sustainability
Article
Duncan–Chang E-υ Model Considering the Thixotropy of Clay
in the Zhanjiang Formation
Bin Tang 1, *, Tianli Liu 2
Citation: Tang, B.; Liu, T.; Zhou, B.
Duncan–Chang E-υ Model Considering
the Thixotropy of Clay in the Zhanjiang
Formation. Sustainability 2022, 14,
12258. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su141912258
Academic Editors: Chao Jia, Kai Yao
and Shuai Shao
Received: 26 July 2022
Accepted: 23 September 2022
Published: 27 September 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912258
and Biaohe Zhou 3
1 Guangxi Key Laboratory of Geotechnical Mechanics and Engineering, Guilin University of Technology,
Guilin 541004, China
2 School of Civil and Architectural Engineering, Guilin University of Technology, Guilin 541004, China
3 College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
* Correspondence: tangbin@glut.edu.cn
Abstract: The clays of the Zhanjiang Formation in the coastal area of Beibu Gulf of China are
thixotropic, and the existing constitutive relationship models relevant for clay are incapable of ac-
curately simulating their stress–strain relationships. It is vital to study the changes of mechanical
properties of Zhanjiang Formation clay that occur during thixotropy, and to establish a constitutive
model considering thixotropy. The varying measures of its shear strength, cohesion, internal friction
angle, and initial tangential modulus during thixotropy were investigated by means of triaxial consol-
idation and drainage tests. Furthermore, the quantitative relationships between the clay’s cohesion,
internal friction angle, and initial tangential modulus of the clay and time were examined. This
relationship was introduced into the Duncan–Chang model, and a Duncan–Chang model considering
the thixotropy of clay was developed. The established model was used to make predictions to assume
the validation of the experimental data, and numerical simulations were then carried out. All of the
results from the model’s prediction, numerical simulation and experimental measurements were
compared against each other in order to verify the reasonableness of the model we had utilized. The
results positively demonstrated that: (1) the shear strength, cohesion, angle of internal friction, and
initial tangent modulus of the clay gradually increases with longer curing times, and eventually
it will stabilize; and (2) compared with the Duncan–Chang model not considering thixotropy, the
established thixotropic model is better able to reflect the influence of clay thixotropy on the clay
stress–strain relationship, as its mean relative error is smaller. The results of this study provide
references for calculating strength and deformation of the clay thixotropy. Further, it also provides
references for bearing load calculations of pile foundations in thixotropic clay strata when subjected
to long-term loading conditions.
Keywords: Zhanjiang Formation clay; thixotropy of clay; initial tangential modulus; Duncan–Chang
model; thixotropic model
1. Introduction
Sustainable economic development cannot be achieved without the aid of infrastruc-
ture construction. In recent years, a large number of infrastructure construction projects,
such as Baosteel Zhanjiang Iron & Steel and Zhongke Refinery and Petrochemical Com-
plex Integration Project, have been initiated in the coastal area of Beibu Gulf. Zhanjiang
Formation clay is widely distributed in these regions, the infrastructure projects mostly
use Zhanjiang Formation clay as foundation. Due to its strong structural and thixotropic
properties, this gifts it rare engineering properties, making it an extremely unusual and
special soil. The special nature of Zhanjiang Formation clay contributes to the complexity
of bearing properties of infrastructure foundation and groundwork. Therefore, it is im-
portant to study the special properties of Zhanjiang Formation clay in order to assess the
sustainable development of the coastal economy.
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 2 of 17

The Zhanjiang Formation, located in the coastal area of Beibu Gulf, China, is a river-
controlled delta-phase sedimentary layer primarily composed of three types of clastic
materials (sand, gravel, and clay), with incomplete deposition patterns of coarse material
in lower layers and fine in the upper. Among them, the clay of the Zhanjiang Group is
widely exposed on the surface or subducted under the Quaternary Holocene soil or Middle
Pleistocene soil, which is the main carrier of various engineering activities. The clays
found in this region have high plasticity, spatial distribution variability, strong structural
properties, and thixotropy. Together, this leads to an extremely unusual and special soil
which possesses rare mechanical properties.
The thixotropy of clay refers to the gradual variations of its mechanical properties
resulting from a period of resting time after a clay structure has been destroyed [1–4]. The
presence of thixotropy causes the stress–strain relationship of the clay to vary with resting
time, as its strength and deformation properties are both highly time-dependent [5–8].
The effect of thixotropy on the strength and deformation properties of clays was
initially investigated by Tang [9] through an unconfined compressive strength test, which
showed that the strength of the tested clays increased gradually as resting periods carried
on, with an eventual stabilization. During the thixotropic process, the strength of the clay is
rapidly augmented in the early stage, slows down in the middle stage, and gradually evens
out in the later stage. Zhang [10] further examined the strength–growth law, as well as
the thixotropic mechanism of clay throughout this process by simultaneously conducting
macroscopic and microscopic tests. The results of the testing showed that after a period of
500 days, the strength of clay had been multiplied to 2.58 times what it had been at the outset.
Zhang also found that the internal structure of clay during thixotropy underwent adaptive
adjustment, and that the degree of cementation between the particles had also gradually
increased. Later, Shahriar [11] studied the effect of thixotropy on the one-dimensional
compressive properties of clay, pointing out that settlement calculations obtained using
the traditional effective stress principle had to be strictly modified to accommodate for
effective vertical stresses reading as less than 100 kPa. Alam [12] closely examined both the
strength and deformation properties of clay during thixotropy. The findings revealed that
the yield stress of clay increased with the passing of time, which proved that there was a
proportional relationship between the thixotropic strength ratio and the plasticity index.
Seng [13] studied the effects of thixotropy on the shear modulus of clays with different
water content. Results showed that the higher the water content of the clay, the more
significant the effect of thixotropy on the shear modulus. These studies indicate that the
presence of thixotropy leads to the strength and deformation modulus of clay being closely
related to time, and also that the influence of clay thixotropy should be considered when
performing geotechnical calculations.
The models most commonly used to reflect the stress–strain relationship of soil are
the linear elastic model, the Duncan–Chang model, the Mohr–Coulomb model, the D–P
model, and the modified Cambridge model. Among these, the linear elastic model factors
in just two elastic parameters of the soil, reflecting the linear relationship of stress–strain.
The Duncan–Chang model approximates the plastic deformation of the soil by making
adjustments to the elastic parameters, reflecting the non-linear and simple characteristics
of the stress–strain curve of the soil. The Mohr–Coulomb model evaluates two elastic
parameters and three plastic parameters of the soil, which works to more accurately describe
the damage behavior of the soil. The D–P model makes appropriate modifications to the
yield surface function of the Mohr–Coulomb model to make it easier to carry out numerical
calculations. The modified Cambridge model takes into account two elastic parameters,
three plastic parameters, two state parameters and one parameter which controls the shape
of the soil’s yield surface, which results in a more defined description of the elastic-plastic
deformation characteristics of the soil, while concurrently taking into account the plastic
volume deformation of the soil. One drawback to these conventional models. However, the
existing constitutive model lacks the capacity to integrate the effect of clay thixotropy when
simulating stress–strain relationships, resulting in inaccurate simulations. The study of the
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 3 of 17

