Lectures Notes: Numerical Analysis in Geotechnical Engineering-Theory and Application - (Part 1: Introduction)

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/328730756
Lectures Notes : Numerical Analysis In Geotechnical Engineering–Theory

and Application-(Part 1: Introduction).
Presentation · November 2018

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.26455.11688
CITATIONS READS
0 5,261
1 author:
Mohamed Ezzat Al-Atroush

Prince Sultan University
31 PUBLICATIONS 94 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Dynamic Soil Structure Interaction View project
Deep Excavation View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Mohamed Ezzat Al-Atroush on 13 February 2019.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

11/4/2018
LECTURE 1
Conducted by:
Dr. Mohamed Ezzat
Assistant professor of Geotechnical Eng.
Department of Structural Eng.
Higher institute of Engineering
Shorouk Academy
Offered to :
“Theory and Application” Shorouk Academy
High institute of engineering
Soil Mech.& Foundation Eng.
Numerical Analysis in Geotechnical Eng
4rd Year – Structural Department.
Academic Year 2018-2019.
CIV 465.
Cairo, 22 / 9 / 2018
1
11/4/2018
Introduction
❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1
The Design of foundations have to

satisfy two fundamental requirements,
respectively;
1. Complete failure of the foundation
must be prevented with an sufficient
margin of safety,
2. The relative and total settlements of
the foundation must be kept within Fig (1), Foundation Failure of the condo building in
China
limits that can be tolerated by the
superstructure.
(Meyerhof, 1951)
• Safety factor of two is generally used in

practice to obtain the maximum safe pile
foundation load (Load Control Criteria).
• The settlement of the foundation under
working load has to be estimated
independently to ascertain its effect on the
superstructure (Settlement Control Criteria).
Fig (2), Relative and total settlement of pisa tower.
Page
Page
:4 :1 Dr.Eng.
Dr.Eng.
Mohamed
Mohamed
Ezzat
Ezzat Numerical
Numerical
analysis
analysis
in Geotechnical
in Geotechnical
Engineering
Engineering
2
11/4/2018
Soil is a complex multiphase material its

stress, strain and strength are represented by
pressure dependency with coupling between
shear and volumetric behavior.
For example: during drained shearing, dense
sands and highly over-consolidated clays tend to
dilate, whereas, loose sands and normally
consolidated clays tend to contract.
With these complexities it is not possible to think

in terms of developing a completely generalized
model for all soils. It is fundamental to tailor the
modeling of material behavior to the particular
problem of interest and the required accuracy of
solution.
Page :5 Dr.Eng. Mohamed Ezzat Numerical analysis in Geotechnical Engineering
Few Examples of Soil Problems:
• Soils are neither elastic, nor

homogeneous.
• Soils around the world vary.
• Same soil with different
saturations and consolidations
behaves differently.
• Soil properties are difficult to
accurately measure.
• in situ vs laboratory testing …
Fig (4), Stresses on soil element.
3
11/4/2018
Traditional Design methods

• Traditional methods of analysis often
use techniques that based on
assumptions that over simplify the
problem at hand.
• These methods lack the ability to

account for all of the factors and
variables the design engineer faces
and may severely limit the accuracy of
the solution. Fig (5), Simplified numerical model for
raft foundation.
• There are many well developed (using traditional methods)
theories and approaches based on soil
mechanics to solve a geo-tech.
problems that can be simply applied
when considering the assumption of
the theory or approach.
Example (1) : Analysis of Retaining Structures
However,,
Fig (6), Rankine and Coulomb Theories of Lateral earth pressure.
After Prof. F.Al Kadi, Lecture notes, 2016
4
11/4/2018
1. Field measurements for earth pressure on retaining walls
Observation:
• For last measurements, coefficient
of earth pressure was more than
active earth pressure and equal
approximately to earth pressure at
rest.
Fig (7),

9
❑ Numerical Analysis Methods Lecture No. 1
1. Field measurements for earth pressure on retaining walls
Fig (10), Comparison between field measurements and theoretical calculation

10
5
11/4/2018
1.Field measurements for earth pressure on retaining walls
Fig (11), field measurements of lateral earth pressure with time change.
11
CONCLUSION
‫يتضح من دراسة نتائج القياسات المعملية والحقلية لضغط التراب على‬

-:‫الحائط الساند اآلتي‬
‫• توزيع ضغط التراب على الحائط الساند وقيمته يعتمد على النظام‬
‫االستاتيكي للحائط وجساءته باإلضافة إلى خواص تربة الردم خلف‬
.‫الحائط الساند وخواص التربة التي يرتكز عليها‬
‫• قيمة ضغط التراب على الحائط و توزيعه يختلف مع الزمن‬
‫) لحدوث تدامك في تربة الردم خلفه‬FUNCTION OF TIME(
‫وكذلك هبوط في التربة أسفل األساسات باإلضافة إلى التشوهات‬
‫) التي تحدث في الجسم الخرساني للحائط‬DEFORMATIONS(
12
6
11/4/2018
2. Soil Subgrade modulus

Modulus of subgrade reaction or spring constant or "k value" is one of the
most misunderstood and misused term in design of foundations.
Fig (13),
Traditional linear method :

𝑆𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠
𝐾𝑠 =
𝑆𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡
Example
• Draw vertical stress distribution under both footings. Also calculate the induced
settlement under each footing.
• Using the traditional methods, Determine the soil subgrade modulus (Ks) for each
footing, and comment on results.
• Using any simplified analysis software (Sap2000, Safe, etc..). Draw the bending moment
diagram (B.M.D) for both footings. (use the calculated [ks] in your analysis).
7
11/4/2018
Footing (1): 2x2m

Effective Depth 4.300 mm
Total Settlement 10.016 mm
Stress at F.L 110.000 kn/m2
Vertical Subgrade Reaction K
10982 kn/m3
(kN/m3)
Footing (2): 4x4m

Effective Depth 8.600 m
Total Settlement 20.024 mm
Stress at F.L 110.000 kn/m2
Vertical Subgrade
5493 kn/m3
Reaction K (kN/m3)
Fig (15), Vertical stress distribution along effective Fig (16), Vertical stress distribution along effective
depth under the 2x2m footing depth under the 4x4m footing

Corner Spring
Example Ksc
A Raft foundation (B× 2B) in plan dimensions

rests on a compressible layer of stiff clay 3B
in Thickness. Assuming the modulus of soil
elasticity (ES) is 20 MN/m2. Compute the Edge Spring Inner Spring
Kse Ksi
value of the coefficient of subgrade reaction
(KSO) to be used for analysis of the raft soil
system as a plate supported on springs (using 0.60 m
Table 3-22).
0.50 m
If the spacing between the springs is 0.50 m in
one direction and 0.60 m in the other
direction, compute the stiffness of the edge
spring corner spring, and interior spring.
8
11/4/2018
Relationship between (K) and (Es)

𝑠 𝐸
Kso = 𝐵 ×𝐼 (For Homogenous soil)
• B: Min. width of footing.

