Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Analytical solution.
(Overkilled if using FEM)
Desai, 1977
Cook, 1995
MIT Lecture (Finite element Method in Engineering Calculation)
MIT Lecture (Finite element Method in Engineering Calculation)
MIT Lecture (Finite element Method in Engineering Calculation)
MIT Lecture (Finite element Method in Engineering Calculation)
MIT Lecture (Finite element Method in Engineering Calculation)
MIT Lecture (Finite element Method in Engineering Calculation)
1. Discretization (Divide) of Element Mesh
2. Approximation Function Development
3. Relate strain-displacement and constitutive
equation.
4. Derivation of Element equation
5. Equation solving by integration process
6. Assembling elements and construct global
equation.
7. Determine Boundary Condition
8. Calculate secondary unknowns
9. Interpretation of Results
Step 1 : Discretization of Element Mesh
Step 1 : Discretization of Element Mesh
Stiffness Matrix
Permeability Matrix
This Matrix is derive to relate the nodal forces to nodal displacement
(Gauss Integration)
Aj : weight factor
Fj : value of the sampling point
Step 5 : Integration Process
Plaxis Feature
Sampling Point
Step 6 : Assembling Elements
Once the Stiffness Matrix is obtained from the Integration Process, Assembling
elements will be perform by SUMMING all of the Stiffness Matrix into Global Matrix
Step 7 : Determine the Boundary Condition
Jaky (1994)
Jaky (1994)
ISOTROPIC KO-CONSOLIDATION
e (Initial Void Ratio) Set the Initial Condition for Numerical Analysis
λ = Modified Compression Index Consolidation Analysis in FEM
κ = Modified Sweelling Index Consolidation Analysis in FEM
Mitchell (1993)
e = Void Ratio
Ψ = Angle of Friction
C = Soil Composition
σ‘ = Effective Normal Stress
c = Cohesion
H = Stress History
T = Temprature
ε = Strain
έ = Strain Rate
S = Structure
Stress Path
Shear Strength Properties of Soil :
φ' = Angle of Friction
σ‘ = Effective Normal Stress
c' = Cohesion
Δu = pore water pressure
b’ and ά = Kf – line parameter
Ψ = Dilatancy Angel
COHESIVE COHESIONLESS
(CLAY AND SILT) (GRAVEL AND SAND)
E50 = EDesign
sy - sx sy - sx sy - sx E
Dsy’ 50
E50
E50
Dsx’
y y y
E50 s 'x
E50 E ref
50
Eref
50
pref
ref
Loose sands: E50 = 15 MPa
pref = 100kPa sx’
ref
Dense sands: E50 = 50 MPa
1600
1400
1200
Eu 1000 Ip< 30
cu 800
600
30 < Ip < 50
400
200 Ip > 50
0
1 1,5 2 3 4 5 6 8 10
Overconsolidation ratio, OCR
E50 Eur
M - C model
E = constant
Eur = E’50
M-C FAILURE CRITERION DILATANCY
Drained Analysis : ψ
c = c’ (Effective Paramater)
Φ’ (Angle of Friction)
dense packing of disks (‘grains’)
Undrained Analysis
Total Stress Analysis φ
▪ C = Su (Undrained Strength) τ
σ φi
Effective Stress Analysis
▪ Method A
▪ C = c’ ; Φ = Φ’ ψ
▪ Method B
interlocking saw blades
▪ C = Su ; Φ = oo
Calculation Mode
Stage Construction Modeling Safety Calculation Plastic Calculation
Output Mode
Deformation Analysis Inner Forces for Structural
Curve Mode
Stress-Strain Relationship Settlement vs Time Curve
Plane Strain Axisymmetric
10.000 15.000 20.000 25.000 30.000 35.000 40.000 45.000 50.000 55.000 60.000 65.000 70.000 75.000 80.000
-5.000
-10.000
-15.000
-20.000
-25.000
-30.000
-35.000
-40.000
-45.000
-50.000
-55.000
Input Menu :
- Cluster Material
- Material Model
- Structural
- Boundary
Condition
- Mesh
Generation
- Load
Load
Structural
Structural
Material
Cluster
Boundary
Condition
5.000 10.000 15.000 20.000
Pore Pressure
25.000 30.000 35.000 40.000 45.000 50.000 55.000 60.000 65.000 70.000 75.000 80.000
Initial Phase
Generation
-5.000
-10.000
-15.000
-20.000
-25.000
-30.000
-35.000
