Explorer les Livres électroniques

Catégories

Explorer les Livres audio

Catégories

Explorer les Magazines

Catégories

Explorer les Documents

Catégories

0 évaluation0% ont trouvé ce document utile (0 vote)

0 vues10 pages2000 Fernando Rodriguez-Roa - Observed and Calculated Load-Settlement Relationship in a Sandy Gravel

© © All Rights Reserved

0 évaluation0% ont trouvé ce document utile (0 vote)

0 vues10 pages2000 Fernando Rodriguez-Roa - Observed and Calculated Load-Settlement Relationship in a Sandy Gravel

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 10

333

relationship in a sandy gravel

Fernando Rodríguez-Roa

Abstract: The purpose of this research was to obtain a better understanding of the nonlinear stress–strain behavior of

the typical gravel of Santiago, Chile, due to the increasing needs for construction of high-rise buildings, multilevel un-

derground constructions, and new subway lines to be built under historical city landmarks. A finite-element computer

program to perform incremental stress–strain analyses of soils was developed on the basis of a modified version of the

hyperbolic elastic model. The changes herein proposed to this well-known constitutive model were based on triaxial

tests carried out on 150 mm diameter specimens of compacted sandy gravels which involved various stress paths. A

comparison was performed between the observed and calculated load–settlement relationship in a plate-load test that in-

cluded unloading–reloading cycles. From the good agreement obtained it is concluded that the modified version of the

hyperbolic model proposed represents reasonably well the behavior of the Santiago gravel.

Key words: constitutive relations, finite-element model, laboratory tests, field tests, soil properties, case history.

Résumé : Le but de cette recherche était d’acquérir une meilleure compréhension du comportement contrainte-

déformation non linéaire du gravier typique de Santiago (Chili), compte tenu des besoins accrus pour la construction de

tours d’habitation, de constructions souterraines à multiples étages, et de nouvelles lignes de métros qui seront

construites sous des repères historiques de la ville. On a développé un programme d’ordinateur en éléments finis pour

des analyses par incréments contrainte-déformation des sols sur la base d’une version modifiée du modèle hyperbolique

élastique. Les changements proposés ici à ce modèle de comportement bien connu ont été fondés sur des essais

triaxiaux réalisés le long de divers cheminements de contrainte sur des spécimens de 150 mm de graviers sableux

compactés. Une comparaison a été faite entre les relations contrainte-déformation calculée et observée dans un essai de

chargement de plaque qui incluait des cycles de déchargement-rechargement. Compte tenu de la bonne concordance

obtenue, on conclut que la version modifiée du modèle hyperbolique proposée représentee raisonnablement bien le

comportement du gravier de Santiago.

Mots clés : relations de comportement, modèle d’éléments finis, essais de laboratoire, essais de terrain, propriétés de

sols, histoire de cas.

[Traduit par la Rédaction] Rodríguez-Roa 342

lected because of its convenience and practicality, despite

The increasing construction of high-rise buildings, multi- the fact that these constitutive relationships are inherently

level underground parking lots, and new subway lines under elastic and do not model plastic deformations in a fully logi-

historical city landmarks located on the gravel of Santiago, cal way (Duncan 1996).

Chile, have led Chilean geotechnical engineers to perform Elastoplastic and elastoviscoplastic stress–strain relation-

different types of field measurements (Escobar 1971; ships have the advantage that they model more realistically

Ortigosa et al. 1973; Kort et al. 1979; Campos 1981; Poblete coupling between shear and volumetric strains and the be-

et al. 1981; Kort and Ortigosa 1995) and numerical analyses havior of soils close to failure, at failure, and after failure

(Bustamante 1987; Rodríguez-Roa 1998) to evaluate the (Owen and Hinton 1980; Chen and Mizuno 1990). However,

shear strength and stress–strain behavior of this soil. they have the limitation that they are more complex (Duncan

The selection of an appropriate soil stress–strain relation- 1996).

ship is primarily involved with balancing simplicity and ac- Preliminary finite-element analyses based on two previous

curacy. There is no benefit in using a very complex formulations of the hyperbolic elastic model were carried

relationship to analyze a geotechnical problem when a sim- out to simulate a plate-load test that included unloading–re-

ple representation of the stress–strain behavior of the soil re- loading cycles (Kort and Ortigosa 1995). The first model

sults in acceptable accuracy. In this paper, a modified used was described by Duncan et al. (1980a), and the second

model by Boscardin et al. (1990). However, neither of these

two hyperbolic models was able to reproduce the whole

Received February 22, 1999. Accepted August 30, 1999. load–settlement relationship satisfactorily. These early nu-

F. Rodríguez-Roa. Department of Structural and merical results showed the need for introducing some im-

Geotechnical Engineering, The Catholic University of Chile, provements to existing hyperbolic models. The proposed

Casilla 306, Correo 22, Santiago, Chile. version of the hyperbolic elastic model, based on laboratory

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T99-109.vp

Wednesday, May 10, 2000 8:03:11 AM

Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile

Composite Default screen

Fig. 1. Grain-size distributions of the sandy gravels analyzed. Typical values obtained from Los Angeles Machine tests

(American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM D-18

Standards, C535-89) range from 15 to 25%.