• I: In fluence factor )22 – 3 ‫(جدول‬
• Kso: Coefficient of subgrade reaction
• Es: Modulus of soil elasticity.
Given: Required:
• ES = 20 * 103 kN/m2 1) KSO
• L * B = 2B * B (footing dims.) 2) KSi , KSe , KSc
• d = 3B (Thickness of compressible layer)
Solution:
𝐸 𝑥 ∗𝑦 𝐾𝑠𝑖 3352.71
𝑆
1) Kso = 𝐵 ∗𝐼 ~ሶ Kse = Kso * = = kN/m’
2 2 𝐵
𝑥 ∗𝑦 𝐾𝑠𝑖 1676.352
Using Table (3-22) ~ሶ Ksc = Kso * = = kN/m’
4 4 𝐵
L/B = 2B/B = 2
d/B = 3B/B = 3
20 ∗ 103 I = 0.8948
~ሶ Kso = 𝐵 ∗0.8948 = 222351.36/B kN/m3
2) Ks = Kso * loading area
~ሶ Ksi = Kso * x * y
22351.36 6705.41
= * 0.5 * 0.6 = 𝐵 kN/m’
𝐵
9
11/4/2018
3.Effect of Raft Thickness (Swastik Metro Building Project)
Fig (18), Effect of Raft Thickness on soil subgrade modulus

MIDAS Co. (2014). Technical Seminar,
CONCLUSION
Thus, K value depends on:
1) width of footing
2) Variations in founding strata.
3) Rigidity of Raft & superstructure
Fig (19), Shape of settlement and contact

stress under rigid and flexible foundation.
Fig (20), Relation between soil stresses and deformation

10
11/4/2018
Example (4) : Stage of Construction effect
11
11/4/2018
Numerical
Analysis Methods
Numerical methods of stress and deformation analysis could be

classified into two categories:
Integral Methods Differential Methods
• Only problem boundary is • problem domain is defined & discretized
defined & discretized • non-linear & heterogeneous material
• more computationally efficient properties
• restricted to elastic analyses • Longer solution run times
Fig (24), underground tunnels

,
Erik Eberhardt – UBC Geological Engineering EOSC 433 (2017)
12
11/4/2018
Numerical Analysis – Differential Methods

Continuum Methods Dis-continuum Methods
• Rock/soil mass behaviour represented • Rock mass represented as a

as a continuum. assemblage of distinct interacting
• Procedure exploits approximations to blocks or bodies.
the connectivity of elements, and • Blocks are subdivided into a
continuity of displacements and deformable finite-difference mesh
stresses between elements. which follows linear or non-linear
stress-strain laws.
,
Overview of the most useable numerical approaches and methods

Continuum Methods
▪Finite Difference Method (FDM )
▪Finite Volume Method (FVM)
▪Finite Element Method (FEM)
▪Meshless Methods
▪Boundary Element Methods (BEM)
Discontinuum Methods
▪Discrete Element Method (DEM)
▪Discrete Fracture Network Method (DFN)
Hybrid Methods
▪Discrete Finite Element Method
▪Combined Finite Discrete Element Method FEM/DEM
13
11/4/2018
Finite Difference method (FDM)
Common Finite element Method (FEM)

Numerical
Methods in Kinematic element method (KEM)
Geotechnical
Engineering
Boundary element method (BEM)
Discrete Element Method (DEM)
The discrete element method (DEM)

The DEM started to develop in the field of
the rock mechanic applications due to its
requirements for modelling the discontinuous
behaviour. The method was primarily defined
as the computational approach that can
simulate finite displacements and rotations of
discrete bodies including their detachment. Fig (30),
The theoretical formulations are based upon
the equations of motion of rigid or
deformable bodies using implicit or explicit
time integrations. The basic concept is to treat
the domain of interest as an assembly of
particles or blocks which are continuously
interacting between each other. In the DEM
approach, the contact between components of
the system is constantly changing during the
deformation process. Fig (31),
14
11/4/2018
The discrete element method (DEM)

Later on, many different numerical methods based on
DEM developed for various rock mechanics problems.
The main strength of the approach was the fact that the
real discontinuities could be simulated, as well as
representing the rock blocks which move and interact
between each other including the fragmentation process
etc. All of DEM based methods have the similar basic
approach, while the differences between them are the
use of various shapes of discrete elements, the way of
computing the contact forces between the discrete
Fig (32),
bodies, the way of recognizing the contact, the way of
integration of equations of motion, etc. The contact
between the discrete bodies is essential part of solving
the task. Nowadays, the mostly used contact algorithms
are penalty, Lagrangian multiplier and augmented
Lagrangian types of contact. The overview of the
contact models can be found in :
Wriggers P. Computational Contact Mechanics.
Springer, Berlin, Second Edition, 2006 Fig (33),
Combined Finite Discrete Element Method FEM/DEM
15
11/4/2018
Finite element Method (FEM)
Brief overview of Finite

element Analysis:
R. Courant, who utilized the
Ritz method of numerical
analysis and minimization of
variation calculus to obtain
approximate solutions to
vibration systems, first
developed finite Element
Analysis (FEA) in 1943.
Shortly thereafter, in 1956 M.
J. Turner, R. W. Clough, H. C.
Martin, and L. J. Topp
Fig (36), 3D finite element model for a high rise
established a broader definition structure and soil media. (Midas GTS NX)
of numerical analysis. The
paper centered on the "stiffness
and deflection of complex
structures".
16
11/4/2018
Finite element analysis are

now an important and
frequently used part of
engineering analysis and
design, finite element
computer programs are now
widely implemented in
practically all branches of
engineering for the analysis of
structures, solids, fluids,
geotechnical problems,…etc.
Fig (37), Soil structure interaction analysis of skyscraper
with Midas Gen & GTS NX
Applications
• Shallow Foundation
• Deep Foundation
• Pit excavation
• Tunneling
• Dams
• Soil improvement
• Retaining structures
• Drainage / dewatering
Fig (38), 3D axisymmetric finite element model for an
• Underpinning underground tunnel. (Midas GTS NX)
• Dynamics
• Environmental engineering,,,
Etc..
17
11/4/2018
Plaxis Vietnam Seminar, 2007
18
11/4/2018
19
11/4/2018
Comparison
between
Traditional
Structural analysis
and
Soil
Structure
interaction analysis
Case study
Tunnel at Silo complex
At Northern Cost of Egypt
The capacity of bucket elevator and

machinery inside the tunnel were increase
during Re-habitation , which increased
supported loads by machine tower and
direct loads on the Tunnel
Fig (44), Silos model
Northen Cost Silos Project, O.Kadi, NECB, MIDAS symposium for GEO-
Technical Engineering, 2016
20
11/4/2018
Case study
Fig (46), Soil Profile (CPT TEST Results )

Northen Cost Silos Project, O.Kadi, NECB, MIDAS symposium for GEO-
Technical Engineering, 2016
Case study
Fig (46), 3D FE Model.
Northen Cost Silos Project, O.Kadi, NECB, MIDAS symposium for GEO-Technical Engineering, 2016
21
11/4/2018
Case study
Tunnel at Silo
complex
Fig (48), Deformation results
Northen Cost Silos Project, O.Kadi, NECB, MIDAS

symposium for GEO-Technical Engineering, 2016 Fig (49), Pile load distribution results
Comparison
Tunnel at Silo complex
Fig. (50), Non Soil-

Structure interaction
model
Fig. (51), Soil-Structure

interaction model
Northen Cost Silos Project, O.Kadi, NECB, MIDAS symposium for GEO-Technical Engineering, 2016
22
11/4/2018
FEM
Common Software's:
FLAC (Itasca) - http://www.itascacg.com/
Phase2 (Rocscience) - http://www.rocscience.com/
DIANA (TNO) - http://www.tnodiana.com/
ELFEN (Rockfield Software Ltd.) - http://www.rockfield.co.uk/
VISAGE (VIPS Ltd.) - http://vips.co.uk/
Midas GTS NX (MIDAS CO.) -http://en.midasuser.com
PLAXIS (PLAXIS BV) - http://www.plaxis.nl/
SVSolid (Soil Vision Systems Ltd.) - http://www.soilvision.com/
ANSYS (ANSYS, Inc.) - http://www.ansys.com/
Fig (53),
23
11/4/2018

Physical problem Change of
physical
problem
Mathematical model
Governed by differential equations Assumptions on
• Geometry Improve
• Kinematics mathematical
• Material law model
• Loading
• Boundary conditions
• Etc.
Finite element solution Choice of

• Finite elements
• Mesh density
• Solution parameters
Finite element Representation of
solution • Loading
of mathematical • Boundary conditions Refine mesh, solution
model • Etc. parameters, etc.
Assessment of accuracy of finite element

solution of mathematical model
Refine
Interpretation of results
analysis
Design improvements
Structural optimization
24
11/4/2018
LECTURE 2
❑ Numerical Modelling Lecture No. 2

physical
problem
Mathematical model
• Loading
• Etc.