impact that thixotropy bears on the stress–strain relationship of clays, and the development
of a model for accurately calculating the stress–strain relationship which takes thixotropy
into account, are of great significance in extending and improving the constitutive theory
of clays.
In relation to the different computational models commonly used when considering
thixotropy, Dexter [14] studied the thixotropy of German and Israeli soils by means of
penetration tests. He was then able to describe the thixotropic behavior of soils by focusing
on particle rearrangement, which led to his development of two simplified mechanical
models of clay thixotropy based on the results of these tests. Barnes [15] provided two
additional approaches to modeling thixotropy based on viscous and viscoelastic theories,
respectively. Dullaert [16] further proposed a general structural dynamics model in order
to describe the flow behavior of thixotropic systems in inelastic suspension media. This
was accomplished by evaluating a series of system transient experiments caused by sud-
den changes in shear rate and by considering structural damage and structural recovery.
Chao [17] proposed modelling strain rate versus time for clay, based on triaxial compression
test data of soft clay. Tang [18] proposed a model for strength recovery during the process
of thixotropy of clay, after studying the effects of moisture content, density, and sensitivity.
All of these studies have provided contributive ideas for considering the thixotropy of clay
in geotechnical calculations. However, due to the absence of describing the quantitative
relationship between the stress–strain relationship and time for clay during the thixotropy
process, these models struggle to accurately describe the stress–strain relations for clay
in the general stress state during thixotropy. As a result, their application in geotechnical
calculations is limited, and further research is still needed.
In this paper, the clay of Zhanjiang Formation was selected as the main focus of our
study of the variation of stress–strain relationship during the thixotropy process of clay. We
also aim to extend the intrinsic relationship model applied to thixotropic clay. The stress–
strain relationship of clay when under different curing times is studied in this paper by
means of triaxial consolidation and drainage tests. The shear strength and initial tangential
modulus of the specimens at different curing times were obtained according to the stress–
strain relationship of the specimens at different curing times. Further, the cohesive force and
internal friction angle of the specimen at different curing times were determined according
to the shear strength of the gathered specimens. The quantitative relationship between
time and the cohesion, internal friction angle, initial tangential modulus of the specimen is
established. This quantitative relationship is introduced into the Duncan–Chang model to
establish a constitutive model considering the thixotropy of clay. The UMAT subroutine
of this specific model was developed in Fortran language and embedded in the ABAQUS
program in order to simulate the test. This model was used to predict the test data validation
under different curing times. The model’s prediction results, numerical simulation results,
and experiment results were subsequently compared to verify the efficiency of the model.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Experimental Study of the Thixotropy of Clay
The tested specimen was taken from the Baosteel project site in Donghai Island,
Zhanjiang City, Guangdong Province. It was documented with a natural moisture content
of 40.17%, a natural density of 1.80 g/cm3 , and a specific gravity of solid particles of 2.71.
The soil sample collected was dried naturally, crushed, and then filtered through a 2 mm
sieve, with any soil samples with a particle size of less than 2 mm being added to distilled
water to configure its moisture content to the natural moisture content. The specimen was
then transformed into a cylindrical specimen with a diameter of 39.1 mm and a height of
80 mm, wrapped in cling film, and placed into a pre-prepared constant temperature and
humidity curing box. The temperature was set at 25 ◦ C. The resting time was determined to
be 7 days. The strength of the clay gradually increases with the increase in resting time, and
eventually stabilizes [9]. Therefore, the amount of resting time between each group of tests
was designed to gradually increase. One resting time was interleaved for tests 1, 2 and 3;
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 4 of 17

Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 4 of 19

two resting times

80 mm, for testsin3,
wrapped 4 film,
cling andand5;placed
three intoresting times
a pre-prepared fortemperature
constant tests 5, and 6 and 7; and four resting
humidity curing box. The temperature was set at 25 °C. The resting time was determined
times for teststo7beand
7 days.8. Thus,
The strength the
of the curing time
clay gradually calculated
increases forineach
with the increase group of tests was 1 day,
resting time,
7 days, 14 days,
and 28 days,stabilizes
eventually 42 days, 63 days,
[9]. Therefore, 84 days,
the amount of restingand 112 days,
time between each grouprespectively (1 day was
of tests was designed to gradually increase. One resting time was interleaved for tests 1,
used as the initial
2 and 3;curing
two restingage
timesfor the3, 4purpose
for tests of establishing
and 5; three resting the7; logarithmic
times for tests 5, 6 and and relationship
four resting times for tests 7 and 8. Thus, the curing time calculated for each group of tests
between cohesion, angle of internal friction, and initial tangential
was 1 day, 7 days, 14 days, 28 days, 42 days, 63 days, 84 days, and 112 days, respectively
modulus versus time).
Triaxial consolidation
(1 day was usedand drainage
as the initial curingtests
age for were
the purposecarried out on
of establishing all specimens at end of each
the logarithmic
relationship between cohesion, angle of internal friction, and initial tangential modulus
age of curing (with 100Triaxial
versus time). kPa,consolidation
200 kPa, andand 300
drainage testskPa confining
were carried out on allpressures,
specimens respectively), and
at end of each age of curing (with 100 kPa, 200 kPa, and 300 kPa confining pressures,
stress–strain relationship curves were obtained for specimens at
respectively), and stress–strain relationship curves were obtained for specimens at differ-
different curing times and
confining pressures, as shown
ent curing times and confiningbelow inasFigure
pressures, shown below 1. in Figure 1.
450 450
100kPa 100kPa
400 400 200kPa
200kPa
300kPa 300kPa
350 350

300 300

σ1-σ3 (kPa)
σ1-σ3 (kPa)

250 250

200 200

150 150

100 100

50 50

0 0
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
1 ε1 (%) 1 ε1 (%)

2 2

3 3
εv (%)

4 εv (%) 4

5 5

6 6
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 5 of 19
7 7

(a) Curing for 1 day (b) Curing for 7 days

450 500
100kPa 100kPa
400 200kPa 450 200kPa
300kPa 400 300kPa
350
350
300
300
σ1-σ3 (kPa)
σ1-σ3 (kPa)

250
250
200
200
150
150
100 100

50 50

0 0
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20

1 ε1 (%) 1 ε1 (%)

2 2

3 3
εv (%)
εv (%)

4 4

5 5

6 6

7 7

(c) Curing for 14 days (d) Curing for 28 days

500
100kPa 100kPa
500
200kPa 200kPa
300kPa 300kPa
400
400
σ1-σ3 (kPa)

300
σ1-σ3 (kPa)

300

200
200

100 100

0 0
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
1 ε1 (%) 1 ε1 (%)

2 2

3 3
εv (%)

εv (%)

4 4

5 5

6 6

7 7

(e) Curing for 42 days (f) Curing for 63 days

Figure 1. Cont.
 300kPa 300kPa
400 400

σ1-σ3 (kPa)

σ1-σ3 (kPa)
300 300

200 200
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 5 of 17
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 6 of 19
100 100

0 100kPa 0
100kPa
0 5 10 500
15 20 200kPa 500 0 5 10 200kPa 15 20
300kPa 300kPa
1 ε1 (%)
400 1
400 ε1 (%)

σ1-σ3 (kPa)

σ1-σ3 (kPa)
300 300
2 2
200 200

3 3

εv (%)
εv (%)

100 100

4 0
4
0
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
1 ε1 (%) 1 ε1 (%)
5 5
2 2

6 3 6
3

εv (%)
εv (%)

