NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

(Semester II: 2010-2011)

EXAMINATION FOR

CE6102 - GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS

April / May 2011 - Time allowed: 2 hours

INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES

1. This examination paper contains THREE (3) questions and comprises SIX (6) printed
pages.

2. Answer all THREE (3) questions.

3. All questions DO NOT carry equal marks.

4. This is an “OPEN BOOK” examination.

.../2
 -2- CE6102

Question 1 (50 marks)

(a) (i) For the finite element mesh comprising six constant strain triangle (CST) elements
shown on Figure 1-1, what is the size of the global stiffness matrix [K], assuming 2
degrees of freedom at each node? What is the semi-bandwidth of the matrix?
[4 marks]
5 6 7 8

1 2 3 4

Figure 1-1
(ii) Without changing or re-ordering the node numbers, and still using only six CST
elements, sketch an alternative discretized mesh for the same geometry that will
result in a semi-bandwidth smaller than that calculated in part (i). What is the new
semi-bandwidth? [3 marks]

(iii) If node re-numbering is allowed, sketch the discretized mesh for the same geometry
that will result in the smallest possible semi-bandwidth.
[3 marks]

(b) (i) For an elastic material with Young’s Modulus E = 40000 kPa and Poisson’s ratio ν =
0.3, write down the 4x4 elastic stress-strain De matrix.
[4 marks]

(ii) To perform an undrained analysis using the material of (b)(i), briefly explain and
write down a possible De matrix based on the ‘nearly incompressible’, effective
stress-based approach.
[3 marks]

(iii) To perform an undrained analysis using the material of (b)(i), briefly explain and
write down a possible De matrix based on the ‘nearly incompressible’, Poisson’s
ratio approach.
[3 marks]

(iv) State the advantages and disadvantages associated with the two approaches of (b)(ii)
and (b)(iii).
[4 marks]

/3
 -3- CE6102
Question 1 Cont’d

(c) Explain why, when carrying out consolidation analysis using the 6-noded linear strain
triangular element shown on Figure 1-2, it is quite common to assign the pore pressure
degrees of freedom only to the 3 corner nodes (instead of all 6 nodes).
[5 marks]
ux, uy, p
displacements ux, uy
+ u x, u y
ux, uy
+ pore pressure p

+
ux, uy, p
+
ux, uy, p
ux, uy

Figure 1-2

(d) Consider the cylindrical soil specimen, with the dimensions shown on Figure 1-3. The
specimen will be subjected to drained triaxial compression testing.
y

z x

0.2 m

0.2 m
Figure 1-3

The element stiffness matrix [ke] of two axisymmetric constant-strain triangles (CST) are
given below, with the units of kN/m:

y N1x N1y N2x N2y N3x N3y

N3  3400 700 0 − 700 700 0  N1x
 700
 1800 500 − 700 − 400 − 1100 N1y
0.1 m  0 500 1700 0 800 − 500  N2x
ke =  
N1 N2 − 700 − 700 0 700 700 0  N2y
r=0
r  700 − 400 800 700 1800 − 300  N3x
 
 0 − 1100 − 500 0 − 300 1100  N3y
0.1 m …/4
 -4- CE6102

Question 1 Cont’d

y N1x N1y N2x N2y N3x N3y

 1900 300 − 1100 − 1600 800 1400  N1x
 300 0 
N3 N2
 2200 800 − 2200 − 300 N1y
− 1100 800 3600 600 − 1600 − 1400 N2x
0.1 m ke =  
− 1600 − 2200 600 3500 300 − 1400 N2y
r  800 − 300 − 1600 300 3300 0  N3x
r=0 N1  
 1400 0 − 1400 − 1400 0 1400  N3y
0.1 m

(i) Use the two CST elements and the element stiffness information provided to model
the cylindrical specimen shown on Figure 1-3. Your answer should include:

(1) a sketch the finite element model, indicating clearly the nodes and the
degrees of freedom, [5 marks]

(2) the fully-assembled global stiffness matrix, [KG], containing the numerical
values. [10 marks]

(ii) The soil specimen is subjected to a vertical uniform strain of 1% under drained
compression loading.

