Numerical simulations of simple shear with non‐coaxial soil models
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract This paper investigates the effects of a non‐coaxial model on simulated stress–strain behaviour of granular materials subject to simple shearing under various initial conditions. In most cases, a significant difference of predictions between coaxial and non‐coaxial modelling is found during the early stage in shearing. With the increase in shearing, non‐coaxial simulations approach and tend to coincide with coaxial simulations. It is also found that the roles of non‐coaxial modelling in simulating simple shear behaviour are considerably influenced by hardening rules, flow rules, initial static lateral pressure coefficients. In some cases, the non‐coaxial modelling gives a similar simulation as the coaxial modelling. In other cases, the non‐coaxial modelling decreases the hardening response or softening response of materials, compared with the coaxial modelling. Under certain conditions, the predicted peak strength of materials with non‐coaxial modelling is larger than that for coaxial modelling. Some of these observations can be attributed to the amount of principal stress rotation in various cases analysed. Others can be attributed to the difference between the directions of the non‐coaxial plastic flow and those for coaxial plastic flow. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Landslides and related hazards · Granular flow and fluidized beds · Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Mechanics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (26)
Show source-provided references
1. RoscoeKH BassettRH ColeER.Principal axes observed during simple shear of a sand. Proceedings of the Geotechnical Conference vol. 1 Oslo 1967;231–237.
2. 10.1680/geot.1970.20.2.12910.1680/geot.1970.20.2.129 ↗
3. 10.3208/sandf1972.14.4_2510.3208/sandf1972.14.4_25 ↗
4. 10.1016/0022-5096(72)90029-410.1016/0022-5096(72)90029-4 ↗
5. 10.3208/sandf1972.23.4_1110.3208/sandf1972.23.4_11 ↗
6. Yielding and flow of sand under principal axes rotation10.3208/sandf1972.30.87 ↗
7. 10.1680/geot.1998.48.5.60510.1680/geot.1998.48.5.605 ↗
8. 10.3208/sandf1972.31.4_12110.3208/sandf1972.31.4_121 ↗
9. 10.1115/1.315761910.1115/1.3157619 ↗
10. 10.1016/0022-5096(64)90029-810.1016/0022-5096(64)90029-8 ↗
11. 10.1680/geot.1971.21.2.15510.1680/geot.1971.21.2.155 ↗
12. 10.1002/nag.161012030610.1002/nag.1610120306 ↗
13. Constitutive equations for planar deformations of rigid‐plastic materials10.1016/0022-5096(93)90038-H ↗
14. Yu HS · 2004
15. YuHS YuanX.The importance of accounting for non‐coaxial behaviour in modelling soil‐structure interaction. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of IACMAG Torino Italy. Invited Issue Lecture vol. 4 2005;709–718.
16. YuHS YangY YuanX.Application of non‐coaxial plasticity models in geotechnical analysis. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering Osaka Japan 2005; in press.
17. An outline of hypoplasticity10.1007/BF00788048 ↗
18. 10.1016/0022-5096(75)90001-010.1016/0022-5096(75)90001-0 ↗
19. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1991)117:7(1466)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1991)117:7(1466) ↗
20. Shear band formation in sand according to non‐coaxial plasticity model10.1680/geot.1995.45.4.649 ↗
21. 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1484(199905)4:3<215::AID-CFM61>3.0.CO;2-810.1002/(SICI)1099-1484(199905)4:3<215::AID-CFM61>3.0.CO;2-8 ↗
22. Elastoplastic constitutive equation with tangential stress rate effect10.1016/S0749-6419(00)00021-8 ↗
23. 10.1016/S0749-6419(02)00113-410.1016/S0749-6419(02)00113-4 ↗
24. 10.1002/nme.162024050510.1002/nme.1620240505 ↗
25. AbboAJ.Finite element algorithms for elastoplasticity and consolidation. Ph.D. Thesis University of Newcastle Australia 1997.
26. 10.1680/geot.1987.37.1.1110.1680/geot.1987.37.1.11 ↗