4 4

7 5
7
5

6 6

(g) Curing for 84 days 7 7

(h) Curing for 112 days
Figure 1. (g) Curing for 84 days
Stress–strain (h) Curing for
relationship curve for specimens 112 days
with different curing times.
Figure 1. Stress–strain relationship curve for specimens with different curing times.
Figure 1. Stress–strain relationship curve for specimens with different curing times.
2.1.1. Effect of Thixotropy on the
2.1.1. Effect of Thixotropy Shear
on the Strength
Shear Strength of Clayof Clay
From Figure 1, it can clearly be seen that the stress on the clay being observed grad-
2.1.1.From
EffectFigure
of Thixotropy
ually1, it can
increases
on
with
the
clearly Shear
be
the increase
Strength
seenunder
in strain thatthe the
ofstress
Clay
same curing timeon
and the clay
confining being observed grad-
pres-
sure. The figure also highlights that the stress of the specimen tends to stabilize once the
uallyFrom Figure
increases with
strain
1,ofit
the can clearly
increase
the specimen in
reaches
be seen
strain
15%.
that
under
Under the
thethe stress
same curing same
time,
oncuring
when
the clay
time
the specimen
being observed gradu-
fi- and confining pres-
ally increases with the
sure. The figureFurthermore, increase
also highlights
nally stabilizes, the stress in strain under the same curing time
that the stress of the specimen tends to stabilize once
gradually increases with the increase in the confining and
pressure. confining pressure.
the
under the same confining pressure, when the specimen finally reaches sta-
The figure
strain also
of the highlights
specimen
bility, the stress that the
reaches
gradually 15%. stress
increases Under
with ofincrease
the the
thespecimen
insame curing
curing time. tends tostress,
time,
Therefore, the stabilize
when the once the strain
specimen fi-
of thestabilizes,
nally specimen reaches
which
the
corresponds
stress 15%.
to 15% of
gradually Under
the strain,the same
was taken
increases
as thecuring
with time,
shear strength
the
of thewhen
increase
specimen,the specimen finally
in the confining pressure.
and then the shear strength of the specimen was plotted against the curing time, as shown
stabilizes, the under
Furthermore, stress gradually
in Figure the
2. increasespressure,
same confining with the increasewhen theinspecimen the confining finallypressure.
reaches Fur-
sta-
thermore, under the same confining pressure, when
bility, the stress gradually increases with the increase in curing time. Therefore, the
600
the specimen finally reaches stability,
stress,
the stress
which gradually to
corresponds increases
15% of with the increase
the strain,
100kPa
550
was taken
200kPa
in curing
as thetime. shearTherefore,
strength of thethe
stress, which
specimen,
500
300kPa
corresponds to 15% of the strain, was taken as the shear
and then the shear strength of the specimen was plotted against the curing time, as shown
450 strength of the specimen, and
400
then the shear strength of the specimen was plotted against the curing time, as shown in
(σ1-σ3)f (kPa)

in Figure 2. 350

Figure 2. 300
250
200
600 150

550
100 100kPa
50
200kPa
500 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 300kPa
120

450 t (d)

400 Figure 2. The relationship between the strength of the specimen and the curing time.
(σ1-σ3)f (kPa)

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
t (d)

Figure 2.
Figure The relationship
2. The relationship between
between the
the strength
strength of
of the
the specimen
specimen and
and the
the curing
curing time.
time.

Looking at Figure 2, it is evident that the strength of the specimens gradually increased
concurrently with increase in the curing time, eventually reaching a state of stabilization.
This is due to the clay re-forming a new stable structure with the increase in time [19–22].
Huo [23] studied the thixotropy of soft clay in Tianjin and analyzed the internal mechanism
of clay thixotropic behavior. The results of the study showed that, during the thixotropy
process, the soil particles follow the principle of energy minimum to re-flocculate and
re-agglomerate, leading to the formation of a new stable structure. Additionally, the
strength of the soil then gradually increased. Zhang [24] analyzed the recovery process of
Zhanjiang clay in terms of its thixotropic strength, studying the clay’s structural changes
when it underwent thixotropic transition. It was concluded that the development of its
structure from dispersion to flocculation under the action of gravitational and repulsive
 ternal mechanism of clay thixotropic behavior. The results of the study showed that, dur-
ing the thixotropy process, the soil particles follow the principle of energy minimum to
re-flocculate and re-agglomerate, leading to the formation of a new stable structure. Ad-
ditionally, the strength of the soil then gradually increased. Zhang [24] analyzed the re-
covery process of Zhanjiang clay in terms of its thixotropic strength, studying the clay’s
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 structural changes when it underwent thixotropic transition. It was concluded that 6 ofthe
17
development of its structure from dispersion to flocculation under the action of gravita-
tional and repulsive forces between clay particles was the main reason for the recovery of
strength
forces during clay
between clayparticles
thixotropy.wasShen [25] analyzed
the main reason for how
the the mechanical
recovery properties
of strength during of
high-sensitivity
clay thixotropy. marine
Shen [25]clayanalyzed
varied byhow conducting indoor tests.
the mechanical Resultsoffrom
properties these exper-
high-sensitivity
iments showed
marine clay variedthe long time change
by conducting of clay
indoor properties
tests. Results was
fromdue to consolidation
these experiments showedand ce-
mentation
the during
long time changethixotropic recovery.was
of clay properties Tangdue[26] studied the unconfined
to consolidation and cementationcompressive
during
strength andrecovery.
thixotropic pore structure evolution
Tang [26] studied law in unconfined
the the thixotropic process through
compressive strength unconfined
and pore
compressive
structure strength
evolution lawtest, scanning
in the electron
thixotropic microscopy,
process and mercury
through unconfined injection test.
compressive The
strength
test, scanning
results showedelectron
that, in microscopy,
the process of and mercury injection
thixotropy, test. Thegradually
the soil particles results showed
coagulatethat,
andin
the
formprocess of thixotropy,
an aggregates the soil
flocculation particlesand
structure, gradually coagulate
the strength of clayand form anwith
increases aggregates
the in-
flocculation
crease in the structure, and the strength of clay increases with the increase in the degree
degree of cementation.
of cementation.
Based on the strength at each curing time and the confining pressure of the test, sev-
Based were
eral things on theachieved:
strength at each
the Mohrcuring
circletime and the
of each ageconfining
specimenpressure of thethe
was plotted, test, several
cohesion
things were achieved: the Mohr circle of each age specimen was plotted,
and internal friction angle of each age specimen were determined, the cohesion and inter- the cohesion and
internal friction angle of each age specimen were determined, the cohesion
nal friction angle of the specimens were plotted versus the curing time, and a logarithmic and internal
friction angle of theThe
fit was performed. specimens wereall
results from plotted
of thisversus the curing
are shown time,
in Figure 3. and a logarithmic fit
was performed. The results from all of this are shown in Figure 3.
0.40
25
φ (rad)
c (kPa)
0.39 φ = 0.02602lg(t) + 0.33109 R2 = 0.94427
c = 9.32648lg(t) R2 = 0.99295
20
0.38

15 0.37
φ (rad)
c (kPa)

0.36
10

0.35

5
0.34

0 0.33
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
t (d) t (d)

(a) Logarithmic fit curve of c (b) Logarithmic fit curve of φ

Figure 3. Curves of c and φ versus curing time.
Figure 3. Curves of c and ϕ versus curing time.