• Finite elements
• Mesh density

Refine
analysis
Design improvements
25
11/4/2018
Numerical Modelling
Theoretical considerations
Requirements for a general solution
In general, a theoretical solution must satisfy:

Equilibrium,
Compatibility,
The material Constitutive behavior
Boundary conditions (both force and displacement).
David M. Potts
Imperial College of Science
London, November 1998
26
11/4/2018
1. Equilibrium,
To quantify how forces are transmitted through a continuum engineers use the concept of
stress (force/unit area). The magnitude and direction of a stress and the manner in which it
varies spatially indicates how the forces are transferred. However, these stresses cannot vary
randomly but must obey certain rules.
a. water flowing through a tank full of sand

b. Concrete beam, supported by two reactions
Figure 1. Stress trajectories

As would be expected, the flows are very small in regions A, Band C.
Potts D.M. & Zdravkovic L. (1999).

Elastic Theory (3D state of stress)
Normal and Shear Stresses on a typical soil element
Recall that:
𝜎𝑥 Normal Stress in the x direction
𝜎𝑦 𝜏𝑥𝑦 = 𝜏𝑦𝑥
Normal stress in the y direction
𝜎𝑧
σ= 𝜏𝑦𝑧 = 𝜏𝑧𝑦
𝜏𝑥𝑦 Normal stress in the z direction
𝜏𝑦𝑧 𝜏𝑧𝑥 = 𝜏𝑥𝑧
𝜏𝑧𝑥 Shear stress on the xy plane
Shear stress on the yz plane
Shear stress on the zx plane
There are 6 independent unknown stresses
Figure 1: Normal and Shear Stresses on a

typical soil element
27
11/4/2018
The following should be noted:
Self-weight, y, acts in the x direction;

- compressive stresses are assumed positive;
- the equilibrium Equations (1.1) are in terms of
total stresses;
stresses must satisfy the boundary conditions
(i.e. at the boundaries the
stresses must be in equilibrium with the applied
surface traction forces).
𝜕𝜎𝑥 𝜕𝜏𝑦𝑥 𝜕𝜏𝑧𝑥

+ + +𝛾 =0
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧
𝜕𝜏𝑥𝑦 𝜕𝜎𝑦 𝜕𝜏𝑧𝑦 Figure 2: Stresses on a typical element
+ + =0 (𝟏. 𝟏)
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧
𝜕𝜏𝑥𝑧 𝜕𝜏𝑦𝑧 𝜕𝜎𝑧
+ + =0
𝜕𝑥 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑧 Equilibrium Equations
Compatibility
1.Physical compatibility:
Compatible deformation involves no overlapping of material and no generation of holes.
Figure 3: Modes of deformation
2.Mathematical compatibility
The above physical interpretation of compatibility can be expressed mathematically, by
considering the definition of strains
28
11/4/2018
(3D state of stress)
Axial strain in the x direction

𝜀𝑥
If deformations are
𝜀𝑦 Axial strain in the y direction
6 independent 𝜀𝑧 defined by continuous
and unknown ε = 𝛾𝑥𝑦
Axial strain in the z direction functions u, v and w in the x, y
strains 𝛾𝑦𝑧 Shear strain in the xy plane and z directions respectively,
𝛾𝑧𝑥 the strains (assuming small
Shear strain in the yz plane strain theory and a
Shear strain in the zx plane
compression positive sign
convention) are defined as
(Timoshenko and Goodier
(1951)
u Displacement in the x direction
3 independent
and unknown u = v Displacement in the y direction
displacement w
Displacement in the z direction
Strain and displacement relations for 3D
ε=∂u Définitions of axial and shear strain Compatibility Equations
𝜕𝑢
𝜀𝑥 = Axial strain in the x-direction
𝜕𝑥
𝜕𝑣
𝜀𝑦 = Axial strain in the y-direction
𝜕𝑦
(1.2)
𝜕𝑤
𝜀𝑧 = Axial strain in the z-direction
𝜕𝑧
𝜕𝑢 𝜕𝑣
𝛾𝑥𝑦 = + Shear strain in the x-y plane
𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑥
𝜕𝑣 𝜕𝑤
𝛾𝑦𝑧 = + Shear strain in the y-z plane
𝜕𝑧 𝜕𝑦
𝜕𝑢 𝜕𝑤
𝛾𝑧𝑥 = + Shear strain in the z-x plane
𝜕𝑧 𝜕𝑥
Hooke’s Law in frequently written in terms of the engineering shear

strain,
29
11/4/2018
Equilibrium and compatibility conditions

Combining the Equilibrium (Equations (1.1)) and Compatibility conditions (Equations
(1.2))gives:
Unknowns: 6 stresses + 6 strains + 3 displacements = 15

Equations: 3 equilibrium + 6 compatibility = 9
To obtain a solution therefore requires 6 more equations. These come from the constitutive
relationships.
Constitutive behavior
This is a description of material behaviour. In simple terms it is the stress – strain

behaviour of the soil. It usually takes the form of a relationship between stresses and
strains and therefore provides a link between equilibrium and compatibility. For
calculation purposes the constitutive behaviour has to be expressed mathematically:
Δσ = [D] Δε
OR
∆𝜎𝑥 𝐷11 𝐷12 𝐷13 𝐷14 𝐷15 𝐷16 ∆𝜀𝑥
∆𝜎𝑦 𝐷21 𝐷22 𝐷23 𝐷24 𝐷25 𝐷26 ∆𝜀𝑦
∆𝜎𝑧 𝐷 𝐷32 𝐷33 𝐷34 𝐷35 𝐷36 ∆𝜀𝑧
∆𝜏𝑥𝑦 = 31 ∆𝛾𝑥𝑦 (1.3)
𝐷41 𝐷42 𝐷43 𝐷44 𝐷45 𝐷46
∆𝜏𝑥𝑧 𝐷51 𝐷52 𝐷53 𝐷54 𝐷55 𝐷56 ∆𝛾𝑥𝑧
∆𝜏𝑧𝑦 𝐷61 𝐷62 𝐷63 𝐷64 𝐷65 𝐷66 ∆𝛾𝑧𝑦
30
11/4/2018
Example : 3D Hooke's Law