From earth pressure measurements performed at line 1 of

the Santiago subway system, Ortigosa et al. (1973) obtained

a coefficient of earth pressure at rest, k0, of 0.33. This value

was later confirmed by Kort et al. (1979) and Rodríguez-Roa

(1998).

When experimental data obtained from vertical load tests

have been compared with measurements from horizontal

load tests carried out at the same depth it has been observed

in this gravel that the initial horizontal modulus is larger

than the initial vertical modulus, but the difference is usually

less than 10% (Rodríguez-Roa 1998).

On the basis of a number of plate-load tests performed at

different sites and depths, and taking into account the settle-

ments measured during the construction process of three tall

buildings, Poblete (1982) proposed the following relation-

ships to evaluate the initial elastic moduli:

[1] E1 = 65 000 z

[2] E2 = 46 000 z

triaxial tests that involved various stress paths, is shown to where E1 and E2 are the small-strain Young’s moduli

successfully reproduce the behavior of the Santiago gravel. (in kPa) of the first and second deposits, respectively, of the

Mapocho River; and z is the depth (in m) of the point con-

Geotechnical characteristics of Santiago sidered.

gravel On the other hand, Campos (1981) subjected an undis-

turbed prismatical sample, 0.40 m high and 9.0 m deep,

The fluvial gravel of Santiago is a thick deposit of dense, which was trimmed by hand, to a simple field tensile test by

sandy gravel containing about 3% fines, with plasticity indi- applying a gradually increasing axial force on its upper end.

ces ranging from 5 to 20, and subrounded coarse particles The maximum tensile stress was approximately 8 kPa, and

with sizes of up to 0.30 m in diameter. The average particle- the small-strain Young’s modulus, Ets, was 10 700 kPa.

size distribution curve obtained by Kort et al. (1979) is

shown in Fig. 1. Usually the gravel is overlaid by a 1.5–

3.0 m thick deposit of low-plasticity clay of medium to high Modified version of the hyperbolic elastic

consistency. From its surface down to a depth of 5–7 m, the model

gravel contains low-plasticity silty fines, with a cohesion, c,

Hyperbolic elastic stress–strain relationships have been

of about 20 kPa, and an angle of internal friction, φ, of 45°

employed quite widely. Most of these applications have used

(Ortigosa 1994). This upper gravelly stratum is known as the

the equations derived by Duncan and Chang (1970) and

second deposit of the Mapocho River (Poblete et al. 1981).

Duncan et al. (1980a). The tangent Young’s modulus on pri-

Below this stratum, the gravelly deposit is still more dense,

mary loading, Epl, is expressed as

usually with more plastic clayey fines, but particle-size dis-

tribution characteristics are very similar. From large-scale 2

R (1 − sin φ)( σ1 − σ 3)

triaxial tests on undisturbed samples, values of c = 24 kPa [3] Epl = Ei 1 − f

and φ = 53° were determined by Kort et al. (1979) for this 2c cos φ + 2σ3 sin φ

lower gravelly stratum (first deposit of the Mapocho River).

These results were obtained from vacuum triaxial tests, so where σ3 is the minor principal stress; σ1 – σ3 is the princi-

the maximum confining pressure used was slightly lower pal stress difference; φ is the slope of the failure envelope or

than atmospheric pressure. angle of internal friction; c is the cohesion; and Rf is the fail-

Typical values of the unit weight of the second and first ure ratio, defined as

gravelly deposits are 22.5 and 23.0 kN/m3, respectively.

(σ1 − σ3 )f

Since the groundwater level is normally deeper than 30 m, [4] Rf =

the gravels are unsaturated and have water contents usually (σ1 − σ3 )ult

ranging from 4 to 6%.

The specific gravity of solid constituents varies from 2.66 where (σ1 – σ3)f is the stress difference at failure; and (σ1 – σ3)ult

for the coarse fraction retained on the number 4 sieve to 2.76 is the asymptotic value of stress difference at large axial

for the fraction passing the number 4 sieve. strains.

The coarse fraction, derived mainly from andesitic rock, The symbol Ei in eq. [3] represents the initial tangent

has a high resistance to degradation by abrasion and impact. Young’s modulus. This modulus is calculated herein as

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T99-109.vp

Wednesday, May 10, 2000 8:03:12 AM

Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile

Composite Default screen

Rodríguez-Roa 335

Table 1. Index properties of the test material. Fig. 2. Experimental stress–strain curves and primary-loading hy-

perbola for isotropic compression test.

F (%) ωL IP ω (%) γ (kN/m ) 3

Note: F, percent passing the No. 200 sieve; ω L, liquid limit; IP,

plasticity index; ω, water content expressed in percent dry weight; γ, unit

weight.

n

σ

[5] Ei = Kpa 23

pa

where pa is the atmospheric pressure; K is the

nondimensional modulus number; n is the nondimensional

modulus exponent; and σ23 is the mean confining stress, cal-

culated as σ23 = (σ2 + σ3)/2, where σ2 is the intermediate

principal stress.