Figure 33 demonstrates
Figure demonstrates that
that the
the cohesion
cohesion and
and the
the angle
angle of
of internal
internal friction
friction ofof the
the clay
clay
gradually increased along with the increase in the curing time, after which it finally levels
gradually increased along with the increase in the curing time, after which it finally levels
off. The
off. The cohesion
cohesionand
andinternal
internalfriction
frictionangle
angleare
areboth
bothrelated toto
related thethe
curing
curingtime, shown
time, shown as
follows:
as follows:
c =c A
=A(kPa)
(kPa)lg(t/d)
lg(t/d) (1)
(1)
ϕ = B lg(t/d) + ϕ0 (2)
φ = B lg(t/d) + φ0 (2)
In this equation, c is the cohesive force of the specimen (kPa), and A is the parameter
of theIninfluence
this equation, c is the cohesive
of thixotropy force of the
on the cohesive specimen
force, with a(kPa), and
scale of 1. AItiswas
the found
parameter
that
of the
the influence
larger of thixotropy
the value of A, theon the cohesive
greater force, with
the influence a scale of 1.on
of thixotropy It the
wascohesive
found that the
force,
and vice versa. Further, t is the curing time (d); ϕ is the angle of internal friction of the
specimen (rad), and B is the parameter of the influence of thixotropy on the angle of internal
friction, with a scale of 1. It was found that the larger the value of B, the greater the effect
of thixotropy on the angle of internal friction, and vice versa. Finally, ϕ0 is the angle of
internal friction at the initial moment of the specimen (rad).
In order to ensure the consistency of the scale on both sides of Equations (1) and (2),
multiply A by 1 kPa and divide t by 1 d.

2.1.2. Effect of Thixotropy on the Deformation Properties of Clay

To further investigate the effect of thixotropy on the deformation properties of clay,
the initial tangential modulus of each age specimen was taken in order to establish its
unique relationship with the curing time. From Figure 1, it can be seen that the stress–strain
 multiply A by 1 kPa and divide t by 1 d.

2.1.2. Effect of Thixotropy on the Deformation Properties of Clay

To further investigate the effect of thixotropy on the deformation properties of clay,
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 the initial tangential modulus of each age specimen was taken in order to establish 7 ofits
17
unique relationship with the curing time. From Figure 1, it can be seen that the stress–
strain relationship curve of the specimens is a hardened curve, which can be described by
the Duncan–Chang
relationship curve of model [27]. Whenisusing
the specimens this model,
a hardened curve,thewhich
initialcan
tangential modulus
be described by the of
the specimen canmodel
Duncan–Chang be found[27].byWhen
the following
using thisequation:
model, the initial tangential modulus of the
specimen can be found by the following equation:
ε1/(σ1 − σ3) = a + b ε1 (3)
ε1 /(σ1 − σ3 ) = a + b ε1 (3)
Ei = 1/a (4)
Ei = 1/a (4)
Here, ε1 is the axial strain of the specimen with a scale of 1, (σ1 − σ3) is the deviatoric
stressHere,
(kPa),ε1aisand
thebaxial strain
are the of the specimen
regression with respectively,
parameters, 1 − εσ13is
a scale of 1, (σand ) isthe
theinitial
deviatoric
tan-
stress (kPa), a and b are the regression
gential modulus of the specimen (kPa). parameters, respectively, and ε 1 is the initial tangential
modulus of the
The data inspecimen
Figure 1 (kPa).
were regressed using Equation (3) in order to determine the
The data in Figure 1 were regressed
parameter a. The initial tangential modulus using Equation
of each (3) inwas
specimen order to determine
determined the pa-
by substi-
rameter a. The initial tangential modulus of each specimen was determined
tuting it into Equation (4), plotting the initial tangential modulus of the specimen against by substituting
it into Equation (4), plotting the initial tangential modulus of the specimen against the
the curing time, and then performing a logarithmic fit, with the results shown in Figure 4.
curing time, and then performing a logarithmic fit, with the results shown in Figure 4.
100
100kPa E(t)=2.37×log10(t)+40.00 R2=0.9414
95
200kPa E(t)=2.45×log10(t)+55.31 R2=0.9051
90
300kPa E(t)=2.38×log10(t)+64.47 R2=0.8980
85
80
75
E(t) (kPa)

70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
t (d)

Logarithmicfitting
Figure4.4.Logarithmic
Figure fittingcurve
curveof
ofthe
theinitial
initialtangential
tangentialmodulus
moduluswith
withcuring
curing time.
time.

From Figure
From Figure 4,4, itit can
can be
be seen
seen that
that thethe initial
initial tangential
tangential modulus
modulus ofof the
the specimens
specimens
gradually increases in direct correlation to the extension of the conservation
gradually increases in direct correlation to the extension of the conservation time, time, eventually
eventu-
stabilizing later on. The initial tangential modulus of the specimen
ally stabilizing later on. The initial tangential modulus of the specimen is related is related to the to
curing
the
time as follows:
curing time as follows:
Ei (t) = C (kPa) lg(t/d) + Ei (5)
Ei(t) = C (kPa) lg(t/d) + Ei (5)
Detailing the equation above, Ei (t) is the initial tangential modulus of the specimen
Detailing the
at conservation equation
time t (kPa),above,
and CEis i(t)
theis parameter
the initial tangential modulus
of the influence of the specimen
of thixotropy on the
at conservation
initial tangentialtime t (kPa),ofand
modulus theCclay,
is the parameter
with a scale of the influence
1. The ofthe
greater thixotropy
value ofon C, the
the
greater the influence of thixotropy on the initial modulus, and vice versa; also, t is the
conservation time (d), and Ei is the initial tangential modulus of the specimen at the initial
moment (kPa).
To ensure the consistency of the magnitudes on both sides of Equation (5), multiply C
by 1 kPa and divide t by 1 d.
As shown by Figure 4, the influence of the confining pressure on the magnitude of C
value is not significant; thus, the C value can be taken as its average value. The influence of
the confining pressure on the initial tangential modulus Ei of the specimen at the initial
moment is also evident due to the compressive stiffness of the clay, and it can be calculated
by the following equation of compressive stiffness [27]:
Ei = KE Pa (σ3 /Pa)n (6)

where: Ei is the compression modulus (kPa); KE and n are constants with a scale of 1, and
Pa is the atmospheric pressure (kPa).
 of the confining pressure on the initial tangential modulus Ei of the specimen at the initial
moment is also evident due to the compressive stiffness of the clay, and it can be calcu-
lated by the following equation of compressive stiffness [27]:
Ei = KE Pa (σ3/Pa)n (6)
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 8 of 17
where: Ei is the compression modulus (kPa); KE and n are constants with a scale of 1, and
Pa is the atmospheric pressure (kPa).
It can be seen from Equation (6) that the compression modulus Ei is a power function
of theItconfining
can be seen from Equation
pressure (6) that
σ3. As such, whentheboth
compression
KE and nmodulus Ei is
are greater a power
than 0, thefunction
compres-of
the confining pressure σ 3 . As such, when both KE and n are greater than 0, the compression
sion modulus Ei increases with the increase in the confining pressure σ3. Using Equation
modulus Ei increases with the increase in the confining pressure σ3 . Using Equation (6)
(6) to fit a power function to the initial tangential modulus Ei of the initial moment pattern
to fit a power function to the initial tangential modulus Ei of the initial moment pattern
garners such results as shown in Figure 5.
garners such results as shown in Figure 5.
75
Ei
70 Ei=5.5433σ30.4314 R2=0.9932

65

60
Ei (kPa)

55

50

45

40

35
100 150 200 250 300
σ3 (kPa)

Figure 5. Power function fitting curve of E versus confining pressure.

