ZSoilDay2011 HSmodels-Course v3.1

The Hardening Soil model with small strain stiffness
in Zsoil v2011
Rafal OBRZUD
GeoMod Ing. SA, Lausanne
The Hardening Soil model with small strian stiffness Rafal Obrzud, GeoMod SA 30.08.2011, Lausanne
Content
Introduction Framework of the Hardening Soil model Hardening Soil SmallStrain Hardening Soil Standard
Model parameters Parameter Identification Assistance in Parameter Selection Practical applications
Why do we need advanced constitutive models? Approximation of soil behaviour for reliable simulations of practical cases
450 400
Triaxial drained compression test
Deviatoric stress [kPa] q= 1-3
350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0,00%
Plasticity (yielding) before reaching the ultimate state

Experiment: Texas sand Simulation: Hardening Soil Simulation: Mohr-Coulomb
2,00% 4,00% 6,00% 8,00% 10,00% 12,00% 14,00%
Axial Strain 1
The Hardening Soil model with small strian stiffness - Introduction Rafal Obrzud, GeoMod SA 30.08.2011, Lausanne
Why do we need advanced constitutive models? ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS

LIMIT STATE ANALYSIS DEFORMATION ANALYSIS
Bearing capacity Slope stability
Pile, retaining wall deflection Supported deep excavations Tunnel excavations Consolidation problems
Basic models e.g. Mohr-Coulomb

Advanced soil models
Basic differences between implemented soil models Mohr-Coulomb q

yield surface
K0-line
Linear elastic domain
p q
K0 unloading
p
E Eur E = Eur
1
Practical applications of the Hardening Soil model
Tunneling
Standard Mohr-Coulomb
Hardening-Soil

yield surface
Volumetric cap models q

K0-line
isotropic hardening mechanism
constant
p q q
Stiffness degradation
p p
Eur E=Eur
E E < Eur
Eur
1
Practical applications of the Hardening Soil model
Berlin sand excavation
Hardening-Soil

yield surface
Volumetric cap models q

K0-line
isotropic hardening mechanism
Hardening Soil models q

+ shear hardening mechanism
p q q
NON-LINEAR elastic domain
q
Eur E<Eur
Eur E=Eur Eur
Eur
E0
E0
1
Small strain stiffness in geotechnical practice
e.g. Atkinson, Jardine and many others The Hardening Soil model with small strian stiffness - Introduction Rafal Obrzud, GeoMod SA 30.08.2011, Lausanne
Stiffness in different models

160
Deviatoric Stress q [kPa]
140 120 100 80 60 40 20
Normalized soil stiffness G/G0 [-]
1 0,8 0,6 0,4 0,2 Linear elasticity at very small strains 1E-05 0,0001 0,001 0,01 0,1 Non-linear elasticity at very small strains
Mohr-Coulomb Modified Cam Clay Cap model
Linear elasticity at small strains
A
0,05 0,1
HS-Standard HS-Small
0 -3,61E-16
0,15
0,2
0 1E-06
Axial Strain 1 [-]
Axial Strain 1 [-]
Perceived application of ZSoil models
ULS - Ulitmate Limit State analysis SLS - Serviceability Limit State analysis
Content
Introduction Hardening Soil model framework Hardening Soil SmallStrain Hardening Soil Standard
Hardening Soil model to describe macroscopic phenomena exhibited by soils HS-Standard

Densification (decrease of voids volume in soil due to plastic deformations) Soil stress history (accounting for preconsolidation effects) Plastic yielding (irreversible strains with reaching a yield criterion)
The Hardening Soil model with small strian stiffness - Framework of HS model Rafal Obrzud, GeoMod SA 30.08.2011, Lausanne

Densification (decrease of voids volume in soil due to plastic deformations) Soil stress history (accounting for preconsolidation effects) Plastic yielding (irreversible strains with reaching a yield criterion) Stress dependent stiffness (increasing stiffness moduli with increasing
1200
depth or stress level)
Triaxial drained compression test - Texas sand

SIG3 = 34.5kPa E(3) SIG3 = 138kPa SIG3 = 345kPa
1000
800
600
E(2)
400
200
E(1)
0 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00%
Axial Strain 1

Densification (decrease of voids volume in soil due to plastic deformations) Soil stress history (accounting for preconsolidation effects) Plastic yielding (irreversible strains with reaching a yield criterion) Stress dependent stiffness (increasing stiffness moduli with increasing Dilatation (occurrence of negative volumetric strains during shearing)
depth or stress level)
+ HS-SmallStrain for handling stiffness in a small strain range

Stiffness variation (degradation of G0 modulus with increasing shear strain
amplitudes between 0.0001 0.1%)
Hysteretic, non-linear stress-strain relationship applicable in the range of small strains *

* HS-SmallStrain can be used to some extent to model hysteretic behavior under cycling loadings with the exception of gradual softening for increasing number of cycles. The Hardening Soil model with small strian stiffness - Framework of HS model Rafal Obrzud, GeoMod SA 30.08.2011, Lausanne
Hardening Soil model in ZSoil
Hardening Soil model framework
Activation of G0 degradation in the small strain range