If the Mohr-Coulomb failure envelope for compressive

stress states is nonlinear, the following expression is used:

σ

[6] φ = φ0 − ∆φ log 23

pa

where φ 0 is the value of φ when σ23 = pa; and ∆φ is the reduc-

Differentiating eq. [8] with respect to the volumetric

tion in φ per log-cycle increase in σ23.

strain gives the following expression for the tangent bulk

For unloading–reloading stress changes, the Young’s modulus, Bpl, in terms of σm (Boscardin et al. 1990):

modulus Eur is expressed as

2

n σ

σ [9] Bpl = Bi 1 + m

[7] Eur = Kur pa 23 B i εu

pa

where the subscript pl has been introduced instead of the

where Kur is the nondimensional unloading–reloading modu- original subscript t to emphasize that this equation was de-

lus number; and the exponent n is assumed to be the same rived on the basis of isotropic compression on primary load-

for primary loading and unloading–reloading. ing.

It should be pointed out that eqs. [5], [6], and [7] were Drained triaxial tests were carried out on 150 mm diame-

originally derived on the basis of data obtained from stan- ter specimens using disturbed soil samples obtained from the

dard triaxial compression tests in which the intermediate first deposit of the Mapocho River. The soil fraction passing

principal stress σ2 is equal to σ3. For cases in which three- the 25 mm diameter sieve was used for the tests (Fig. 1).

dimensional stresses are involved the constitutive model The test material was prepared at the optimum water content

should also include the value of σ2. The use of σ23 instead of and compacted to 100% of the Modified Proctor maximum

the original stress, σ3, is probably not the best solution but it dry density (ASTM D1557-91). Index properties of the com-

takes into account in some degree the value of σ2 and has the pacted material are summarized in Table 1.

advantage of maintaining the simplified form of the hyper- The results of an isotropic compression triaxial test that

bolic elastic stress–strain relationships. included cycles of unloading and reloading are shown in

From the different formulations used previously to evalu- Fig. 2. The inelastic behavior observed on unloading is

ate the second soil property needed, Poisson’s ratio or bulk mainly due to sliding between soil grains. Particle crushing

modulus, the procedure developed by Boscardin et al. (1990) of the Santiago gravel starts at stress levels above approxi-

seems to be the most appropriate because it avoids many of mately 1500 kPa (P. Ortigosa, personal communication,

the problems involved in other formulations (Duncan 1996). 1995). If particle crushing occurs, the inelastic behavior will

According to such a procedure, the results of an isotropic be more marked. Because of the limitations of the triaxial

compression loading can be represented by a hyperbolic equipment used, the maximum stress applied during this iso-

equation of the form tropic compression test was only 800 kPa.

Bi εvol In Fig. 3, the two unloading curves corresponding to the

[8] σm = first and second cycle of the test have been moved in a man-

ε

1 − vol

ner parallel to the origin by modifying the abscissas or volu-

εu metric strains adequately. To maintain the modified

hyperbolic formulation as simple as possible it was assumed

where σm is the mean normal stress; Bi is the initial tangent that if particle crushing is not significant, these unloading

bulk modulus; and εu is the asymptotic value of the volumet- curves may be approximately characterized by a unique hy-

ric strain, εvol, at large values of σm. perbolic expression of the form of eq. [8]. This hyperbolic

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T99-109.vp

Wednesday, May 10, 2000 8:03:14 AM

Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile

Composite Default screen

Fig. 3. Unloading hyperbola and experimental stress–strain Fig. 4. Calculated and experimental stress–strain curves for stan-

curves for isotropic compression test. dard triaxial tests.

Table 2. Hyperbolic parameters fitted to isotropic compression Table 3. Hyperbolic parameters fitted to standard triaxial test

test results. results.

332.5 0.0165 486.1 0.0037 1660 0.52 2700 0.67 0.50 50.5 0.0

(σ1 − σ3 )

expression may be fitted to the mean relationship of unload- [11] SL =

ing curves available within the range of stresses to be ana- (σ1 − σ3 )f

lyzed. The instantaneous slope of this unique unloading Similarly, when the current mean normal stress MNS, i.e.,

hyperbola, or bulk modulus Bur, may be represented by (σ1 + σ2 + σ3)/3, falls below 95% of the previous maximum

eq. [9], but using the corresponding unloading parameters value MNSmax, the unloading–reloading bulk modulus might

Bi(ur) and ε u(ur) as follows: be used. These considerations are certainly valid for the

2 stress paths of standard triaxial compression tests in which

σm

[10] Bur = Bi (ur) 1 + during loading, or unloading, both SL and MNS move in the

Bi (ur) εu (ur) same direction, i.e., both parameters increase or decrease si-

multaneously. However, for other stress paths these parame-

On reloading, hysteresis is ignored, i.e., the unloading hy- ters may move in the opposite direction, and, consequently,

perbola is also accepted as the reloading curve in the model from a theoretical point of view it is possible to have a pri-

used. The hyperbolic parameters fitted to the isotropic com- mary-loading Young’s modulus in conjunction with an un-

pression test results are listed in Table 2. loading–reloading bulk modulus, or vice versa.