Figure 5. Power function fitting curve of Ei iversus confining pressure.
As can be seen from Figure 5, Equation (6) reflects the relationship between Ei and the
As can
confining be seenefficiently.
pressure from Figure 5, Equation
Substituting (6) reflects
Equation the Equation
(6) into relationship between
(5) yields theEinitial
i and

the confining pressure efficiently. Substituting Equation (6) into

tangential modulus of the specimen versus the confining pressure, shown as:Equation (5) yields the
initial tangential modulus of the specimen versus the confiningnpressure, shown as:
Ei (t) = C (kPa) lg(t/d) + KE Pa (σ3 /Pa) (7)
Ei(t) = C (kPa) lg(t/d) + KE Pa (σ3/Pa)n (7)
2.2. Duncan–Chang Model Considering Thixotropy
According to Model
2.2. Duncan–Chang the results of the triaxial
Considering consolidation and drainage tests mentioned
Thixotropy
above, the stress–strain relationship of the specimens during thixotropy in the clay of the
According to the results of the triaxial consolidation and drainage tests mentioned
Zhanjiang Formation bears obvious non-linear characteristics, with the Duncan–Chang
above, the stress–strain relationship of the specimens during thixotropy in the clay of the
model [27] being better able to simulate the non-linear stress–strain relationship of clay.
Zhanjiang Formation bears obvious non-linear characteristics, with the Duncan–Chang
Even still, the Duncan–Chang model cannot consider the influence of the thixotropy of clay.
model [27]
One suggestionbeingfor
better able tothis
improving simulate
modelthe non-linear
would stress–strain
be introducing relationship
a thixotropy of clay.
parameter to
Even still, the Duncan–Chang model cannot
allow for the influence of the thixotropy of clay. consider the influence of the thixotropy of
clay. One suggestion for improving
The Duncan–Chang model is athis model
type would
of E-υ modelbe in
introducing
which theabasic
thixotropy param-
parameters of
eter to allow for the influence of the thixotropy of clay.
the soil sample can be obtained from both conventional triaxial consolidation as well as
drainage tests. The tangential modulus Et is thus determined from the relationship curve
between the deviatoric stress (σ1 − σ3 ) and the axial strain ε1 , and the tangential Poisson’s
ratio υt is subsequently determined from the relationship curve between the axial strain, ε1 ,
and the horizontal strain, ε3 .

2.2.1. Deviatoric Stress–Axial Strain Relationship Considering Thixotropy

In the Duncan–Chang model, the relationship between the deviatoric stress (σ1 − σ3 )
and the axial strain, ε1 , in the soil is assumed to be hyperbolic [27], i.e.,:
σ1 − σ3 = ε1 /(a + b ε1 ) (8)

Above, a and b are the hyperbolic parameters, respectively.

According to the definition of the modulus of elasticity, in the incremental method,
the tangential modulus can be defined as:
Et = dσ1 /dε1 (9)
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 9 of 17

Since this is the case, substituting Equation (8) into Equation (9) yields:
dσ1 d(σ1 − σ3 ) 1 b ε1
Et = = = − (10)
dε 1 dε 1 a + b ε1 ( a + b ε 1 )2

From Equation (10), the value of Et tends to 1/a when ε1 tends to 0, indicating that the
parameter a is the inverse of the initial tangential modulus Ei of the (σ1 − σ3 )-ε1 relationship
curve, i.e.,:
a = 1/Ei (11)
From Equation (8), the value of (σ1 − σ3 ) tends to 1/b when ε1 tends toward positive
infinity, indicating that the parameter b is the inverse of the limiting value of (σ1 − σ3 ), i.e.,:
b = 1/(σ1 − σ3 )ult (12)
In practice, the axial strain ε1 of the specimen cannot reach infinity, leading to the
specimen being damaged when a large deformation of the specimen occurs. In conventional
triaxial tests, the stress at 15% axial strain is generally taken to be the damage load (σ1 − σ3 )f
of the specimen, necessitating that a damage ratio Rf [27] needs to be introduced, which
can be shown as:
Rf = (σ1 − σ3 )f /(σ1 − σ3 )ult (13)
The damage ratio Rf is generally taken as an empirical value of 0.75 to 1 [27].
Substituting Equation (7) into Equation (11) yields the expression for the hyperbolic
parameter a considering the effect of thixotropy as:
1 1
a= = t σ3
n (14)
Ei (t)


C (kPa) lg d + KE Pa Pa

Substituting Equation (13) into Equation (12) gives the expression for the hyperbolic
parameter b as:
b = 1/(σ1 − σ3 )ult = Rf /(σ1 − σ3 )f (15)
According to the Mohr–Coulomb theory, it is known that the specimen breaks with:
(1/2) (σ1 − σ3 ) − (1/2) (σ1 + σ3 ) sinϕ − c cosϕ = 0 (16)

From Equation (16) the expression for the strength of the specimen can be obtained as:
(σ1 − σ3 )f = (2c cosϕ + 2σ3 sinϕ)/(1 − sinϕ) (17)
Substituting Equation (17) into Equation (15) yields:
b = Rf (1 − sinϕ)/(2c cosϕ + 2σ3 sinϕ) (18)

Substituting Equation (1) and Equation (2) into Equation (18) gives the expression for
the hyperbolic parameter b, taking into account thixotropy, as:
Rf 1 − sin B lg dt + ϕ0
 

b= (19)
2A (kPa) lg dt cos B lg dt + ϕ0 + 2σ3 sin B lg dt + ϕ0


 


Substituting Equations (14) and (19) into Equation (8) gives the relational expression
for (σ1 − σ3 )-ε1 , considering thixotropy, as:
ε1
σ1 − σ3 = Rf (1−sin ϕ) ε 1
(20)
1
E (t)
+ 2c cosϕ+2σ3 sinϕ
i

In this equation: c = A (kPa) lg(t/d);

ϕ = B lg(t/d) + ϕ0 ;
Ei (t) = C (kPa) lg(t/d) + KE Pa (σ3 /Pa)n .
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 10 of 17

2.2.2. Determination of Tangential Modulus

For non-linear stress–strain relationships, the deformation of the soil, although non-
linear, can be regarded as linear at small increment. Such deformation adheres to Hooke’s
law. Both the tangential modulus and Poisson’s ratio are important elements of the
non-linear elastic model. The method of determining the tangential modulus, Et , is
discussed below.
A transformation of Equation (8) yields:
ε1 = (σ1 − σ3 ) a/[1 − (σ1 − σ3 ) b] (21)

Substituting Equations (14) and (15) into Equation (21) yields:

σ − σ3
ε1 = h 1 i (22)
R (σ −σ )
Ei (t) 1 − (fσ −1 σ )3
1 3 f

Differentiating the two sides of Equation (22) yields:

dσ1
dε 1 = (23)
Rf (σ1 −σ3 ) 2
h i
Ei (t) 1 − (σ1 −σ3 )f

Therefore, the tangential modulus can be expressed as:

Rf (σ1 − σ3 ) 2
 
dσ1
Et = = Ei (t) 1 − (24)
dε 1 (σ1 − σ3 )f

i.e.,:
2
R (σ − σ3 ) (1 − sin ϕ)

Et = Ei (t) 1 − f 1 (25)
2c cos ϕ + 2σ3 sinϕ
As shown, c = A (kPa) lg(t/d);
ϕ = B lg(t/d) + ϕ0 ;
Ei (t) = C (kPa) lg(t/d) + KE Pa (σ3 /Pa)n .