Triaxial test simulation
Secant stiffness in small strains
zoom

Triaxial test simulation with the unloading/reloading cycle
1000 900 800 Deviatoric stress q [kPa] Deviatoric stress q [kPa] 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 0,01 0,02 0,03 0,04 0,05 Axial strain 1 [-] HS-SmallStrain HS-Standard 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0,019 HS-SmallStrain HS-Standard
E0
Eur
Eur zoom
0,02
0,021
0,022
0,023
0,024
Axial strain 1 [-]
Main mechanical features of HS model HS-Standard

Smooth hyperbolic approximation of the stress-strain curve of soil (Duncan-Chang concept) Two plastic mechanisms:
normally-consolidated soils)
isotropic (to handle important plastic volumetric strains observed in
deviatoric (to handle domination of plastic shear strains which are

observed in coarse materials and heavily consolidated cohesive soils)
Ultimate state described by Mohr-Coulomb criterion Rowes dilatancy
+ HS-SmallStrain
Nonlinear elasticity which includes hysteretic effects (Hardin-Drnevich concept)
Content
Non-linear elasticity for very small strains

Hyperbolic Hardin-Drnevich relation to describe S-shaped stiffness
a = 0.385
The Hardening Soil model with small strian stiffness - HS SmallStrain Rafal Obrzud, GeoMod SA 30.08.2011, Lausanne
Content
Hyperbolic approximation of the stress-strain curve

E0 tangent initial stiffness modulus E50 secant stiffness modulus corresponding to 50% of the ultimate deviatoric stress qf described by Mohr-Coulomb criterion Eur unloading/reloading modulus (parameter corresponding to in Modified Cam Clay)
For most soils Rf falls between 0.75 and 1
The Hardening Soil model with small strian stiffness - HS Standard Rafal Obrzud, GeoMod SA 30.08.2011, Lausanne
Hyperbolic approximation of the stress-strain curve
Stress stiffness dependency Triaxial drained compression test - Texas sand

SIG3 = 34.5kPa E(3) SIG3 = 138kPa SIG3 = 345kPa
1200
1000
800
600
E(2)
400
200
E(1)
0 0,00%
5,00%
10,00%
15,00%
Axial Strain 1
Stress stiffness dependency

E0ref , E50ref, , Eurref correspond to reference minor stress ref
where i.e. stiffness degrades with decreasing 3 up to the limit minor stress L which can be assumed by default L =10kPa
In natural soils: m = 0.3 - 1.0
e.g. Norwegian Sands and silts 0.5 (Janbu, 1963) Soft clays m=0.38 - 0.84 (Kempfert, 2006)
Stiffness stress dependency parameter m
1. 2.
Find three values of E50(i) corresponding 3(i) to respectively Find a trend line y = ax + b by assigning variables y= x=
3.
Then the determined slope of the trendline a is the parameter m
Stress stiffness dependency at initial state
E [kPa]
0 0,0 2,0 4,0 6,0 m = 0.4 m = 0.6 m = 0.8 50000 100000 150000 200000 0,0 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 0 50000
E [kPa]
100000 150000 200000 0,0 phi = 20 phi = 30 phi = 40 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 0 50000
E [kPa]
100000 150000 c= 0 c = 15 c = 30 200000
z [m]
z [m]
10,0 12,0 14,0 16,0 18,0 20,0
Level of reference stress
10,0 12,0 14,0 16,0 18,0 20,0
z [m]
8,0
10,0 12,0 14,0 16,0 18,0 20,0
Stiffness exponent
Unloading/reloading Poissons ratio ur

Experimental measurements from local strain gauges show that the initial values of Poissons ratio in terms of small mobilized stress levels q/qmax varies between 0.1 and 0.2 for clays, sands.
Typically elastic domain
0,5 Poisson's ratio [-] 0,4 0,3 0,2 0,1

after Mayne et al. (2009)
0,0 0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1 Mobilized stress level q / qmax Toyoura Sand (Dr=56%) Ticino Sand (Dr=77%) Pisa Clay (Drained Triaxial) Sagamihara soft rock
Unloading/reloading Poissons ratio ur