To determine the remaining hyperbolic parameters corre- To support this new version of the hyperbolic model on

sponding to the test material, three standard triaxial tests the basis of the experimental evidence, a special triaxial test

were carried out under confining pressures of 50, 100, and was performed. This test consisted of three stages to ana-

200 kPa. Each test included an unloading–reloading cycle at lyze various stress paths. In the first stage, the sample was

approximately one third of the stress difference at failure. consolidated under a confining pressure of 200 kPa and then

However, for clarity, only one of these cycles has been in- gradually loaded to reach a value of σ1 equal to 600 kPa. An

cluded in Fig. 4. The hyperbolic parameters fitted to the unloading–reloading cycle was performed at σ1 = 400 kPa,

standard triaxial test results are listed in Table 3. A value of as seen in Fig. 5a. In the second stage, the vertical stress σ1 =

∆φ = 0 was assumed for the range of confining pressures 600 kPa was maintained while the horizontal stress σ3 was

used. gradually increased from 200 to 600 kPa (Fig. 5a). In the

The nonlinear and stress-dependent stress–strain proper- third stage, still keeping σ1 constant at 600 kPa, the value of

ties of the soils are approximated by performing the numeri- σ3 was gradually decreased until the sample failed (Fig. 5b).

cal analysis in increments. Duncan et al. (1980b) proposed The first stage of the test contains typical stress paths of a

using the unloading–reloading modulus when SL, the cur- standard triaxial test, and therefore the hyperbolic model can

rent stress level of an element, falls below 95% of the previ- be used without difficulty. However, to obtain a better fit

ous maximum value, SLmax. The parameter SL is defined as with the experimental data during the second and third

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T99-109.vp

Wednesday, May 10, 2000 8:03:20 AM

Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile

Composite Default screen

Rodríguez-Roa 337

Fig. 5. Calculated and experimental stress–strain curves for special triaxial test: (a) first and second loading stages; (b) third loading

stage.

[14] νt =

sions were tried for the moduli. The results of this study can 6Bt

be expressed as follows: (i) if at the beginning of the incre-

ment, SL > 0.95SLmax and MNS > 0.95MNSmax, the moduli

where νt is Poisson’s ratio at the beginning of the increment.

to be used for the increment are Et = Epl and Bt = Bpl; (ii) if

It was assumed that allowable values of νt range from 0.0 to

SL < 0.95SLmax, then for any value of MNS, Et = Eur and Bt

0.49.

= Bur; (iii) if SL > 0.95SLmax and MNS < 0.95MNSmax,

The numerical results showed a low sensitivity for varia-

tions of the parameter α between 0.8 and 1.2. A value of α =

[12] Et = [SL]αEpl + [1 – (SL)α]Eur 1 was assumed in this case.

When the Boscardin et al. (1990) hyperbolic model was

and applied, the following criterion was employed: (i) if SL >

0.95SLmax, Et = Epl and Bt = Bpl; (ii) if SL < 0.95SLmax, Et =

[13] Bt = [SL]αBpl + [1 – (SL)α]Bur Eur and Bt = Bpl.

To improve the accuracy of the solution, very small stress

where α is the stress-level exponent. Equations [12] and [13] increments of 10 kPa were used in all the numerical calcula-

show that in this case a generalized unloading condition is tions.

nearer the real situation when SL is close to zero, whereas a As expected, the results obtained with both models are

generalized primary-loading condition is predominant when identical in the first loading stage. In the second stage, both

SL is close to unity. models present a similar agreement with the experimental

A comparison of the proposed hyperbolic model, the evidence (Fig. 5a); however, negative values of Poisson’s

Boscardin et al. (1990) hyperbolic model, and experimental ratio resulted when the Boscardin et al. (1990) model was

data, is shown in Figs. 5a and 5b. The numerical calcula- applied, and then νt was set equal to zero, keeping the value

tions were performed on the basis of the tangent stiffness of Et. Negative values of νt were also obtained with the

method and the incremental generalized Hooke’s law taking Boscardin et al. model during the initial part of the third

into account the axisymmetric characteristics of the special loading stage of the test. To analyze the third stage inde-

triaxial test. In addition, the following expression of the the- pendently of the previous stages, the axial strain of the spec-

ory of elasticity was used: imen was set equal to zero at the beginning of this third

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T99-109.vp

Wednesday, May 10, 2000 8:03:33 AM

Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile

Composite Default screen

Fig. 6. Typical inadmissible stress states: cases I, II, and III. stress states, and the corresponding fractions of principal

Failure envelope

stresses to be eliminated, are also illustrated in Fig. 6.

Equation [6] was only used for mean confining stresses

Case I larger than the atmospheric pressure because for confining

ts pressures lower than pa, the Santiago gravel presents a

straight failure envelope, as was shown by Kort et al. (1979).