2.2.3. Volume Strain–Axial Relationship Curves

The relationship curve for ε1 -ε3 is also assumed to be hyperbolic in the Duncan–Chang
model [27], i.e.,:
ε1 = − ε3 /(f − D ε3 ) (26)
It can also be expressed as:
ε3 = − f ε1 /(1 − D ε1 ) (27)

When expressed as the latter, f and D are the hyperbolic parameters, respectively.
Moreover, when, for parameter D, the different curves can be averaged, then for
parameter f, Duncan–Chang assumes the following relationship between parameter f and
the confining pressure σ3 :
f = G − F lg(σ3 /kPa) (28)
The values of the parameters G and F in Equation (28) can be derived by fitting the
curve in accordance with different values of the confining pressure σ3 and the correspond-
ing f values.
The volumetric strain under conventional triaxial test conditions can then be expressed as:
εv = ε1 + 2ε3 (29)
Substituting Equation (27) and Equation (28) into Equation (29) yields:
 σ3

2 f ε1 2 G − F lg kPa ε1
εv = ε1 − = ε1 − (30)
1 − Dε 1 1 − D ε1
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 11 of 17

From Equation (30), it can be seen that the parameters of the volumetric strain versus
axial strain curves are D, G, and F. This trio of parameters can be obtained by either
conventional triaxial consolidation or drainage tests.

2.2.4. Determination of Tangential Poisson’s Ratio

The tangential Poisson’s ratio is defined as:
υt = − dε3 /dε1 (31)

Differentiating the two sides of Equation (27) yields:

dε3 = − f dε1 /(1 − D ε1 )2 (32)

While substituting Equation (32) into Equation (31) yields:

υt = − dε3 /dε1 = f /(1 − D ε1 )2 (33)

Substituting Equation (22) and Equation (28) into Equation (33) yields:
σ3

dε 3 G − F lg kPa
υt = − =  2 (34)
dε 1  
1−  (σ1 −σ3 )
D 
R (σ −σ )
 Ei (t) 1− f 1 3 
(σ1 −σ3 )f

As shown above, (σ1 − σ3 )f = (2c cosϕ + 2σ3 sinϕ)/(1 − sinϕ)

c = A (kPa) lg(t/d);
ϕ = B lg(t/d) + ϕ0 ;
Ei (t) = C (kPa) lg(t/d) + KE Pa (σ3 /Pa)n .

3. Discussion and Validations of the Results

3.1. Discussion of the Results
In summary, the parameters of the improved Duncan–Chang model are Rf , ϕ0 , A, B, C,
KE , n, D, G, and F. These ten parameters can be determined by using conventional triaxial
consolidation and drainage tests. Parameter Rf is the damage ratio, i.e., the ratio of damage
strength in relation to ultimate strength; ϕ0 is the angle of internal friction of the specimen
recorded at the initial moment of thixotropy; parameters A, B, and C are the parameters
representing the influence of thixotropy on the cohesion of clay, the angle of internal friction,
and the initial tangential modulus, respectively, as was discussed previously in Section 2;
parameters KE and n are both parameters reflecting the compressive stiffness of the soil
(in these instances, the larger the value, the greater the initial tangential modulus with the
increasing of the confining pressure, and the greater the stiffness of the soil, and vice versa);
parameters D, G, and F are parameters factoring into the Duncan–Chang model that detail
the hyperbolic relationship that exists between the strain in the horizontal direction of the
specimen and the axial strain. The improved Duncan–Chang model introduces the different
parameters of the influence of thixotropy on clay cohesion, angle of internal friction and
initial tangent modulus. Thus, the improved Duncan–Chang model is applicable to clay
with thixotropy. For sandy soils, c = 0 is preferred; also, for clay soils that do not exhibit
significant thixotropy, A = B = C = 0 is preferred (in this case, the computational model
becomes the Duncan–Chang model without the consideration of clay thixotropy). The
following values of these model parameters were determined as a result of the test data
gathered in Section 2, with the results shown below in Table 1.

Table 1. Table of model parameters.

ϕ0 A B C KE n D G F Rf
0.3311 9.466 0.02252 2.400 5.544 0.4314 0.01874 0.5921 0.1471 0.7500
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 12 of 17

3.2. Model Validations

3.2.1. Experimental Validations
In order to verify the efficiency of the improved Duncan–Chang model, we adjusted
the curing time and the confining pressure for the tests in Section 2. The new curing times
were set to 10 days, 50 days, and 90 days, with the confining pressure for the tests being set
to 150 kPa, 250 kPa, and 350 kPa, respectively. We therefore used this established model
to predict the outcome of the test results; according to the test conditions and the model
parameters given in Table 1, we calculated the values of the hyperbolic parameters a and b
for the relationship between the deviatoric stress (σ1 − σ3 ) and the axial strain ε1 , which
are highlighted in the following Tables 2 and 3.

Table 2. Predicted values of hyperbolic parameter a.

Curing Duration
150 kPa 250 kPa 350 kPa
(Days)
10 0.01978 0.01602 0.01393
50 0.01915 0.01560 0.01361
90 0.01892 0.01545 0.01350

Table 3. Predicted values for hyperbolic parameter b.

Curing Duration
150 kPa 250 kPa 350 kPa
(Days)
10 0.003954 0.002517 0.001846
50 0.003405 0.002234 0.001663
90 0.003236 0.002144 0.001603

The relationship prediction curve of (σ1 − σ3 )-ε1 for the specimens was obtained by
substituting Tables 2 and 3 into Equation (8); also, the relationship prediction curves of
εv – ε1 for the specimens was obtained by substituting the values of parameters D, G, F, as
well as the confining pressure, into Equation (30); and finally, the prediction curves of the
improved Duncan–Chang model were compared with the measured results of tests, as can
be seen in Figure 6.
The mean relative errors observed between these model prediction results and the ex-
perimental measured results of σ1 − σ3 and εv in Figure 6 are highlighted in Tables 4 and 5.
Table 4. The mean relative errors between the model prediction results and the experimental mea-
sured results of σ1 − σ3 .

Curing Duration
150 kPa 250 kPa 350 kPa
(Days)
10 8.11% 3.44% 9.87%
50 6.89% 5.37% 10.61%
90 4.23% 4.72% 9.33%

Table 5. The mean relative errors between the model prediction results and the experimental mea-
sured results of εv .

Curing Duration
150 kPa 250 kPa 350 kPa
(Days)
10 30.53% 11.72% 6.60%
50 9.41% 6.47% 4.09%
90 10.27% 4.88% 5.75%
 The relationship prediction curve of (σ1 − σ3)-ε1 for the specimens was obtained by
substituting Tables 2 and 3 into Equation (8); also, the relationship prediction curves of εv
– ε1 for the specimens was obtained by substituting the values of parameters D, G, F, as
well as the confining pressure, into Equation (30); and finally, the prediction curves of the
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 improved Duncan–Chang model were compared with the measured results of tests, 13 of 17
as
can be seen in Figure 6.

