journal article·2016-02

SSUH model: A small-strain extension of the unified hardening model

YangPing Yao, Shan Qu, ZhenYu Yin, EnYang Zhu

Publisher page

Abstract

A small strain unified hardening (SSUH) model is proposed in the present study to tackle the small strain behavior of clay. The model is an extension of the unified hardening (UH) model for overconsolidated (OC) clays accounting for the small strain stiffness. The new features of the SSUH model over the UH model include: (a) a new elastic hysteretic stress-strain relationship to evaluate the stiffness degradation at small strains and to generate the hysteresis loop under cyclic loading condition; (b) a revised unified hardening parameter to enhance the plastic stiffness at small strains; and (c) a new overconsolidation parameter, which is crucial to make the UH model working with the elastic hysteretic stress-strain relationship effectively. With these enhancements, the SSUH model can describe a high initial stiffness and the highly nonlinear stress-strain relationship at small strains, in addition to the shear dilatancy and strain hardening/softening behaviors of OC clays at large strains. In comparison with the Modified Cam-clay (MCC) model, the proposed model needs two more small strain related parameters, which can be easily obtained from laboratory tests. Finally, some drained triaxial compression tests at large strains, drained triaxial compression/extension tests at small strains, an undrained compression test at small strains and a drained cyclic constant radial stress test are employed to validate the new model.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics · Geotechnical Engineering and Underground Structures · Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (34)