On the other hand, the program assumes that if particle

Case II

In I : * = GH crushing is not significant, the cohesion remains approxi-

Case III

In II : * = CE mately constant despite a possible reduction in φ, when the

mean confining stress increases.

c In III : * = AD and *= BD In evaluating the stiffness of the six-node interface ele-

A B C GH ments, it was assumed that both normal and shear displace-

D E ments vary quadratically along the length of the element,

which is compatible with the external boundary displace-

Tensile Compressive ments of both eight-node quadrilateral elements and six-

stresses stresses node triangular elements.

The properties of the zero thickness interface element

where * = Fraction of the principal consist of a normal stiffness, Kn, and a shear stiffness, Ks,

stress to be eliminated which are related to the normal and shear stresses acting on

the element by

[15] σn = Kn ∆n

stage of the test (Fig. 5b). As illustrated in Fig. 5b, the re-

sults obtained show an excellent agreement between the pro- and

posed model and the experimental data. The agreement

shown by the Boscardin et al. model is clearly unsatisfac- [16] τ = K s ∆s

tory. where σn and τ are the normal and shear stresses, respec-

tively, acting on the interface; ∆n is the average relative nor-

Finite-element method mal displacement across the element; and ∆s is the average

relative shear displacement along the element.

The computer program FEASOILS (finite element analy-

sis of soil structures) was used for the analysis. This pro- The stiffness values assigned to the interface elements

gram uses several subroutines formulated previously by vary depending on the element stresses at the beginning of

Romero (1996) for the stress–strain analysis of axisymme- each increment. If σn is a tensile stress, both Kn and Ks are

tric and plane-strain problems. Six-node triangular elements, assigned very small values. For compression, the value of Kn

eight-node quadrilateral elements, and six-node interface el- is made very high to prevent significant overlap of the adja-

ements were included. The nonlinear incremental procedure cent finite elements, and the value of Ks is set equal to Kst,

is based on the tangent stiffness matrix method. as proposed by Clough and Duncan (1971):

The program was developed to analyze soil structures sub- m 2

σ Rfi τ

mitted to compressive stress states. However, in nonlinear [17] Kst = KI γ w n

1 −

elastic analyses low tensile stresses may occur in some pa τf

zones subjected to unloading. To take this aspect into ac-

count, the value of σ1 is checked in each element at the be- where Kst is the tangent shear-stiffness value; KI is the

ginning of a new increment. If σ1 is positive (compressive dimensionless shear-stiffness number; m is the shear-

stress), the proposed hyperbolic model is used, even if σ2 stiffness exponent; γ w is the unit weight of water expressed

and (or) σ3 are negative (tensile stresses). In such a case ten- in the same units as Kst ; Rfi is the interface failure ratio; and

sile stresses are replaced by a very small positive value: τ f is the maximum shear stress on the interface.

0.1pa. This value was selected because eqs. [5] and [7] The maximum shear stress on a frictional interface may

should be used for values of σ23, larger than 0.1pa, to avoid be expressed in terms of the interface friction angle, δ, and

numerical problems (Duncan et al. 1980b). If σ1 is negative, the normal stress as follows:

a linear elastic behavior is considered and tensile moduli are

used for the increment. [18] τ f = σn tan δ

It is important to emphasize that the maximum values of After an element has failed in shear, with the interface still

tensile and shear stresses are restricted at the end of each in- in compression, the value of Ks is reduced to a negligible

crement by using the iterative “stress transfer” method pro- value but the value of Kn is kept large.

posed by Zienkiewicz et al. (1968). The nonlinear failure For unloading–reloading, i.e., when τ/ τ f falls below 95%

envelope into the region of compressive stresses and the of the previous maximum value, the following expression is

straight line Mohr-Coulomb failure envelope adopted for adopted for Kst (Morrison and Duncan 1995):

tensile stresses as a simplification are illustrated in Fig. 6.

The internal friction angle, φts, for tensile stresses, shown in σ

m

Fig. 6, may be calculated from the maximum tensile stress [19] Kst = KI γ w n

measured in a simple tensile test. Some typical inadmissible pa

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T99-109.vp

Wednesday, May 10, 2000 8:03:35 AM

Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile

Composite Default screen

Rodríguez-Roa 339

Fig. 7. Plate-load test arrangement at the CTC site (adapted from Fig. 8. Finite-element mesh for modeling plate-load test at the

Kort and Ortigosa 1995, their Fig. 2). D, diameter. CTC site. H, height.

employed to simultaneously eliminate, at the end of each in- Table 4. Hyperbolic parameters used for the soil–concrete inter-

crement, tensile normal stresses and (or) excessive shear face.

stresses acting on interface elements.

KI m Rfi δ (°) Kn/ γ w

Finite-element analysis performed 40 000 1.0 0.9 35.3 5.0×108

Note: Kn, normal stiffness value for compressive stresses.