To solve for these 15 unknowns,we have:
• 3 equations of force equilibrium (from the stresses)
• 6 equations of compatibility (from the strains)
Hence, the system is statically indeterminate and to overcome this deficiency, we need 6
more equations. These equations can be obtained from relating stress and strain and
assuming an isotropic medium.
For the linear elastic, isotropic case(i.e., stiffness the same in all directions), the stresses
and strains can be related through Hooke's law and the system of equations is solvable.
σ=Dε Stresses from Hooke’s Law
D : Material Stiffness matrix.
For a linear elastic material the [D] matrix takes the following form:
(1 − 𝜇) 𝜇 𝜇 0 0 0
𝜇 (1 − 𝜇) 𝜇 0 0 0
𝐸 𝜇 𝜇 (1 − 𝜇) 0 0 0
0 (1.4)
(1 + 𝜇) 0 0 0 (1/2 − 𝜇) 0
0 0 0 0 (1/2 − 𝜇) 0
0 0 0 0 0 (1/2 − 𝜇)
where E and  are the Young's Modulus and Poisson's ratio respectively.
BUT, Remember !
Soil is a complex multiphase material its
stress, strain and strength are represented by
pressure dependency with coupling between
shear and volumetric behavior.
For example: during drained shearing, dense
sands and highly over-consolidated clays tend to
dilate, whereas, loose sands and normally
consolidated clays tend to contract.
31
11/4/2018
Stresses
σ = [σxx σyy σzz σxy σyz σzx]T
σ = σ’ + σf
σ = total stresses
σ’ = effective stresses
σf = pore pressure (isotropic):
• Hydrostatic (constant head)
• Non-hydrostatic (variable head → groundwater flow)
• Excess pore press. (undrained behavior → consolidation)
Strains
Cartesian strains: ε = [εxx ε yy εzz εxy εyz εzx]T
Normal strains Shear strains
𝝏𝒖𝒙 𝝏𝒖𝒙 𝝏𝒖𝒚
𝜺𝒙𝒙 = 𝜸𝒙𝒚 = +
𝝏𝒙 𝝏𝒚 𝝏𝒙
𝝏𝒖𝒚 𝝏𝒖𝒚 𝝏𝒖𝒛
𝜺𝒚𝒚 = 𝜸𝒚𝒛 = +
𝝏𝒚 𝝏𝒛 𝝏𝒚
𝝏𝒖𝒛 𝝏𝒖𝒛 𝝏𝒖𝒙
𝜺𝒛𝒛 = 𝜸𝒛𝒙 = + Potts D.M. & Zdravkovic L. (1999).
𝝏𝒛 𝝏𝒙 𝝏𝒛
However, because soil usually behaves in a nonlinear manner, it is more realistic for the
constitutive equations to relate increments of stress and strain, as indicated in Equation (1.3),
and for the [D] matrix to depend on the current and past stress history.
The constitutive behaviour can either be expressed in terms of total or effective stresses. If
specified in terms of effective stresses, the principle of effective stress (a =σ’+σf) may be
invoked to obtain total stresses required for use with the
equilibrium equations:
Δσ’= [D’] Δε; Δσf = [Df] Δε; therefore Δσ = ([D’] + [Df]) Δε (1.5)
where [Df ] is a constitutive relationship relating the change in pore fluid pressure to the
change in strain. For undrained behaviour, the change in pore fluid pressure is related to
the volumetric strain (which is small) via the bulk compressibility of the pore fluid
32
11/4/2018
Constitutive laws are the relationships between stresses and strains
a- linearly elastic b- nonlinearly elastic
c- plastic d- Rigid, perfectly plastic e- elasto-plastic

1) Perfectly plastic,
2) Strain hardening
El-Mossallamy, Y (2008). 3) Strain softening
Page :65 a- linearly elastic
Dr.Eng. Mohamed Ezzat b- nonlinearly
Numerical analysis inelastic
Geotechnical Engineering
f- visco-elastic creep at constant g- visco-elastic relaxation at

stress constant strain
El-Mossallamy, Y (2008).
33
11/4/2018
Summary
Basic concepts of the Finite element method (deformations):
equilibrium Load stiffness matrix
Stress Displacement
constitutive relation kinematics

Strain
• The Finite Element Method (FEM) is a numerical technique to find an
approximate solution for a (set of) partial differential equation(s).
• The Finite Element Method for deformations is based on the following
principles:
• Equilibrium (between external forces and internal stresses)
• Kinematics (displacements and strains)
• Constitutive relation (material behaviour) Potts D.M. & Zdravkovic L. (1999).
Numerical Problem Solving
,
34
11/4/2018
Geometric idealisation
In order to apply the above concepts to a real geotechnical problem, certain assumptions and
idealisations must be made. In particular, it is necessary to specify soil behaviour in the form
of a mathematical constitutive relationship. It may also be necessary to simplify and/or
idealise the geometry and /or boundary conditions of the problem.
2D Plain strain model 2D Axisymmetric model 3D Model

• Retaining walls. • Circular footing • General Modeling criteria
• Slope stability. • Single pile analysis • If the model is Axis-
• Tunnels. • Flow of injections and symmetric ¼ the model
• Strip footing pumping out wells can be used.
• Seepage 2D analysis
• Road Embankments Potts D.M. & Zdravkovic L. (1999).
Page :70 Dr. Eng. Mohamed Ezzat Numerical analysis in Geotechnical Engineering
35
11/4/2018
Problem Solving: 2-D or 3-D?

Many geotechnical problems can be assumed to be plane strain(2-D assumption)
without significant loss of accuracy of the solution.
• in plane strain, one dimension must be considerably longer than the other two;
• strains along the out-of plane direction can be assumed to be zero;
• as such, we only have to solve for strains in one 2-D plane.
Figure 4: Examples of plane strain

,
Stresses due to a strip loading
36
11/4/2018
Figure 5: Example of PLAXIS Problems: a) Plane Strain, and b) Axisymmetric

(PLAXIS, 2011)
,
37
11/4/2018
Midas GTS User Supplied Subroutine. (2009).
38
11/4/2018
Example 1 : Deep Excavation Problem

2-D Plane strain model
3-D model
Ezzat M, 2018, numerical modelling of Rod al farag underground metro station
39
11/4/2018
The 2-D analysis didn’t consider the corners effect.
Ezzat M, 2018, numerical modelling of Rod al farag underground metro station
Example 2 : Bearing Capacity of Single Pile
1.Pile Load Transfer Mechanism

Figure, Load settlement curve of loading pile (After Figure, Strain gauge reading on pile shaft (load
Tomlinson, 1995). transfer curves) (After Tomlinson, 1995).
40
11/4/2018
1.Pile Load Transfer Mechanism
(After Oneil et al., 1987). After Tomlinson, 1995
2. Failure Mechanism
Figure 6: Arching around the pile tip: principle sketch (top left), skin friction
(bottom left) and principle stresses (right) (After Wehnert and Vermeer ,2004).
41
11/4/2018
1. Bearing capacity of single pile under vertical compression load

Design criteria
Standards
Bearing Capacity (Ultimate limit state ULS)
(e.g. Egyptian code of practice)
- Correlation with In-Situ tests

CPT, Pressuremeter test, …
- Methods based on analytical solution Pile diameter less than 60 cm
(static and dynamic formulae) Large diameter bored piles
- Pile load test (D > 60 cm)
Deformation(Serviceability limit state SLS)
- Method based on theory of elasticity

- Numerical Analysis
- Pile load test (in most cases for single pile)
Pile loading test
(a) Kentledge of stacked concrete

blocks.
(b) Reaction system. (c) Osterberg cell load test.
(Quoted from FHWA, 1999).
(d) Statnamic pile load test.