600
550 measured results of the tests: 600 measured results of the tests:
σ3=150kPa σ3=150kPa
500
σ3=250kPa σ3=250kPa
450 500
σ3=350kPa σ3=350kPa
400 predicted results of the model: predicted results of the model:

σ1-σ3 (kPa)
σ1-σ3 (kPa)

400
350
300
300
250
200 200
150
100 100
50 0 5 10 15 20
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
ε1 (%) 1 ε1 (%)
1

2
2
3

εv (%)
3
εv (%)

4
4
5

5 6

6 7

8
7

(a) Curing for 10 days (b) Curing for 50 days

700
measured results of the tests:
600 σ3=150kPa
σ3=250kPa
500 σ3=350kPa
predicted results of the model:
σ1-σ3 (kPa)

400

300

200

100
A
0
0 5 10 15 20
1 ε1 (%)

3
εv (%)

(c) Curing for 90 days

Figure 6. Comparison between the predicted results of the model and the measured results of tests.
Figure 6. Comparison between the predicted results of the model and the measured results of tests.

Figure 6 and Tables 4 and 5 prove that the predicted results of the model were in good
agreement with the measured results of tests, its mean relative error was small, indicating
that the model developed was more accurate in reflecting how the thixotropy of the clay
directly affected the non-linear stress–strain relationship of the clay.
Both prediction curves of the Duncan–Chang model—one not considering the thixotropy
of the clay and one that did consider it—were compared against the measured results of
 Figure 6 and Tables 4 and 5 prove that the predicted results of the model were in
good agreement with the measured results of tests, its mean relative error was small, in-
dicating that the model developed was more accurate in reflecting how the thixotropy of
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258
the clay directly affected the non-linear stress–strain relationship of the clay. 14 of 17
Both prediction curves of the Duncan–Chang model—one not considering the thix-
otropy of the clay and one that did consider it—were compared against the measured
results of the tests for the curing time of 90 days and different confining pressures, with
the tests fordisplayed
the results the curingintime of 90
Figure 7. days and different confining pressures, with the results
displayed in Figure 7.
400
measured results of the tests: 500 measured results of the tests:
σ3=150kPa σ3=250kPa
predicted results of the original Duncan-Chang model: predicted results of the original Duncan-Chang model:
300
400
predicted results of the improved Duncan-Chang model: predicted results of the improved Duncan-Chang model:
σ1-σ3 (kPa)

σ1-σ3 (kPa)
300
200

200

100
100

0 0
Sustainability 02022, 14, 12258
5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 16 of 19
ε1 (%) ε1 (%)

(a) σ3 = 150 kPa (b) σ3 = 250 kPa

700
measured results of the tests:
600 σ3=350kPa
predicted results of the original Duncan-Chang model:
500
predicted results of the improved Duncan-Chang model:
σ1-σ3 (kPa)

400

300

200

100

0
0 5 10 15 20
ε1 (%)

(c) σ3 = 350 kPa

Figure
Figure 7.
7. Comparison
Comparison between
between the
the predicted
predicted results
results of
of the
the model
model and
and the
the measured
measured results
results of
of tests.
tests.

The mean relative errors observed between these model prediction results and the
σ11 −−σσ3 in
experimental measured results of σ Figure
3 in Figure7 7are
arehighlighted
highlightedininTable
Table6.6.

Table 6. The mean relative

Table relative errors
errors between
betweenthe
themodel
modelprediction
predictionresults
resultsand
andthe
theexperimental
experimentalmeas-
mea-
ured resultsofofσσ1 1− −
suredresults σ3.σ3 .

Duncan–Chang
Duncan–ChangModelModel 150150
kPa
kPa 250
250kPa
kPa 350
350kPa
kPa
NotNot
considering Thixotropy
considering Thixotropy 23.07%
23.07% 22.24%
22.24% 22.27%
22.27%
Thixotropic
Thixotropic 4.23%
4.23% 4.72%
4.72% 9.33%
9.33%

Examining
Examining Figure
Figure 77 and
and Table 6, it
Table 6, it can
can be
be seen
seen that
that the
the Duncan–Chang
Duncan–Chang modelmodel that
that
considered the thixotropy of the clay reflected the stress–strain relationship of thixotropic
considered the thixotropy of the clay reflected the stress–strain relationship of thixotropic
clay
clay more
more accurately
accurately than
than the model that
the model that did
did not
not consider
consider thixotropy.
thixotropy. Furthermore,
Furthermore, its
its
mean
mean relative
relative error
error was
was smaller, indicating that
smaller, indicating that the
the established
established model
model is
is more
more suited
suited to
to
reflect the influence of thixotropy on the nonlinear stress–strain relationship of
reflect the influence of thixotropy on the nonlinear stress–strain relationship of clay. clay.

3.2.2. Numerical Simulation Validations

In order to further verify the validity of thethe proposed
proposed method,
method, the
the ABAQUS
ABAQUS software
software
was used
used to
to simulate
simulatetests.
tests.The
Theresults
resultsofofthe
thenumerical
numericalsimulation,
simulation,the predicted
the predictedresults of
results
the model, and the measured results of tests were weighed against each other for
of the model, and the measured results of tests were weighed against each other for vali- validation.
As thereAsisthere
dation. currently no constructive
is currently modelmodel
no constructive allowing for the
allowing forthixotropy of clay
the thixotropy in the
of clay in
ABAQUS
the ABAQUS software, thethe
software, model
modelwas
waswritten
writtenasasa aUMAT
UMATsubroutine
subroutineininFortran
Fortran language
and then subsequently embedded in the ABAQUS software. This enabled us to realize the
simulation of the thixotropy of clay. The results of the simulation of the test according to
the above conditions are presented in Figure 8.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 15 of 17

Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 17 of 19

simulation of the thixotropy of clay. The results of the simulation of the test according to
the above conditions are presented in Figure 8.

600 600 measured results of the tests: results of the numerical simulations:
550 measured results of the tests: results of the numerical simulations: σ3=150kPa σ3=150kPa
σ3=150kPa σ3=150kPa σ3=250kPa σ3=250kPa
500 500
σ3=250kPa σ3=250kPa σ3=350kPa σ3=350kPa
450 σ3=350kPa σ3=350kPa
predicted results of the model:

σ1-σ3 (kPa)
400 predicted results of the model: 400
σ1-σ3 (kPa)

350
300 300
250
200 200
150
100 100
50 0 5 10 15 20
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
1 ε1 (%) 1 ε1 (%)

2
2

3
3
εv (%)

εv (%)

4
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
8

(a) Curing for 10 days (b) Curing for 50 days

700
measured results of the tests: results of the numerical simulations:
600 σ3=150kPa σ3=150kPa
σ3=250kPa σ3=250kPa
500 σ3=350kPa σ3=350kPa
predicted results of the model:
σ1-σ3 (kPa)

400

300

200

100
A
0
0 5 10 15 20
1 ε1 (%)

3
εv (%)

(c) Curing for 90 days

Figure 8. Comparison of the measured results of the experiment, the predicted results of the model,
Figure 8. Comparison of the measured results of the experiment, the predicted results of the model,
and the numerical simulation results.
and the numerical simulation results.

As can be seen from Figure 8, the results of the numerical simulations, the measured
results of tests and the predicted results of the model were in agreement, adding further
validity to the developed model.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 16 of 17

As can be seen from Figure 8, the results of the numerical simulations, the measured
results of tests and the predicted results of the model were in agreement, adding further
validity to the developed model.