Because of the special features of the CTC building, the

tallest in Santiago, with 33 stories and three underground

basements, a plate-load test was performed by applying a

vertical load per unit area up to 5000 kPa as part of the soil used for loading, unloading, and reloading to improve the

exploration during the project stage. Details of the equip- accuracy of the solution.

ment and test procedure are described by Kort and Ortigosa A linear elastic behavior of the reinforced-concrete mate-

(1995). Figure 7 shows a cross section of the scheme used rial of the plate was assumed, using a Young’s modulus of

for the test. At this site the groundwater level is at a depth of 15 000 MPa and a Poisson’s ratio of 0.25. The hyperbolic

14.2 m. The load was applied in increments by means of a parameters used for the soil–concrete interface (Table 4)

hydraulic jack reacting against a horizontal rigid steel beam were based on the values proposed by Clough and Duncan

tied to a pair of anchor footings. The diameter of the plate (1971).

used was 0.80 m, and the vertical distance between the lower To reduce the computational effort during the trial-and-

surface of the plate and the groundwater level was 1.4 times error process, all available experimental data were used as

its diameter. input, i.e., the coefficient of earth pressure at rest k0, the initial

A cross section of the axisymmetric finite-element mesh elastic modulus (eq. [1]), and the stress–strain characteris-

used in modeling this test is illustrated in Fig. 8. Interface tics and strength parameters obtained from the large-scale

elements were inserted between the plate and the underlying triaxial and simple tensile tests. Thus, the following hyper-

soil. From preliminary finite-element linear-elastic analyses bolic parameters were first selected for the first deposit of the

it was concluded that the vicinity of the anchor footings did Mapocho River: k0 = 0.33; K = 2310; n = 0.5; Kur /K = 1.6

not significantly affect the relationship between the load ap- (mean value calculated by Rodríguez-Roa (1998) from ra-

plied and the settlement of the plate. tios Eur/Ei obtained from triaxial and plate-load tests); φ 0 =

The simulation of the excavation process, previous to the 53°; c = 30 kPa (in fact the cohesion derived from the large-

placement of the plate, and the location of the groundwater scale triaxial tests on undisturbed samples was equal to

level were included in the analysis to adequately evaluate the 24 kPa (Kort et al. 1979), but after a few trials it was found

initial effective stress field. that this value was slightly underestimating the real value,

Because the finite-element procedure is based on the tan- probably due to the inevitable disturbance of the samples

gent stiffness matrix method, very small increments were which were trimmed by hand); φts = 74.8°; Ets = 10 700 kPa;

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T99-109.vp

Wednesday, May 10, 2000 8:03:37 AM

Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile

Composite Default screen

Table 5. Hyperbolic parameters fitted to the first deposit of Fig. 10. Failed zones at different stages of the plate-load test.

Mapocho River.

Bi/pa εu Bi(ur)/pa εu(ur) ∆φ α

469.4 0.0115 729.0 0.004 4.0 1.1

for plate-load test at the CTC site.

D (277. 0 ; 1. 0 )

1. 0

0.8

At stage B

{ SL max = 0.348

Stress Level, SL

Consequently, only the following soil parameters were 0.6

submitted to the trial-and-error process: Bi, ε u, Bi(ur), ε u(ur),

α, and ∆φ (the reduction in φ per log-cycle increase in σ23).

0 .4 C ( 2 095 . 5 ; 0 . 355 )

The values of the hyperbolic parameters finally adjusted to

the behavior of the first deposit of the Mapocho River are B ( 113 . 3 ; 0. 243 )

listed in Table 5. 0.2

In Fig. 9, the load–settlement relationship measured is

compared with the fitted numerical results. Good agreement

was achieved, even for pressures over 1500 kPa. This obser- 0.0

vation shows that despite particle crushing, which could tend 0 1000.0 2000.0 3000.0

to be significant for the highest pressures applied during the

test, it never actually did affect the results. This is probably Mean Normal Stress, MNS (kPa)

due to the particular resistance to crushing of subrounded

particles of the Santiago gravel. The low value fitted to ∆φ served in the second unloading curve close to point D

compared with other published results (Duncan et al. 1980a) (Fig. 9).

is a confirmation of this aspect. Furthermore, it is concluded, The stress path followed by element 321 (Fig. 8), which is

as pointed out by J.M. Duncan (personal communication, directly beneath the plate, is shown in Fig. 11 in terms of the

1997), that dilatancy effects are indirectly reflected in the mean normal stress (MNS) and stress level (SL). For clarity,

values of the parameters that control the relationship be- only the results obtained from stages B to D have been in-

tween the bulk modulus and the stresses. cluded in the figure. During this loading and unloading pro-

The occurrence of soil zones with values of SL greater cess, all theoretically possible relative variations of MNS

than 0.95, i.e., failed zones, has been examined at four dif- and SL take place in element 321. The good agreement

ferent stages corresponding to points A, B, C, and D in observed in Fig. 9 between experimental and predicted re-

Fig. 9. There is no soil element that fulfills such a stress sponses has thus validated the loading–unloading moduli cri-

condition at stage A. However, the situation at stages B, C, teria proposed herein.