Show source-provided references
1. Jardine R J, Potts D M, Fourie A B, et al. Studies of the influence of non-linear stress-strain characteristics in soil-structure interaction. Geotechnique, 1986, 36: 377–39610.1680/geot.1986.36.3.377 ↗
2. Burland J B. Ninth Laurits Bjerrum Memorial Lecture: ‘Small is beautifull’–the stiffness of soils at small strains. Can Geotech J, 1989, 16: 499–51210.1139/t89-064 ↗
3. Jardine R J, Symes M J, Burland J B. The measurement of soil stiffness in the triaxial apparatus. Geotechnique, 1984, 34: 323–34010.1680/geot.1984.34.3.323 ↗
4. Viggiani G, Atkinson J H. Stiffness of fine-grained soil at very small strains. Geotechnique, 1995, 45: 249–26510.1680/geot.1995.45.2.249 ↗
5. Clayton C R I, Heymann G. Stiffness of geomaterials at very small strains. Geotechnique, 2001, 51: 245–25510.1680/geot.2001.51.3.245 ↗
6. Santagata M, Germaine J T, Ladd C C. small-strain nonlinearity of normally consolidated clay. J Geotech Geoenviron ASCE, 2007, 133: 72–8210.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2007)133:1(72) ↗
7. Clayton C R I. Stiffness at small strain: Research and practice. Geotechnique, 2011, 61: 5–3710.1680/geot.2011.61.1.5 ↗
8. Li Q, Ng C W W, Liu G B. Determination of small-strain stiffness of Shanghai clay on prismatic soil specimen. Can Geotech J, 2012, 49: 986–99310.1139/t2012-050 ↗
9. Xiao Y, Liu H, Chen Y, et al. Testing and modeling of the statedependent behaviors of rockfill material. Comput Geotech, 2014, 61: 153–16510.1016/j.compgeo.2014.05.009 ↗
10. Xiao Y, Liu H, Chen Y, et al. State-dependent constitutive model for rockfill materials. Int J Geomech, 2014, 5, doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000421
11. Xiao Y, Liu, H., Chen, Y, et al. Bounding surface model for rockfill materials dependent on density and pressure under triaxial stress conditions. J Eng Mech, 2014, 140: 0401400210.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000702 ↗
12. Kondner R L. Hyperbolic stress-strain response: Cohensive soils. J Soil Mech Found Div, ASCE, 1963, 89: 115–14410.1061/JSFEAQ.0000479 ↗
13. Puzrin A M, Burland J B. A logarithmic stress-strain function for rocks and soils. Geotechnique, 1996, 46: 157–16410.1680/geot.1996.46.1.157 ↗
14. Puzrin A M, Burland J B. Non-linear model of small-strain behaviour of soils. Geotechnique, 1998, 48: 217–23310.1680/geot.1998.48.2.217 ↗
15. Simpson B. Retaining structures: Displacement and design. Geotechnique, 1992, 42: 541–57610.1680/geot.1992.42.4.541 ↗
16. AI-Tabbaa A, Wood D M. An experimentally based "bubble" model for clay. Numerical models in geomechanics. Pieruszczak S, Pande G N. eds. NUMOG 3. London: Elsevier Applied Science, 1989. 91–99
17. Stallebrass S E, Taylor R N. The development and evaluation of a constitutive model for the prediction of ground movements in overconsolidated clay. Geotechnique, 1997, 47: 235–25310.1680/geot.1997.47.2.235 ↗
18. Benz T. Small-strain stiffness of soils and its numerical consequences. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Stuttgart: University of Stuttgart, 2007
19. Whittle A J, Kavvadas M J. Formulation of MIT-E3 constitutive model for overconsolidated clays. J Geotech Eng ASCE, 1992, 120: 173–19810.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1994)120:1(173) ↗
20. Yao Y P, Hou W, Zhou A N. UH model: Three-dimensional unified hardening model for overconsolidated clays. Geotechnique, 2009, 59: 451–46910.1680/geot.2007.00029 ↗
21. Yao Y P, Gao Z W, Zhao J D, et al. Modified UH model: constitutive modeling of overconsolidated clays based on a parabolic Hvorslev envelope. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE, 2012, 138: 860–86810.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000649 ↗
22. Yao Y P, Sun D A, Matsuoka H. A unified constitutive model for both clay and sand with hardening parameter independent on stress path. Comput Geotech, 2008, 35: 210–22210.1016/j.compgeo.2007.04.003 ↗
23. Matsuoka H, Yao Y P, Sun D A. The Cam-clay models revised by the SMP criterion. Soils Found, 1999, 39: 81–9510.3208/sandf.39.81 ↗
24. Luo T, Qin Z H, Feng X, et al. A symmetrisation method for non-associated unified hardening model. Comput Geotech, 2013, 52: 38–4510.1016/j.compgeo.2013.03.004 ↗
25. Yao Y P, Kong Y X. Extended UH model: Three-dimensional unified hardening model for anisotropic clays. J Eng Mech ASCE, 2012, 138: 853–86610.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000397 ↗
26. Yao Y P, Niu L, Cui W J. Unified hardening (UH) model for overconsolidated unsaturated soils. Can Geotech J, 2014, 51: 810–82110.1139/cgj-2013-0183 ↗
27. Yao Y P, Zhou A N. Non-isothermal unified hardening model: A thermo-elasto-plastic model for clays. Geotechnique, 2013, 63: 1328–134510.1680/geot.13.P.035 ↗
28. Yao Y P, Kong L M, Zhou A N, et al. Time-dependent unified hardening model: Three-dimensional elastoviscoplastic constitutive model for clays. J Eng Mech ASCE, 2014, 141: 0401416210.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000885 ↗
29. Ghantous I B. Prediction of in situ consolidation parameters of Boston Blue Clay. Dissertation for the Bachelor Degree. London: University of London, 1982
30. Nakai T, Hinkio M. A simple elastoplastic model for normally and overconsolidated soils with unified material parameters. Soils Found, 2004, 44: 53–7010.3208/sandf.44.2_53 ↗
31. Jiang J. Small-strain characteristics and long-term deformation behavior of Shanghai soft soil. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Shanghai: Tongji University, 2009
32. Liu M. Dynamic constitutive model for saturated soft clay and long-term deformation of subway tunnels. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree. Shanghai: Tongji University, 2006
33. Yao Y P, Sun D A. Application of lade's criterion to Cam-clay model. J Eng Mech ASCE, 2000, 126: 112–11910.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2000)126:1(112) ↗
34. Yao Y P, Wang N D. Transformed stress method for generalizing soil constitutive models. J Eng Mech ASCE, 2014, 140: 614–62910.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000685 ↗