By simplifying and solving the equations in (d)(i)(2), calculate the corresponding

radial strain experienced by the specimen. [6 marks]

Question 2 (25 marks)

(a) An excavation pit is 30m x 80m in plan. Figure Q2.1 show the FEM mesh of a plane
strain half model of the excavation. Discuss what is wrong with the model and how
would you improve the model for a Drained and Undrained excavation analysis? Give
brief reasons for your answers in terms of minimum model size and mesh refinement
needed for good accuracy.
[7 marks]

(b) The Mohr-Coulomb idealization of a drained triaxial test is shown in Fig.Q2.2. Using
Mohr-circle diagram, show how would you obtain the drained strength parameters
from such tests? What is the expression for the equivalent undrained shear strength of
the soil for a known mean effective stress state? Show that this is identical to the
expression for half the deviator stress at failure, (σ 1' − σ 3' ) / 2 in Figure Q2.2.
[8 marks]

(c) A sandy silt layer of 10 m thickness has the following measured parameters: c’=10
kPa, Ф’=28 deg, γ=18 kN/m3, and OCR=2. The SPT N values range from N=3 and
linearly increase to N=10 at 2m and 10m depth of the layer. What is the undrained
.../5
 -5- CE6102
Question 2 Cont’d

shear strength variation of the soil layer using the Mohr-Coulomb model; and how does it
compare to SPT correlation of cu=5N kPa? Assume GWT is at ground surface.
[10 marks]

Figure Q2.1 FEM Mesh of 30m x 80m wide excavation pit

σ1-σ3 E’ σ’3 = confining pressure

2c' cos ϕ '+2σ ' 3 sin ϕ '

2 cu = = σ 1' − σ 3'
1 − sin ϕ '

-ε1
εv
2 sinψ
1 − sinψ

-ε1
1-2ν’
Figure Q2.2 Mohr-Coulomb model fitted to Drained Triaxial (CID) Test Data
…/6
 -6- CE6102

Question 3 (25 marks)

(a) Figure Q3.1 showed the c-phi reduction analysis of an excavation using elastic wall
model. Explain why the global FOS (Factor of Safety) obtained from the analysis is
incorrect? How would get a more correct model for the global FOS and sketch the
expected failure mode in your analysis.
[10 marks]

(b) Sketch the results of a typical CID Tri-axial test of a Hardening Soil with small strain
stiffness overlay. Explain what are the advantages of the Hardening Soil (HS_small)
with small strain stiffness compared to the Mohr-Coulomb model?
[7 marks]

(c) An excavation of 20m depth in a deep deposit of a stiff residual soil has the following
soil properties: c’=10 kPa, ϕ’=30 deg, γ =20 kN/m3, OCR=2. The GIR (Geotechnical
Interpretive Report) states that the Mohr-Coulomb (MC) modulus is E=2N MPa. The
SPT N values are N=5 at 3m depth and increase linearly with depth to N=30 at 20m
depth. The alternative is to use the Hardening Soil (HS) model for the soil with
m=0.7, E50ref = 1N MPa; Eurref = 3 N MPa
The HS model has a stiffness variation as given below.
m m
 c' cos φ '+σ '3 sin φ '   c' cos φ '+σ '3 sin φ ' 
E50 = E 
ref
 Eur = E 
ref

 c' cos φ '+ p sin φ '   c' cos φ '+ p sin φ ' 
50 ref ur ref

Plot the stiffness variation with depth of the MC (E only) and HS model ( E50 and
Eur for the residual soil on graph paper, and explain what differences you would
expect from your analysis using the two different soil models.
[8 marks]

Figure Q3.1 Deformed mesh and incremental displacements plot of c/phi reduction

- END OF PAPER –