and D is different, as seen in Fig. 10. From these results it is Despite the fact that FEASOILS uses DOUBLE PRECI-

observed that most critical stress states take place at the SION, numerical instability problems were found, i.e., small

highest loading level and at the end of the second unloading changes in the hyperbolic parameters to be fitted implied

cycle. This last aspect explains the marked curvature ob- significant variations in the load–settlement relationship

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T99-109.vp

Wednesday, May 10, 2000 8:03:48 AM

Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile

Composite Default screen

Rodríguez-Roa 341

calculated, mainly in the final parts of the unloading curves. Bustamante, E.F. 1987. Nonlinear behavior of a cohesionless soil

The loss of precision is caused by the large size of the finite- mass. C.Eng. thesis, School of Engineering, University of Chile,

element mesh used (number of nodes = 1646, with a half Santiago, Chile. (In Spanish.)

band width of 138), added to the existence of soil elements Campos, J.A. 1981. Finite-element analysis of finite-length excava-

with values of SL close to unity, i.e., with low values of tions. C.Eng. thesis, School of Civil Engineering, University of

Young’s modulus, near the concrete and interface elements Chile, Santiago, Chile. (In Spanish.)

with high values of Young’s modulus and normal stiffness Chen, W.F., and Mizuno, E. 1990. Nonlinear analysis in soil me-

for compressive stresses, respectively (Day and Potts 1994). chanics. Theory and Implementation. Elsevier Science Pub-

As part of this research, finite-element analyses were also lishers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

carried out to simulate two additional vertical load tests per- Clough, G.W., and Duncan, J.M. 1971. Finite-element analyses of

formed at other sites in Santiago at depths of 10.5 and retaining wall behavior. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and

Foundations Division, ASCE, 97(12): 1657–1673.

20.0 m. The subsidence induced by the construction of a re-

cently built subway line in Santiago was also modeled. Day, R.A., and Potts, D.M. 1994. Zero thickness interface elements

— numerical stability and application. International Journal for

These analyses were performed by considering the same pa-

Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 18: 689–

rameters above fitted to the Santiago gravel, except small

708.

changes for the cohesion (Rodríguez-Roa 1998). It was

Duncan, J.M. 1996. State of the art: limit equilibrium and finite-

found from the good agreements obtained that the ground- element analysis of slopes. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,

water level did not significantly affect the plate-load test at ASCE, 122(7): 577–596.

the CTC site. In addition, the numerical model also showed Duncan, J.M., and Chang, C.Y. 1970. Nonlinear analysis of stress

a good performance for solving plane-strain problems1. and strain in soils. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Founda-

tions Division, ASCE, 96(5): 1629–1653.

Conclusions Duncan, J.M., Byrne, P., Wong, K.S., and Mabry, P. 1980a.

Strength, stress–strain and bulk modulus parameters for finite el-

A finite-element computer program to perform incremen- ement analysis of stresses and movements in soil masses. Uni-

tal stress–strain analyses of soil structures has been formu- versity of California, Berkeley, Calif., Report UCB/GT/80-01.

lated on the basis of a modified version of the hyperbolic Duncan, J.M., Wong, K.S., and Ozawa, Y. 1980b. FEADAM: a

elastic model. This constitutive model takes into account in computer program for finite element analysis of dams. Univer-

some degree the value of the intermediate principal stress sity of California, Berkeley, Calif., Report UCB/GT/80-02.

and considers that both Young’s modulus and the bulk Escobar, G. 1971. Shear strength parameters for the gravel of San-

modulus depend on both the stress state and the stress his- tiago. C.Eng. thesis, School of Engineering, Catholic University

tory. For the dense sandy gravels analyzed the additional pa- of Chile, Santiago, Chile. (In Spanish.)

rameter α required for the model is close to unity. Kort, I., and Ortigosa, P. 1995. Foundation of the CTC building on

The model has been shown to successfully simulate the the Santiago gravel. In Proceedings of the 10th Panamerican

nonlinear behavior of the Santiago gravel (first deposit of the Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,

Mapocho River) for loading, unloading, and reloading. The Guadalajara, Mexico, Vol. 2, pp. 1218–1229.

fitted values of the hyperbolic parameters are in accordance Kort, I., Musante, H., and Fahrenkrog, C. 1979. In-situ mechanical

with the characteristics of a dense sandy gravel with properties measurements of gravelly soil used in an interaction

subrounded particles in contact with one another. and foundation model for the Santiago Metro. In Proceedings of

Further experimental work is needed to prove the validity the 6th Panamerican Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foun-

dation Engineering, Lima, Perú, Vol. 2, pp. 217–224.

of the proposed constitutive model for other granular soils,

mainly when they are submitted to stress paths in which SL Morrison, C.S., and Duncan, J.M. 1995. User’s guide for SAGE: a

finite element program for static analysis of geotechnical engi-

increases and MNS decreases, or vice versa. On the other

neering problems. Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Va.

hand, the present hyperbolic model might be incorporated

Ortigosa, P. 1994. Slope stability studies for Line 5 of the Santiago

within a Mohr-Coulomb plasticity model so that “dilation”

subway system. Metro S.A., Santiago, Chile.

and “failure” can be properly taken into account.