-40.000
-45.000
-50.000
-55.000
-60.000
Active pore pressures
2
Extreme active pore pressure -539.03 kN/m
(pressure = negative)
INSTALASI DPT
0.000
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
60.000
Deformed Mesh
10.000
GALIAN 1
0.000
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
Deformed Mesh
-3
m
10.000
GALIAN 2
0.000
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
Deformed Mesh
-3
m
10.000
GALIAN 3
0.000
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
Deformed Mesh
-3
m
10.000
GALIAN FINAL
(KONDISI TERKRITIS)
0.000
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
Deformed Mesh
-3
m
10.000
0.000
10.000
20.000
30.000
40.000
50.000
Deformed Mesh
-3
m
32.000 36.000 40.000 44.000 48.000 52.000 56.000 60.000 64.000 68.000 72.000 76.000
-4.000
Peristiwa Basal Heave &
-8.000
Uplift Condition
-12.000
-16.000
-20.000
-24.000
-28.000
-32.000
-36.000
Total displacements
-3
Extreme total displacement 117.93*10 m
10.000
Deformasi Element
0.000
-10.000
-20.000
-30.000
-40.000
-50.000
Deformed Mesh
-3
Extreme total displacement 117.93*10 m
(displacements scaled up 50.00 times)
0.000 10.000 20.000 30.000 40.000 50.000 60.000 70.000 80.000
10.000
Kontur Deformasi
-3
*10 m
0.000
120.000
110.000
-10.000 100.000
90.000
80.000
-20.000
70.000
60.000
-30.000 50.000
40.000
30.000
-40.000
20.000
10.000
-0.000
-50.000
-10.000
-60.000
Total displacements
-3
Extreme total displacement 117.93*10 m
Plastic Points
0.000 10.000 20.000 30.000 40.000 50.000 60.000 70.000 80.000 90.000
10.000
0.000
-10.000
-20.000
-30.000
ZONA PLASTIS
-40.000
-50.000
Plastic Points
%
0.000
2.800
2.600
2.400
-10.000
2.200
2.000
1.800
-20.000
1.600
1.400
1.200
-30.000
1.000
0.800
-40.000 0.600
0.400
0.200
-50.000 0.000
-0.200
-60.000
Shear strains
Extreme shear strain 2.77 %
0.00
Kapasitas DPT
0.00
-5.00 -5.00
-10.00 -10.00
-15.00 -15.00
-20.00 -20.00
-25.00 -25.00
10.000
0.000
-10.000
-20.000
-30.000
-50.000
Deformed Mesh
-3
Extreme total displacement 298.42*10 m
(displacements scaled up 20.00 times)
0.000 10.000 20.000 30.000 40.000 50.000 60.000 70.000 80.000
10.000
m
0.000
0.300
0.280
0.260
-10.000
0.240
Grouted 0.220
-20.000
Body harus 0.200
0.180
berada diluar 0.160
bidang 0.140
-30.000
keruntuhan 0.120
BIDANG 0.100
0.080
0.040
0.020
-50.000 0.000
-0.020
-60.000
Total displacements
-3
Extreme total displacement 298.42*10 m
Performed using :
M-C (Mohr-Coloumb Criterion) Behaviour
Constant Stiffness Modulus
Load advancement number of steps (Incremental Multiplier (Msf)
Reference :
Brinkgreve, R.B.J. and Bakker, H.L. (1991). Non-Liniear finite element
analysis of safety factors. Proc. 7th Int. Conf. on Comp. Methods and
Advances in Geomechanics, Cairns, Australia, 1117-1122.
SAFETY By
REDUCING STRENGTH
ANALYSIS PARAMETERS
(Фr1,cr1) (Фrf,crf)
(Фr2,cr2)
Reference :
Brinkgreve, R.B.J. and Bakker, H.L. (1991). Non-Liniear finite element
analysis of safety factors. Proc. 7th Int. Conf. on Comp. Methods and
Advances in Geomechanics, Cairns, Australia, 1117-1122.
(Plate)
S
D = 0.6 m Splane strain = 0.531 m
A = 0.282 m2 S2 =0.282
Asquare = m2 Aplane strain = 0.531 m2
E = 2.1 x 107 kN/m2 S = 0.531 m I plane strain = 1/12 .(1). (0.713) = 0.012
I = 0.006362 m4 Esquare = EI / I square
E square . Isquare
Esquare = 200.535.228 kN/m2 Eplane strain = 110.628.600
I square = 1/12 . (S) .(S3) I planestrain
I square = 0.00662
INTERFACE
Source : Manual
Plaxis
Schweiger, 2010
Predicted Undrained Behaviour depends on soil model used
Schweiger, 2010
Schweiger, 2010
Schweiger, 2010
Schweiger, 2010
Parameter Tanah Kohesif:
Effective Strength