𝐾𝑡 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃 − 𝐾𝑛 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃
−𝐾𝑡 sin2 𝜃 − 𝐾𝑛 cos2 𝜃 𝐾𝑡 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃 − 𝐾𝑛 sin 𝜃 cos 𝜃 𝐾𝑡 sin2 𝜃 + 𝐾𝑛 cos2 𝜃

➢ Nodal link elements have enabled early researchers to model the slip between
surfaces
➢ However, these elements are not continuum elements
➢ Not compatible with isoparametric continuum elements
➢ Consistent load distribution between element nodes is not possible
➢ Because of these reasons, the nodal link elements have not become popular

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 12

 Thin interface continuum elements
• Thin continuum elements with small thickness are placed between two rigid surfaces
• Very low modulus & low strength is assigned to the interface element to promote early
failure & enable shear deformation along the interface between the two rigid masses
• How small should this thickness be?
• Difficult to quantify as no experimental data is available on interface thickness
• Optimal thickness may also depend on the type of problem analysed
• Due to large aspect ratios of thin elements, numerical problems may arise
• Properties (modulus, shear strength, etc.) change with thickness of elements – hence
difficult to interpret results
• After initial development, these elements have not become popular due to numerical
problems
FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 13
Thin isoparametric continuum element as interface

t=0.01 FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements t=0.10 14

 stress-strain behaviour with thin isoparametric element of three
70 different thickness values
Theoretical limit

60 t=0.01
t=0.05
50 t=0.1
shear stress (kPa)

40
n=100 kPa
30 c=10
Shear displacement at =30
max=c+n.tan
20 peak stress increasing = 67.74 kPa
with thickness – large
10
error in peak stress
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12
shear displacement

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 15

Zero thickness isoparametric interface elements

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 16

Strains:
i. Shear strain

ii. Normal strain

Strains for zero thickness elements are defined as the relative deformations
between the upper and lower surfaces.
𝜀𝑠 (𝜉) = 𝑢𝑡𝑜𝑝 − 𝑢𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑚
Top surface 𝑁1 𝜉
1
𝜀𝑛 (𝜉) = 𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑜𝑝 − 𝑢𝑛𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑚
𝑁3
4
5
Two-dimensional interface element is a line element as 𝑁2
thickness is zero 2
Nodes on top surface are: 1, 2 & 5 6 Bottom surface
3
Nodes on bottom surface are: 4, 3 & 6
FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 17
 𝑁1 𝜉
Top surface
1

𝑁3 =+1
4
5

𝑁2

2 =0

=−1 6 Bottom surface

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 18

 Four node iso-parametric joint elements

2 1 2 1
3 3 4
4

Interface between 4-node Interface between 3-node

quadrilateral elements triangular elements
Shape functions:
1+𝜉
𝑁1 , 𝑁4 =
2
1−𝜉
𝑁2 , 𝑁3 =
2
FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 19
 Six node isoparametric joint elements – planar or curved

5 2 5 1
2 1
3 3 4
4 6
6

Interface between 8-node Interface between 6-node

quadrilateral elements triangular elements or 9-
Shape functions: node quadrilateral elements
𝜉(𝜉 + 1)
𝑁1 , 𝑁4 =
2
𝜉(𝜉−1)
𝑁2 , 𝑁3 = ; 𝑁5 , 𝑁6 = (1 − 𝜉 2 )
2
FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 20
𝑢𝑡𝑜𝑝 = 𝑁1 𝜉 𝑢1 + 𝑁2 𝜉 𝑢2 u & v are the tangential and
normal displacements of nodes
𝑢𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑚 = 𝑁1 𝜉 𝑢4 + 𝑁2 𝜉 𝑢3
𝜀𝑡 = 𝑢𝜉−𝑡𝑜𝑝 − 𝑢𝜉−𝑏𝑜𝑡 = 𝑁1 . 𝑢1 + 𝑁2 . 𝑢2 − 𝑁2 . 𝑢3 − 𝑁1 . 𝑢4
𝜃
𝜀𝑛 = 𝑣𝑛−𝑡𝑜𝑝 − 𝑣𝑛−𝑏𝑜𝑡 = 𝑁1 . 𝑣1 + 𝑁2 . 𝑣2 − 𝑁2 . 𝑣3 − 𝑁1 . 𝑣4