(Quoted from FHWA, 1999). El-Mossallamy, Y (2015).
42
11/4/2018
Load-settlement relationship Load
Elastic
Settlement

Allowable load
Ultimate limit state Load
Failure
Elastic
Settlement
Ultimate limit state
43
11/4/2018
Serviceability limit state

Load
max. load
(Serviceability requirements)
Elastic
max. allowable settlement
Settlement
Allowable load
Allowable Load (1) Load
max. load (2)
(Serviceability
Elastic requirements)
max. allowable settlement

Failure
load
Settlement
Allowable Load =
min [ (1) or (2)]
44
11/4/2018
3-D model
2-D Axisymmetric model
Ezzat M., et al. (2018).
Deformed Shape
45
11/4/2018
Finite element result of the Finite element result of the Formed Finite element result of the Finite element result of the
Formed plastic points at the plastic points at the second stage Formed plastic points under load Formed plastic points under load
initial stage. (concreting). increment 1. increment 2.
Finite element result of the Finite element result of the Finite element result of the
Formed plastic points under Formed plastic points under load Finite element result of the Formed Formed plastic points under
load increment 3. increment 4. plastic points under load increment 5. load increment 6.
Finite element result of the Finite element result of the Finite element result of the Finite element result of the Formed
Formed plastic points under Formed plastic points under Formed plastic points under plastic points under load increment
load increment 7. load increment 8. load increment 9. 10 (Failure load).
LECTURE 3
46
11/4/2018

physical
problem
Mathematical model
• Loading
• Etc.

• Finite elements
• Mesh density

Refine
analysis
Design improvements
Numerical Modelling
47
11/4/2018
Geometry
Geometrical Topology
Midas GTS User Supplied

Subroutine. (2009).
Geometry & Element discretisation

The geometry of the boundary value problem under investigation must be defined and
quantified. Simplifications and approximations may be necessary during this process.
This geometry is then replaced by an equivalent finite element mesh which is
composed of small regions called finite elements.
Geometry model
Generated finite element mesh of the
geometry around the Tunnel.
48
11/4/2018
Examples
Shallow Foundation Model Deep Foundation Model
Geometry model Geometry model
Generated finite element mesh of the geometry around

the footing, Using PLAXIS Generated finite element mesh of the geometry around
the Pile, Using MIDAS GTS NX

Type of Elements
One dimensional elements
Truss Element Beam Element

DOF
Truss elements have a displacement and rotation DOF DOF
in the ECS x axis direction.
N - {ui vi wi}T , θi - {θi θi θi}T
ui = {ui} , θi - {θxi}
Stress and Strain
Beam elements can consider the ECS defined axial
Stress and Strain deformation, bending, torsion, shear deformation
Truss elements express the ECS defined axial etc., as shown in figure 3.7.6. When Euler’s theory
deformation and torsion, as shown in figure 3.7.1. (which does not consider shear deformation) is
applied, the shear area factor is input as 0.
N = {Nxx} , ε - {εxx}
N - {Nxx} , ε = {εxx}
(Axial force and strain)
(Axial force and strain)
49
11/4/2018
Two dimensional elements
DOF
Axisymmetric solid elements have
displacement DOF in the GCS x (radial
direction) and y directions.
ui = {ui vi}T
Stress and Strain
Axisymmetric solid elements consider strain and stress defined
on the GCS, and the components are as follows:
σ𝑥𝑥 ε𝑥𝑥
σ𝜃𝜃 ε𝜃𝜃
σ= σ𝑦𝑦 , ε = ε𝑦𝑦
𝜏𝑦𝑥 γ𝑦𝑥
(In-plane/circumferential direction stress and strain)
For two dimensional (2D) problems, the finite elements are usually
triangular or quadrilateral in shape. Their geometry is specified in
terms of the coordinates of key points on the element called nodes
. 10 noded 15 noded
3 noded 6 noded
Triangular elements
8 noded 12 noded
4 noded
Quadrilateral elements
50
11/4/2018
2D isoparametric elements with possible stress points:
Triangular elements
Quadrilateral elements
DOF
Three dimensional elements The global coordinate system (GCS) of a solid
element has a displacement DOF in the x , y , z
axis directions.
ui = {ui vi wi}T
Stress and Strain

A solid element considers the stress and strain
defined by the GCS. Its components are as
follows:
σ𝑥𝑥 𝜀𝑥𝑥
σ𝑦𝑦 𝜀𝑦𝑦
σ𝑧𝑧 𝜀𝑧𝑧
σ= 𝜏𝑥𝑦 , ε = 𝛾𝑥𝑦
𝜏𝑦𝑧 𝛾𝑦𝑧
𝜏𝑧𝑥 𝛾𝑧𝑥
(3 dimensional stress and strain)
51
11/4/2018
Isoparametric elements 3D isoparametric

for three-dimensional elements with possible
(3D) analysis: Gauss points:
Tetrahedral
elements
Quadrilater
al elements
Element and nodes in a FE mesh (global node numbers are indicated):

52
11/4/2018
The geometry of the boundary value

problem must be approximated as
accurately as possible. If there are
curved boundaries or curved material
interfaces, the higher order elements,
with mid-side nodes should be used,
Examples of good and bad meshes Use of higher order elements

Discretization
Boundary Element
Model Depth
Model Width
53
11/4/2018
Recommendations Geometry Dimensions
Boundary Element
Model Depth
Single pile model geometry Single pile model geometry

(After Fayiz, 1992). (After Baars and Niekerk,
1999).
Model Width
Circular footing model geometry

Sensitivity Analysis
• Several analysis attempts should be carried out with

different mesh size, geometry widths, and geometry
depths in order to investigate the effect of boundaries
location on the analysis result.
• This Sensitivity analysis showed that the positions of

the model boundaries do not affect the obtained
stresses and displacement around the analysis zone.

54
11/4/2018
Single Pile Example
• Pile Diameter = 1.30m

• Pile Length =9.50 m
• Axially compression Loaded

Mesh Size Effect
Finite element meshes with different sizes.

(a) coarse mesh, (b) medium mesh (c) fine mesh.
55
11/4/2018
Mesh Size Effect

Load (kN)
0 2000 4000 6000
-
20.00
Settlement (mm)
40.00
FEM Results Coarse
mesh (Size=1 m)
60.00
FEM Results Meduim
mesh (Size=0.4 m)
80.00 FEM Results Fine
mesh (Size=0.2 m)
100.00
120.00
140.00
Load settlement results of the three finite element models with

different levels of refinement.
Mesh size has a major effect on numerical results of the pile settlement
at the ultimate state, as the induced pile settlement at failure state is
increased as mesh size decreases.
Geometry Dimensions Effect
Finite element models of five single bored piles with different geometry widths of 10mx16m,
15mx16m, 20mx16m, 25mx16m, and 30 mx16m).
Finite element models of five single bored piles with different geometry depths of 15mx16m,
15mx25m, 15mx30m, 15mx40m, and 15 mx45m).
56
11/4/2018
115.5 118.00
Pile max Settlement (mm)
Pile max Settlement (mm)

115 116.00
114.5 114.00
114
112.00
113.5
110.00
113
112.5 108.00
112 106.00
111.5 104.00
0 10 20 30 40 0 20 40 60
Geometry Width (m) Geometry Depth (m)
Pile Settlement (mm) Pile Settlement (mm)
Relations between maximum obtained Relations between maximum

pile settlement and model geometry obtained pile settlement and model
width. geometry depth.