4. Conclusions
(1) The shear strength, cohesion, and angle of internal friction of the clay gradually
increases directly with the increase in the maintenance time, eventually stabilizing.
Among these given factors, the relationship between cohesion, angle of internal
friction, and maintenance time can all be expressed using a logarithmic function.
(2) The initial tangent modulus of the clay gradually increases in harmony with the
increase in the maintenance time before eventually reaching stabilization; the rela-
tionship between the initial tangent modulus and the maintenance time can also be
expressed using a logarithmic function.
(3) Compared with the Duncan–Chang model not considering thixotropy, the thixotropic
model that was applied in this paper can more accurately reflect the influence of clay
thixotropy on the clay stress–strain relationship, given its smaller mean relative error.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, B.T.; writing—original draft preparation, B.Z.; writing—review

and editing, T.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, grant
number 41867035; the Guangxi Natural Science Foundation, grant number 2020GXNSFAA297199;
and the Project of Guangxi Key Laboratory of Geotechnical Mechanics and Engineering, grant
number 2016-A-01.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the
corresponding author via e-mail: tangbin@glut.edu.cn.
Acknowledgments: We thank the funders, thank the helpful comments from the editors and review-
ers, and thank the contributions of all authors.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Ren, Y.; Yang, S.; Andersen, K.H.; Yang, Q.; Wang, Y. Thixotropy of soft clay: A review. Eng. Geol. 2021, 287, 106097. [CrossRef]
2. Cheng, W.C.; Li, G.; Liu, N.; Xu, J.; Horpibulsuk, S. Recent massive incidents for subway construction in soft alluvial deposits of
Taiwan: A review. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 2020, 96, 103178.1–103178.18. [CrossRef]
3. Al-Janabi, H.A.; Aubeny, C.P. Experimental measurement of thixotropy and sensitivity in gulf of Mexico clay. In Proceedings of
the International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers, Honolulu, HI, USA, 16–21 June 2019.
4. Ruge, J.C.; Molina-Gómez, F.; Rojas, J.P. Thixotropic behaviour study of clayey soils from the lacustrine deposits of Bogotá high
plateau. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2019, 1386, 012050. [CrossRef]
5. Kamil, A.S.; Aljorany, A.N. Thixotropic hardening of fao clay. J. Eng. 2019, 25, 68–78. [CrossRef]
6. Shahriar, A.R.; Jadid, R. An experimental investigation on the effect of thixotropic aging on primary and secondary compression
of reconstituted dredged clays. Appl. Clay Sci. 2018, 162, 524–533. [CrossRef]
7. Zeng, L.L.; Hong, Z.S.; Cui, Y.J. Time-dependent compression behaviour of dredged clays at high water contents in China. Appl.
Clay Sci. 2016, 123, 320–328. [CrossRef]
8. Yin, Z.Y.; Karstunen, M.; Chang, C.S.; Asce, M. Modeling time-dependent behavior of soft sensitive clay. J. Geotech. Geoenviron.
Eng. 2011, 137, 1103–1113. [CrossRef]
9. Tang, B.; Zhou, B.; Xie, L.; Yin, J. Evaluation method for thixotropy of clay subjected to unconfined compressive test. Front. Earth
Sci. 2021, 9, 683454. [CrossRef]
10. Zhang, X.W.; Kong, L.W.; Yang, A.W.; Sayem, H.M. Thixotropic mechanism of clay: A microstructural investigation. Soils Found.
2017, 57, 23–35. [CrossRef]
11. Shahriar, A.R.; Abedin, M.Z.; Jadid, R. Thixotropic aging and its effect on 1-D compression behavior of soft reconstituted clays.
Appl. Clay Sci. 2018, 153, 217–227. [CrossRef]
12. Alam, M.K.; Shahriar, A.R.; Islam, M.S.; Abedin, M.Z. Experimental investigation on the strength and deformation aspects of
thixotropic aging in reconstituted clays. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 2021, 39, 2471–2486. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2022, 14, 12258 17 of 17

13. Seng, S.; Tanaka, H. Properties of very soft clays: A study of thixotropic hardening and behavior under low consolidation pressure.
Soils Found. 2012, 52, 335–345. [CrossRef]
14. Dexter, A.R.; Horn, R.; Kemper, W.D. Two mechanisms for age-hardening of soil. J. Soil Sci. 1988, 39, 163–175. [CrossRef]
15. Barnes, H.A. Thixotropy-a review. J. Non-Newton. Fluid Mech. 1997, 70, 1–33. [CrossRef]
16. Dullaert, K.; Mewis, J. A structural kinetics model for thixotropy. J. Non-Newton. Fluid Mech. 2006, 139, 21–30. [CrossRef]
17. Chao, Y.; Carter, J.P.; Sheng, D.; Sloan, S.W. An isotach elastoplastic constitutive model for natural soft clays. Comput. Geotech.
2016, 77, 134–155.
18. Tang, B.; Zhou, B.; Xie, L.; Yin, J.; Zhao, S.; Wang, Z. Strength recovery model of clay during thixotropy. Adv. Civ. Eng. 2021,
2021, 8825107. [CrossRef]
19. Landro, G.; Brumaud, C.; Plötze, M.L.; Winnefeld, F.; Habert, G. A fresh look at dense clay paste: Deflocculation and thixotropy
mechanisms. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2018, 539, 252-160. [CrossRef]
20. Du, M.; Liu, P.; Wang, J.E.; Clode, P.L.; Liu, J.; Leong, Y.K. Colloidal forces, microstructure and thixotropy of sodium montmoril-
lonite (SWy-2) gels: Roles of electrostatic and van der Waals forces. Appl. Clay Sci. 2020, 195, 105710. [CrossRef]
21. Peng, J.; Luo, S.; Wang, D.; Ren, Y.; Zhang, G. Quantitative evaluation of thixotropy-governed microfabric evolution in soft clays.
Appl. Clay Sci. 2021, 210, 106157. [CrossRef]
22. Rinaldi, V.A.; Clariá, J.J. Time dependent stress–strain behavior of bentonite slurries; effect of thixotropy. Powder Technol. 2016,
291, 311–321. [CrossRef]
23. Huo, H.F.; Qi, L.; Lei, H.Y.; Yu, G. Consideration and experimental study on thixotropy of Tianjin soft clay. Chin. J. Rock Mech.
Eng. 2016, 35, 631–637.
24. Zhang, X.W.; Kong, L.W.; Li, J.; Yang, A.W. Microscopic mechanism of strength recovery in thixotropic process of clay. Chin. J.
Geotech. Eng. 2014, 36, 1407–1413.
25. Shen, S.L.; Jiang, Y.Q.; Cai, F.X.; Xu, Y.S. Mechanisms of Property Changes of Soft Clays Around Deep Mixing Column. Chin. J.
Rock Mech. Eng. 2005, 24, 4320–4327.
26. Tang, B.; Xie, L.; Wang, W.; Zhou, B.H.; Gong, Y.X. Unconfined compressive strength and pore structure evolution law of structural
clay after disturbance. Front. Earth Sci. 2022, 10, 932621. [CrossRef]
27. Duncan, J.M.; Chang, C.Y. Nonlinear analysis of stress and strain in soils. J. Soil Mech. Found. Div. 1970, 96, 1629–1653. [CrossRef]