Ortigosa, P., Fahrenkrog, C., and Musante, H. 1973. Earth pressure

measurements at Line 1 of the Santiago subway system. Revista

Acknowledgments del IDIEM, University of Chile, 12: 61–92. (In Spanish.)

Owen, D.R.J., and Hinton, E. 1980. Finite elements in plasticity:

This work was supported by the Chilean Fund for Re- theory and practice. Pineridge Press Limited, Swansea, U.K.

search (FONDECYT) under Research Project 1960271. This Poblete, M. 1982. Load deformation properties of some Chilean

support is gratefully acknowledged. The writer also wishes granular soils. In Proceedings of the 1st Chilean Conference on

to thank the comments formulated by professor Horacio Geotechnical Engineering, Santiago, Chile, Vol. 1, pp. 42–57.

Musante during the development of this research. (In Spanish.)

Poblete, M., Ortigosa, P., Caiozzi, P., and Scholz, A. 1981. Elastic

characteristics of the Santiago fluvial gravel. Revista del

References

IDIEM, University of Chile, 20: 71–84. (In Spanish.)

Boscardin, M.D., Selig, E.T., Lin, R.S., and Yang, G.Y. 1990. Hy- Rodríguez-Roa, F. 1998. Prediction of movements induced by ex-

perbolic parameters for compacted soils. Journal of cavations performed on the Santiago gravel. FONDECYT Re-

Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 116(1): 88–104. search Project 1960271, Final report, Santiago, Chile. (In Spanish.)

1

Rodríguez-Roa, F. 1999. Ground subsidence due to a shallow tunnel in a dense sandy gravel. Submitted for publication.

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T99-109.vp

Wednesday, May 10, 2000 8:03:49 AM

Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile

Composite Default screen

Romero, M.L. 1996. Nonlinear stress–strain analysis of soil struc- γ unit weight (soil, water, and air)

tures using the finite-element method. M.Sc. thesis, Catholic γw unit weight of water

University of Chile, Santiago, Chile. (In Spanish.) δ interface friction angle

Zienkiewicz, O.C., Valliappan, B.E., and King, I.P. 1968. Stress ∆n average relative normal displacement across the

analysis of rock as a ‘no tension’ material. Géotechnique, 18: interface element

56–66. ∆s average relative shear displacement along the interface

element

List of symbols ∆φ reduction in φ per log-cycle increase in σ23

εa axial strain

Bi initial tangent bulk modulus on primary loading

εu asymptotic value of the volumetric strain at large mean

Bi(ur) initial tangent bulk modulus on unloading–reloading

normal stresses on primary loading

Bpl bulk modulus on primary loading

εu(ur) asymptotic value of the volumetric strain at large mean

Bt tangent bulk modulus at the beginning of the increment

normal stresses on unloading–reloading

Bur bulk modulus on unloading–reloading

εvol volumetric strain

c cohesion

φ slope of the failure envelope into the region of compres-

D diameter

sive stresses

Ei initial tangent Young’s modulus on primary loading

φts slope of the failure envelope into the region of tensile

Epl Young’s modulus on primary loading

stresses

Et tangent Young’s modulus at the beginning of the incre-

φ0 φ when σ23 = pa

ment

νt Poisson’s ratio at the beginning of the increment

Ets small-strain Young’s modulus from a simple tensile test

νts Poisson’s ratio for a three-dimensional state of tensile

Eur Young’s modulus on unloading–reloading

stresses

E1 small-strain Young’s modulus of the first deposit of the

τ shear stress

Mapocho River

τf maximum shear stress on the interface

E2 small-strain Young’s modulus of the second deposit of

σm mean normal stress

the Mapocho River

σn normal stress on the interface

F percentage passing the No. 200 sieve

σ1 major principal stress

H height

σ2 intermediate principal stress

IP plasticity index

σ3 minor principal stress

K modulus number on primary loading

σ23 mean confining stress

KI dimensionless shear-stiffness number at interface

σi* fraction of the principal stress σi to be eliminated

elements

(σ1 – σ3)f stress difference at failure

Kn normal stiffness value at interface elements

(σ1 – σ3)ult asymptotic value of stress difference at large axial strains

Ks shear stiffness value at interface elements

ω water content in percent dry weight

Kst tangent shear-stiffness value

ωL liquid limit

Kur modulus number on unloading–reloading

k0 coefficient of earth pressure at rest

m shear-stiffness exponent at interface elements Subscripts

MNS current mean normal stress f failure

n modulus exponent i initial

pa atmospheric pressure m mean

Rf failure ratio max maximum value

Rfi interface failure ratio pl primary loading

SL current stress level ts tensile stress

z depth of the point considered ult ultimate or asymptotic value

α stress-level exponent ur unloading reloading

I:\cgj\Cgj37\Cgj04\T99-109.vp

Wednesday, May 10, 2000 8:03:49 AM