4.4 Article

Anisotropic elastoplastic bounding surface model for cohesive soils

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING MECHANICS
Volume 128, Issue 7, Pages 748-758

Publisher

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2002)128:7(748)

Keywords

elastoplasticity; cohesive soils; anisotropy; models; triaxial tests

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The initial stresses existing in the natural ground are anisotropic in the sense that the vertical stress is typically larger than the lateral stresses. The construction activities, such as embankments and excavation, induce anisotropy in the stress system. The stress-deformation behavior and excess pore water pressure response of soils are affected by the inherent and induced stress anisotropy. This paper presents an improved soil model based on the anisotropic critical state theory and bounding surface plasticity. The anisotropic critical state theory of Dafalias was extended into three-dimensional stress space. In addition to the isotropic hardening rule, rotational and distortional hardening rules were incorporated into the bounding surface formulation with an associated flow rule. The projection center that is used to map the actual stress point to the imaginary stress point was specified along the K-0 line instead of the hydrostatic line or at the origin of the stress space. A simplified form of plastic modulus was used and the proposed model requires a total of 12 material parameters, the same number as that of the single-ellipse time-independent version of the Kaliakin-Dafalias model. The model was validated against the undrained isotropic and anisotropic triaxial test results under compression and extension shearing modes for Kaolin Clay, San Francisco Bay Mud, and Boston Blue Clay. The effects of stress anisotropy and overconsolidation were well captured by the model. The time effect was not included in the formulations presented in this paper.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available