Types of Boundaries
57
11/4/2018
Modelling Example
One of the simplest forms of a foundation is the shallow foundation. In this exercise
we will model such a shallow foundation with a width of 2 meters and a length that is
sufficiently long in order to assume the model to be a plane strain model. The
foundation is put on top of a 4m thick clay layer. The clay layer has a saturated
weight of 18 kN/m3 and an angle of internal friction of 20°.
Geometry of the shallow foundation.

The foundation carries a small building that is being modelled with a vertical point force.
Additionally a horizontal point force is introduced in order to simulate any horizontal
loads acting on the building, for instance wind loads. Taking into account that in future
additional floors may be added to the building the maximum vertical load (failure load) is
assessed.
58
11/4/2018
Table 1: Material properties of the clay layer and the concrete footing
SCHEME OF OPERATIONS
This exercise illustrates the basic idea of a finite element deformation analysis. In order to keep
the problem as simple as possible, only elastic perfectly-plastic behaviour is considered. Besides
the procedure to generate the finite element mesh, attention is paid to the input of boundary
conditions, material properties, the actual calculation and inspection of some output results.
Aims B) Calculations
• Geometry input • Initial pore pressures and stresses
• Initial stresses and parameters • Construct footing
• Calculation of vertical load representing the • Apply vertical force
building weight • Apply horizontal force
• Calculation of vertical and horizontal load • Increase vertical force until failure occurs
representing building weight and wind force
• Calculation of vertical failure load. C) Inspect output
A) Geometry input
• General settings
• Input of geometry lines
• Input of boundary conditions
• Input of material properties
• Mesh generation
59
11/4/2018
Draw Geometry lines
Create Faces and sew them
Define Materials and select the constative model.
60
11/4/2018
Define Properties
Meshing
Define Boundary conditions.
61
11/4/2018
Define Loads
Define Cases of Construction.
62
11/4/2018
Select Analysis options
Vertical Displacement under Vertical load
Vertical Displacement under both horizontal and Vertical loads
63
11/4/2018
Horizontal Displacement under Vertical load
Horizontal Displacement under both horizontal and Vertical loads
Horizontal Displacement under Failure load
Vertical Displacement under Failure load
64
11/4/2018
LECTURE 4

physical
problem
Mathematical model
• Loading
• Etc.

• Finite elements
• Mesh density

Refine
analysis
Design improvements
65
11/4/2018
Numerical Modelling
Interface Elements
• In any soil-structure interaction
situation, relative movement of the
structure with respect to the soil can
occur.
• The use of continuum elements, with
compatibility of displacements, in a
finite element analysis of these
situations prohibits relative
Figure: Soil-structure
movement at the soil-structure interface using continuum
interface, elements
• Nodal compatibility of the finite
element method constrains the
adjacent structural and soil
elements to move together. Potts D.M. & Zdravkovic L. (1999).
66
11/4/2018
Use of Interface Elements
• Interface, or joint elements as they

are sometimes called, can be used
to model the soil-structure
boundary such as the sides of a
wall or pile, or the underside of a
footing.
3D numerical model of a single pile
2D plane strain model of diaphragm walls

Examples
Figure: Soil-structure Figure: Use of

interface using continuum continuum elements to Figure: Use of springs to
elements model interface model interface
The use of continuum Use of thin continuum Linkage elements in which only the
elements, with compatibility elements with standard connections between opposite nodes are
of displacements, in a finite constitutive laws (Pande considered (Hermann (1978), Frank et al.
element analysis of these and Sharma (1979), (1982)). Usually opposite nodes are
situations prohibits relative Griffiths (1985)), connected by discrete springs,
movement at the soil-
structure interface
67
11/4/2018
• Special interface or joint elements

of either zero or finite thickness
(Goodman et al. (1968), Ghaboussi
et al. (1973), Carol and Alonso
(1983), Wilson (1977), Desai et al.
(1984), Beer (1985).
• Among these alternatives, the use
of zero thickness interface Figure: Use of special interface
elements is probably the most elements
popular. Such an element has
been developed by the numerical
geotechnical research group at
Imperial College, Day (1990).
Basic theory
The behavior of interface elements is based on Coulomb's law
of friction (1785). Interface elements allow for differential
displacements between the node pairs (slipping and gapping).
As it interacts with two elastic-perfectly plastic springs. One
spring models gap while the other models slip.
Coulomb Friction function for interface elements.

68
11/4/2018
• The Mohr Coulomb criterion is used to distinguish between

the elastic and plastic behavior of the interface.
• The elastic behavior is expected when small displacements
occur within the interface, and
• the plastic behavior is achieved at the occur of permanent
slip.
The shear stress 𝝉 at the elastic state of the interface is given by:
𝝉 < − 𝝈𝒏 𝒕𝒂𝒏 𝝋𝒊 + 𝒄𝒊
Where, σn is the effective normal stress.
For plastic behavior 𝝉 is given by:

𝝉 = − 𝝈𝒉 𝒕𝒂𝒏 𝝋𝒊 + 𝒄𝒊
Where, φi and ci are the friction angle and cohesion (adhesion) of the interface.
Furthermore, shear strength parameters of the interface elements are linked to the strength
of the neighbor soil layers through a strength reduction factor (R). as given by (3.12):
Ci = R* csoil
tan φi = R*tan φsoil < tan φsoil
In soil-structure interaction problems

special attention is required for the
corners of rigid structures, as an abrupt
change in boundary condition may lead
to high peaks in the stresses and strains.
Volume elements are not capable of
reproducing these sharp peaks and as a
result of this, it may produce non-
physical stress oscillations. Software
automatically preventing stress
oscillation by generate the interface
element at corner of structural element
as shown in Figure below. These Figure , interface element around structural element corner.
elements allow for sufficient flexibility

around the pile base and also preventing
non-physical stress results.
69
11/4/2018
Types of Interface Elements
• According to Model type:
line interface Element
Shell interface element

Plane interface element
• According to interface material:
Rigid interface
Elastic interface
Effect of Interface Element on Analysis Results
LOAD (KN)
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
-
10.00
20.00 F.E
SETTLEMENT (MM)
Settlement
30.00 (mm) with
interface
40.00 F.E
Settlement
(mm) without
50.00 interface
60.00
70.00
80.00
70
11/4/2018
Implementation of Interface Element
71
11/4/2018
Modelling Example
In this exercise we will model such a Bored Pile with a variable diameter of 0.55, and
0.61 m and a length of 23 m below the ground. The pile is implemented in a multi
layered soil shown in figure below, to be tested under vertical axially compression
load of 3600 kN. According to the Geotechnical study performed at pile location, the
ground water table is -3.0m below the ground surface.
Geometry of the Bored Pile.