𝜀 = 𝐵 𝑢
[B] matrix consists of shape functions of nodes 𝑢1
𝑣1
𝑢2
𝜀𝑡 𝑁1 0 𝑁2 0 −𝑁2 0 −𝑁1 0 𝑣2
𝜀𝑛 = 0 𝑁1 0 𝑁2 0 −𝑁2 0 −𝑁1 𝑢3
𝑣3
𝑢4
𝑣4
FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 21
𝑢𝑡𝑜𝑝 = 𝑁1 𝜉 𝑢1 + 𝑁2 𝜉 𝑢2 + 𝑁3 𝜉 𝑢5
𝑢𝑏𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑜𝑚 = 𝑁1 𝜉 𝑢4 + 𝑁2 𝜉 𝑢3 + 𝑁3 𝜉 𝑢6
𝜀 = 𝐵 𝑢
𝜃

[B] matrix consists of shape functions of nodes 𝑢1

𝑣1
𝑢2
𝑣2
𝑢3
𝜀𝑡 𝑁1 0 𝑁2 0 −𝑁2 0 −𝑁1 0 𝑁3 0 −𝑁3 0 𝑣3
𝜀𝑛 = 0 𝑁1 0 𝑁2 0 −𝑁2 0 −𝑁1 0 𝑁3 0 −𝑁3 𝑢4
𝑣4
𝑢5
For axi-symmetric problems, there will be another strain
𝑣5
component (hoop strain) defined as (utop− ubot)/r 𝑢6
FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 𝑣6 22
Two stress components: Modified direct shear test set up
i. Shear stress
ii. Normal stress

𝜏 𝐾𝑆 0 𝜀𝑠
𝜎𝑛 = 0 𝐾𝑁 𝜀𝑛 Soil

𝐾𝑆 0 Harder material in
Constitutive matrix, 𝐷 = the lower box &
0 𝐾𝑁 concrete
softer material in
𝐾𝑆 and 𝐾𝑁 have units of 𝐹Τ𝐿3 upper box

𝐾𝑆 - determined from modified direct shear tests as slope of stress vs. relative deformation response
𝐾𝑁 - assumed to be very large when 𝜎𝑛 is compressive - assigned a small value when 𝜎𝑛 is tensile to
allow separation of two surfaces
FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 23
𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑐ҧ + 𝜎𝑛 tan 𝛿

𝑐ҧ 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝛿 are the interface strength properties

When 𝜏  𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 , 𝐾𝑠 is set to small value to allow for relative deformations between the
two surfaces
𝜏 𝑑𝜏
𝐾𝑠 = max
𝑑𝛿
𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥


𝐾𝑆
𝑐ҧ
n
𝛿
FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 24
 ′ 𝑇 +1 𝑇
𝐾 = ‫= 𝑣𝑑 𝐵𝐷 𝐵 𝑣׬‬ ‫׬‬−1 𝐵 𝐷𝐵 𝐽 𝑑𝜉 . factor

=σ𝜉𝑖[𝐵]𝑇 . 𝐷 . 𝐵 . 𝑤𝑖 . 𝐽 × 𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟

stiffness matrix in global coordinates, 𝐾 = 𝜆 𝑇 𝐾′ 𝜆

𝜆 = transformation matrix similar to that used for bar elements

Direction cosines obtained from x/ and y/ ;

2 2
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑥 |𝐽| 𝜕𝑦 |𝐽|
𝐽 = + ; = . 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝛼; = . 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝛼
𝜕𝜉 𝜕𝜉 𝜕𝜉 2 𝜕𝜉 2

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 25

 𝐾𝑠𝑖 0
Initially before failure of interface, 𝐷 =
0 𝐾𝑛𝑖

After failure, both shear and normal stiffness terms are set to some small residual
values to allow for debonding
𝐾𝑆𝑅 0
𝐷 =
0 𝐾𝑁𝑅
𝜏 and 𝜎𝑛 are independent of each other during elastic state. At limit state, max is
related to n through the Mohr Coulomb equation

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 26

 Simulation of direct shear test with zero-thickness joint element
▪ Upper box is fixed against
lateral deformations
▪ Bottom box is moved
horizontally
▪ Shear zone between the
two boxes connected by a
joint element
▪ 8-node quad & 6-node
joint elements used

2 5 1
3 4
6

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 27

 Stress-strain curve with zero-thickness joint element
70 Theoretical limit = 67.74
n=100 kPa
c=10
60
=30
max=c+n.tan
50 = 67.74 kPa
shear stress (kPa)