72
11/4/2018
Table 1: Material properties of the soil layers and the concrete bored pile
Granular fill
Parameter Symbol Stiff clay Concrete Unit
gravel
Mohr- Mohr- Linear
Material model Model ‫ــــــــــ‬
Coulomb Coulomb elastic
Non-
Type of behaviour Type Drained Drained ‫ــــــــــ‬
porous
Weight above
γunsat 16.0 17.0 24.0 kN/m3
phreatic level
Weight below phreatic
γsat 19.0 20.0 ‫ــــــــــ‬ kN/m3
level
Young’s modulus Eref 30.103 45.103 4.1.107 kN/m2
Poisson’s ratio v 0.30 0.30 0.2 ‫ــــــــــ‬
Cohesion C 0 20 ‫ــــــــــ‬ kN/m2
Friction angle Φ 35 22 ‫ــــــــــ‬ O
Dilatancy angle ψ 0 0 ‫ــــــــــ‬ O
Using Finite element Software, it required simulate

the soil behavior in Drained condition, also obtain
the following:
1. Soil Vertical and horizontal Stresses at the initial

Model Depth= 35m
condition.
2. Change in Soil Vertical and horizontal due to
bored pile construction.
3. Draw pile load settlement curve under the
following 13 loading increments of 0kN, 300kN,
600kN, 900kN, 1200kN, 1500kN, 1800kN, 2100kN,
2400kN, 2700kN, 3000kN, 3300kN, 3600kN.
4. Draw pile load distribution under applied load of
1200kN.
Model
Width=12m
P.S: use the Recommended Geometry shown in figure. Recommended Geometry
73
11/4/2018
SCHEME OF OPERATIONS
This exercise illustrates the basic idea of a finite element deformation analysis. In order to keep
the problem as simple as possible, only elastic perfectly-plastic behaviour is considered. Besides
the procedure to generate the finite element mesh, attention is paid to the input of boundary
conditions, material properties, the actual calculation and inspection of some output results.
Aims B) Calculations
• Geometry input • Initial pore pressures and stresses
• Initial stresses and parameters • Construct pile
• Calculation of vertical load representing the • Apply vertical force
pile weight
• Calculation of vertical load.
C) Inspect output
A) Geometry input
• General settings
• Input of geometry lines
• Input of boundary conditions
• Input of material properties
• Mesh generation
Draw Geometry lines Create Faces and sew them
74
11/4/2018
Define Materials and select the constative model.
Define Properties
75
11/4/2018
Meshing
Define Boundary conditions.
Define Loads
76
11/4/2018
Create interface Element
Change Property
77
11/4/2018
Define Cases of Construction.
Select Analysis options
78
11/4/2018
Vertical Displacement under Vertical load
Load (kN) Sett lement (mm)

0 - Load (kN)
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
300 0.97 -
600 1.88
20.00
900 2.84
1200 3.87 40.00
1500 4.96
Settlement (mm)
60.00
1800 6.10 Sett lement (mm)
2100 7.29 80.00
2400 8.62 100.00

2700 21.54
120.00
3000 47.06
3300 89.14 140.00
3600 145.93
160.00
Results of pile load settlement
79
11/4/2018
Pile load Distribution under load of 3600 kN
❑ Numerical Modelling References
References
• Meyerhof, G. G. (1951). “The Bearing Capacity of Foundations”. Géotechnique, vol.
2, no. 4, pp. 301-332.
• El Kadi. I . F (2015). Lecture Notes, earth pressure and retaining structures, Course
of advanced Foundation Engineering 5th Edition, pp 4-15.
• MIDAS Co. (2014). Technical Seminar, STRUCTURAL CONSULTANT: STERLING
ENGINEERING, SWASTIK METRO BUILDING, BANGALORE. PP 176 -181
• Eberhardt. E (2017). Lecture of Deformation Analysis and Elasto-Plastic Yield, UBC
Geological Engineering, EOSC 433
• Wriggers P. (2006), Computational Contact Mechanics. Springer, Berlin, Second
Edition.
• Turner M. J. , Clough R. W. , Martin H. C. and Topp L. J. (1956), stiffness and
deflection of complex structures“
• PLAXIS Standard Course (2012). Lectures & Exercises on 2D and 3D Modelling,
MUMBAI, INDIA.
• O. Kadi (2016). MIDAS symposium for GEO-Technical Engineering, Northen Cost
Silos project, the structural consultant : NECB.
• Potts D.M. & Zdravkovic L. (1999). Finite element analysis in geotechnical
engineering Book. Part one: Theory, Imperial College of science, London,
• Timoshenko S & Goodier IN. (1951), "Theory of elasticity", McGraw Hill, NewYork
80
11/4/2018

• Tomlinson, M.J. (1995). Foundation design and construction practice. 5th Ed.,
Chapman and Hall.
• Wehnert, M., and Vermeer, P. A. (2004). Numerical Analyses of Load Tests on Bored
Piles. Numerical Models in Geomechanics. NUMOG 9th. Ottawa, Canada.
• Federal Highway Administration, FHWA, (1999). “Drilled Shafts: Construction
Procedures and Design Methods”. Design Manual of U.S. Department of
Transportation, Publication no. FHWA-IF-99-025.
• Fayiz, A. A. (1992). Axially loaded piles in layered soils, M. Sc. Thesis, Cairo
University.
• Baars, S. v. & Niekerk, W. v. (1999). Numerical modelling of tension piles. In
International Symposium on Beyond 2000 in Computational Geotechnics, pp. 237-
246.
• Prakash, S., and Sharma, D. (1997). Pile foundation Engineering practice. 2 nd.
Edition, McGrow.
• Joshi, R. C.; Sharma, H. D.; and Sparrow, D. G. (1989). “Comparison of Pile Load
Test Methods”. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Ottawa, no. 26, pp. 742-744.
• Griffiths D.V. (1985), "Numerical modelling of interfaces using conventional finite
elements", Proc. 5th Int. Conf. Num. Meth. Geomech., Nagoya, pp837-844
• Hermann L.R. (1978), "Finite element analysis ofcontact problems", ASCE, EM5,Vo!.
104, pp 1043-1057
• Frank R., Guenot A. & Humbert P. (1982), "Numerical analysis of contacts in
geomechanics", Proc. 4th 1nt. Conf. Num. Meth. Geomech., Rotterdam,pp 37-42
❑ REFERENCES
• Goodman R.E., Taylor R.L. & Brekke T.L. (1968), "A model for the mechanics of
jointed rock", ASCE, SM3, Vo!. 94, pp 637-659
• Carol. and Alonso E.E. (1983), "A new joint element for the analysis of fractured
rock", 5th Int. Congr. Rock Mech., Melbourne, Vo\. F, pp 147-151
• Wilson E.L. (1977), "Finite elements for foundations, joints and fluids", Chapter lOin
Finite elements in Geomechanics, Edt. Gudehus, John Wiley &Sons
• Desai C.S. (1980), "A general basis for yield, failure and potential functions in
plasticity", Int. In!. Num. Ana!. Meth. Geomech., Vo!. 4, pp 361-375
• Beer G. (1985), "An isoparametric joint/interface element for finite element analysis",
Int. 1nl. Num. Meth. Eng., Vol. 21, pp 585-600
• Ghaboussi l, Wilson E.L. & Isenberg 1 (1973), "Finite element for rock joint
interfaces", ASCE, SMIO, Vo!. 99, pp 833-848
• Braja M.Das, Text book "Principles of foundation engineering”, Sixth edition.
• Brinkgreve, R.B., and Vermeer, P.A. (1999). Edition manual of PLAXIS. Blkema,
Rotterdam, Brookfield.
• PLAXIS Bulletin (2008). finite element code for soil and rock analyses, Modelling the
behaviour of piled raft applying Plaxis 3D Foundation Version 2, Delft, The
Netherlands
• Potts D.M. & Zdravkovic L. (2001). Finite element analysis in geotechnical
engineering Book. Part two: Application, Imperial College of science, London,
• Hansen, J. B., (1963). Discussion on hyperbolic stress-strain response in cohesive
soils. ASCE, Vol. 89, SM4, pp. 241-242.
81
11/4/2018