40

30

20
Peak stress developed
10 at shear displacement
of 0.007
0
0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.009 0.01
shear displacement
FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 28
 v=?
c &  are the shear strength properties of interface
=angle of joint > 
What is the maximum pressure (v) that can be
applied on upper surface?
➢ Two rock pieces are jointed along an inclined surface
➢ Nodes at top of upper block are prescribed incremental
vertical displacements – similar to laboratory tests
➢ Shear & normal stresses develop in joint element – they
continue to increase with displacements
➢ At some stage, shear stress in joint reaches the limit state
➢ After limit state, the upper blocks starts sliding down with
respect to bottom block

➢ After limit state, the normal & shear stresses on the
interface remain constant
𝜎𝑛 = 𝜎𝑣 . 𝑐𝑜𝑠 2 𝛼 𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑐 + 𝜎𝑛 . 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜙
𝜏 = 𝜎𝑣 . 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝛼. 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝛼
FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 29
Normal and shear stresses on the interface are,
𝜎𝑛 = 𝜎𝑣 . 𝑐𝑜𝑠 2 𝛼
𝜎𝑡 = 𝜎𝑣 . 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝛼. 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝛼
Max. shear stress on the interface 𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑐 + 𝜎𝑛 . 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜙 = 𝑐 + 𝜎𝑣 . 𝑐𝑜𝑠 2 𝛼. 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜙

At the limit state, 𝜎𝑡 = 𝜏𝑚𝑎𝑥 

𝑐 10
𝜎𝑣 = = = 91.90
𝑐𝑜𝑠 2 𝛼(𝑡𝑎𝑛𝛼−𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜙) 𝑐𝑜𝑠 2 (26.56) tan 26.56 −tan(20)

After the interface fails, how would the upper block displace – does it develop any further
strains or move like a rigid body?

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 30

 Strain stress
100 -.12440E-03 -.67090E+01
-.24880E-03 -.13418E+02
90 -.37319E-03 -.20127E+02
-.49759E-03 -.26836E+02
80 -.62199E-03 -.33545E+02
-.74639E-03 -.40254E+02
70 -.87078E-03 -.46963E+02
-.99518E-03 -.53672E+02
Vertical pressure

60 -.11196E-02 -.60381E+02
-.12440E-02 -.67090E+02
50 -.13684E-02 -.73799E+02
-.14928E-02 -.80508E+02
40
-.16172E-02 -.87216E+02
-.17062E-02 -.92017E+02
30
-.17041E-02 -.91906E+02
20
-.17040E-02 -.91901E+02
-.17040E-02 -.91900E+02
10 -.17040E-02 -.91900E+02
-.17040E-02 -.91900E+02
0 rigid body
0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 deformation
Vertical displacement
FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 31
TANGENTIAL STRESS NORMAL STRESS (at vertical displacement of -0.0020
1 -.21469E+02 -.42937E+02
Three – point numerical integration
2 -.21469E+02 -.42937E+02
3 -.21469E+02 -.42937E+02 used for 6-node joint elements
TANGENTIAL STRESS NORMAL STRESS (at vertical displacement of -0.0025
1 -.26836E+02 -.53672E+02
2 -.26836E+02 -.53672E+02
3 -.26836E+02 -.53672E+02
TANGENTIAL STRESS NORMAL STRESS (at vertical displacement of -0.0030)
1 -.32203E+02 -.64406E+02
2 -.32203E+02 -.64406E+02
3 -.32203E+02 -.64406E+02
TANGENTIAL STRESS NORMAL STRESS (at vertical displacement of -0.0035)
1 -.36793E+02 -.73613E+02
2 -.36793E+02 -.73613E+02
3 -.36793E+02 -.73613E+02
TANGENTIAL STRESS NORMAL STRESS (at vertical displacement of -0.0040)
1 -.36763E+02 -.73531E+02 Stress state remains constant after
2 -.36763E+02 -.73531E+02
limit state
3 -.36763E+02 -.73531E+02

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 32

 Concluding Remarks
• Zero thickness isoparametric joint elements are compatible with
isoparametric continuum elements
• These elements can help in modelling the relative displacements
• Shear and normal stresses on these surfaces can be monitored
independent of the continuum elements
• Exact limit loads can be obtained using these joint elements

FEA&CM Lecture-20 Joint Elements 33

FEM & Constitutive Modelling in Geomechanics
Lecture - 20
Modelling of Interfaces – Joint Elements

K. Rajagopal
Professor & PK Aravindan Institute Chair
Department of Civil Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Chennai, India 600 036
E-mail: gopalkr@iitm.ac.in