• Meyerhof, G. G. (1976). “Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Pile Foundations”.
Journal of Geo-technical Engineering, ASCE, vol. 102, no. GT3, pp. 195-228.
• MIDAS GTS NX user manual, ANALYSIS REFERENCE chapter 4 materials, Section
2. Plastic Material Properties.
• O'Neill and Reese (1970), BEHAVIOR OF AXIALLY LOADED DRILLED SHAFTS IN
BEAUMONT CLAY, Part 1 :4 , Research Project 3-5-65-89 conducted for The Texas
Highway Department in cooperation with the U. S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
• PLAXIS Manual (1998), Version 8.2.
• PLAXIS Manual (2016), Plaxis 2D, Reference Manual
• Zienkiewicz, O.C. & Pande, G.N., (1977). Some useful forms of isotropic yield
surfaces for soil and rock mechanics. in: Finite Elements in Geomechanics, Ed. G.
Gudehus, Wiley, Chichester, 1977.
• Sommer, H. & Hammbach, P. (1974). Großpfahlversuche im Ton für die Gründung
der Talbrücke Alzey. Der Bauingenieur Vol. 49: 310-317.
• Midas GTS User Supplied Subroutine. (2009). MIDAS Information Technology Co.
Ltd.
• El-Mossallamy, Y (2015). Lecture Notes, Foundation Engineering, Course of Deep
Foundation , faculty of engineering, Ain shams university.
• El-Mossallamy, Y (2008). Lecture Notes, Course of Numerical analysis in
Geotechnicail Engineering, Post graduate , faculty of engineering, Ain shams
university.

• Ezzat M, Eid M., Hefny A., Sorour T, and Zaghloul Y (2018). Full-Scale Well
Instrumented Large Diameter Bored Pile Load Test in Multi Layered Soil: A Case
Study of Damietta Port New Grain Silos Project. International Journal of Current
Engineering and Technology. Jan/Feb Issue.
• Eid M., Hefny A., Sorour T, Zaghloul Y and Ezzat M, 2018. Numerical Analysis of
Large Diameter Bored Pile Installed in Multi Layered Soil: A Case Study of Damietta
Port New Grain Silos Project. International Journal of Current Engineering and
Technology. Jan/Feb Issue.
• Ezzat M, Eid M., Hefny A., Sorour T,and Zaghloul Y , (2018). Response of Large
Diameter Bored Piles in Clayey Soils under Axial Compression Loads, A Thesis
Submitted in Partial fulfillment for The Requirement of the Degree of Doctor of
Philosophy in Civil Engineering, faculty of engineering, Ain shams university.
• Valley, B, Thuro, K, Eberhardt, E & Raetzo, H (2004). Geological and geotechnical
investigation of a shallow translational slide along a weathered rock/soil contact for
the purpose of model development and hazard assessment. In Proceedings of the 9th
International Symposium on Land slides, Rio de Janeiro. A.A. Balkema: Leiden, pp.
385-391.
• Woo, K-S, Eberhardt, E. Rabus, B, Stead, D & Vyazmensky, A.(2012). Integration
of field characterization, mine production and InSAR monitoring data to constrain and
calibrate 3-D numerical modelling of block caving-induced subsidence. International
Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences: 53(1), 166-178.
82
11/4/2018
As long as you live, Keep

Learning…
Preface
Soil is a complex multiphase material its stress, strain and strength
are represented by pressure dependency with coupling between shear
and volumetric behavior. With these complexities it is not possible to
think in terms of developing a completely generalized model for all
soils. It is fundamental to tailor the modeling of material behavior to
the particular problem of interest and the required accuracy of
solution. Perhaps this explains why the finite element method has
been used in many fields of engineering practice for over thirty years, Mohamed Ezzat
however it is only relatively recently that it has begun to be widely Ph.D. of Geotechnical Eng.,
Faculty of Engineering,
used for analyzing geotechnical problems. Ain Shams university
The main objective of this course is to provide the undergraduate student with an insight into the use
of the finite element method in simulation of geotechnical engineering problems. The methodology
that will be followed in this research to achieve its objectives are directed towards the following
points:
• Presentation of the theory, assumptions and approximations involved in finite element analysis;
• Description of several constitutive models that commonly used, and explore their strengths and
weaknesses.
• Provide sufficient field case studies and solved examples so that students can make judgements as
to the credibility of numerical results that they may obtain, or review, in the future. These practical
examples are also used to demonstrate the restrictions, advantages and disadvantages of numerical
analysis.
View publication stats 83

Lectures Notes: Numerical Analysis in Geotechnical Engineering-Theory and Application - (Part 1: Introduction)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lectures Notes: Numerical Analysis in Geotechnical Engineering-Theory and Application - (Part 1: Introduction)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Lectures Notes : Numerical Analysis In Geotechnical Engineering–Theory

Presentation · November 2018

Mohamed Ezzat Al-Atroush

Dynamic Soil Structure Interaction View project

Deep Excavation View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1

The Design of foundations have to

• Safety factor of two is generally used in

❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1

Soil is a complex multiphase material its

With these complexities it is not possible to think

Page :5 Dr.Eng. Mohamed Ezzat Numerical analysis in Geotechnical Engineering

❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1

Few Examples of Soil Problems:

• Soils are neither elastic, nor

Fig (4), Stresses on soil element.

Page :6 Dr.Eng. Mohamed Ezzat Numerical analysis in Geotechnical Engineering

❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1

Traditional Design methods

• These methods lack the ability to

❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1

Example (1) : Analysis of Retaining Structures

After Prof. F.Al Kadi, Lecture notes, 2016

Page :8 Dr.Eng. Mohamed Ezzat Numerical analysis in Geotechnical Engineering

❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1

1. Field measurements for earth pressure on retaining walls

After Prof. F.Al Kadi, Lecture notes, 2015

❑ Numerical Analysis Methods Lecture No. 1

1. Field measurements for earth pressure on retaining walls

Fig (10), Comparison between field measurements and theoretical calculation

❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1

1.Field measurements for earth pressure on retaining walls

❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1

‫يتضح من دراسة نتائج القياسات المعملية والحقلية لضغط التراب على‬

After Prof. F.Al Kadi, Lecture notes, 2015

❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1

2. Soil Subgrade modulus

Traditional linear method :

❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1

Page :14 Dr.Eng. Mohamed Ezzat Numerical analysis in Geotechnical Engineering

❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1

Footing (1): 2x2m

Footing (2): 4x4m

Page :15 Dr.Eng. Mohamed Ezzat Numerical analysis in Geotechnical Engineering

❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1

A Raft foundation (B× 2B) in plan dimensions

Page :16 Dr.Eng. Mohamed Ezzat Numerical analysis in Geotechnical Engineering

❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1

Relationship between (K) and (Es)

• B: Min. width of footing.

Page :17 Dr.Eng. Mohamed Ezzat Numerical analysis in Geotechnical Engineering

❑ Numerical Analysis Methods Lecture No. 1

Page :18 Dr.Eng. Mohamed Ezzat Numerical analysis in Geotechnical Engineering

❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1

3.Effect of Raft Thickness (Swastik Metro Building Project)

Fig (18), Effect of Raft Thickness on soil subgrade modulus

Page :19 Dr.Eng. Mohamed Ezzat Numerical analysis in Geotechnical Engineering

❑ Introduction Lecture No. 1

Fig (19), Shape of settlement and contact

Fig (20), Relation between soil stresses and deformation