Therefore, the characteristic value for the elastic unloading/reloading Poissons ratio of ur = 0.2 can be adopted for most soils.
160,0
Failure ratio Rf
Asymptote qa=1/b E50 = 2a 1
140,0 120,0
q = 1 - 3
100,0 80,0 60,0 40,0 20,0 0,0 0 0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
1,8E-03 1,6E-03 1,4E-03 1,2E-03
Identification of Rf Rf = qf / qa = bq f
1/q
1,0E-03 8,0E-04 6,0E-04 4,0E-04 2,0E-04
b=1/qa 1
0,0E+00 0
a =1/2E50
0,05 0,1 0,15 0,2
1 [-]
Double hardening model
r() follows van Ekelens formula in order to assure a smooth and convex yield surface (cf. Modified Cam clay model)
Double hardening model 1 p 2 cap yield surfaces described with van Ekelens formula Mohr-Coulomb failure surface 3 p-q section through shear and cap yield surfaces
Dilatancy
0,5 0,4 0,3
Rowe's dilatancy for m cs Contractancy cut-off for m < cs
sinm [-]
0,2 0,1 0,0 -0,1 -0,2 -0,3 -0,4 0
Rowe's dilatancy
Contractancy domain
10 20
Dilatancy domain
30 40
m [deg]
Dilatancy
Dilatancy in HS-SmallStrain
Contractancy domain
Dilatancy domain
Since the cut-off for the contractancy domain could yield too small volumetric strain, the scaling parameter D is introduced.
Parameters M and H
Evolution of the hardening parameter pc :
plastic strains
H controls the rate of volumetric
Parameters M and H
M and H must fulfil two conditions: 1. K0NC produced by the model in oedometric conditions is the same as K0NC specified by the user 2. Eoed generated by the model is the same Eoed ref specified by the user
Typical stress path in the oedometric test
Parameters M and H
ASSUMPTIONS:
1. At given oedref which is located at post-yield plastic curve, both shear an volumetric mechanism are active 2. Initial stress point 3. A strain driven oedometer test is run with vertical strain amplitude =10-5 and the tangent oedometric modulus is computed as Eoed = / / 4. Optimisation of M and H must fulfil two conditions:
K0NC produced by the model in oedometric conditions = K0NC specified by the user Eoed generated by the model = Eoed ref specified by the user
Initial state variables - OCR

Notion of overconsolidation ratio: OCR = vc v0 Typical oedometer test
0
Vertical preconsolidation pressure vc
v0 current in situ stress vc past vertical preconsolidation pressure

NB. In natural soils, overconsolidation may stem from mechanical unloading such as erosion, excavation, changes in ground water level, or due to other phenomena such as desiccation, melting of ice cover, compression and cementation.
0,02
Volumetric strain v [-]
0,04
0,06
0,08
0,1
Simulation Experiment
0,12 1 10 100 1000
Vertical stress v' [ kPa]

Initial state variables OCR and K0

Normally-conslidated soil (OCR=1) Overconslidated soil (OCR>1)
Why does it appear and what should be inserted?

Initial state variables K0 and K0NC A

v h h
Excavation v
Vertical effective stress
A B B Horizontal effective stress p
Initial state variables K0 and K0NC
SR 0
Preconsolidation stress configuration corresponding to K0NC Current in situ stress configuration corresponding to K0 (at the beginning of numerical simulation)
Initial state variables K0 vs. OCR Estimation of earth pressure at rest

Normally-consolidated soils
0,9 0,8 0,7 1-sin(phi') Brooker&Ireland(1965) Simpson(1992)
Overconsolidated soils
2,5 2,0 1,5
K0NC
0,5 0,4 0,3 0,2 0 20 ' [deg] 40 60
K0
1,0 0,5 0,0 0 5
0,6
phi=20deg phi=30deg phi=40deg
OCR [-]
10
15
20

For most cases when soil was subject to natural consolidation before unloading
K0NC
K0
K0SR = K0NC

In the case of simulating the triaxial compression test after isotropic loading/unloading: K0SR K0NC but
K0SR =1
B
isotropic loading/unloading
A p
Initial state variables
1. User specifies initial stress conditions 0 2. Zsoil at the beginning of a FE analysis calculates SR with and the horizontal stress components
3. Then the hardening parameter pc0 is computed

Setting initial state variables 1. Through K0 y = depth x = xK0(x)
2. Through Initial Stress
Setting initial state variables If the model does not converge at Initial State for the specified K0
1.
try to start Initial State analysis from a small Initial loading Fact. and Increment
2.
otherwise, define initial conditions through Initial Stress
Initial state variables - preconsolidation 1. through OCR

(gives constant OCR profile)
At the beginning of FE analysis, Zsoil sets the stress reversal point (SR) with:
2. through qPOP (gives variable OCR profile)
Stress history through OCR Deposits with constant OCR over the depth (typically deeply bedded soil layers)
OCR [-] 7 9 Effective stress [kPa] 500 1000 Ko [-] 1500 0 2 4 6 Depth [m] 8 10 12 14 16 18 SigEff vertical SigEff preconsolidation 0,00 0,50 1,00 1,50
1 0 2 4 6 Depth [m] 8 10 12 14 16 18
11
13 0 2 4 6 Depth [m] 8 10 12 14 16 18
Deposits with varying OCR over the depth (typically superficial soil layers)
Profiles for Bothkennar clay

Stress history through qPOP Deposits with varying OCR over the depth (typically superficial soil layers)
0 0 2 4 6 Depth [m] 8 10 12 14 16 18
Effective stress [kPa] 200 400
600 0 2 4
OCR [-] 7 9
Ko [-] 11 13 0 2 4 6 Depth [m] 8 10 12 14 16 18 0 0,5 1 1,5
qPOP
Depth [m]
6 8 10 12 14 16 18
SigEff vertical SigEff preconsolidation
Variable K0 can be introduced merely through Initial Stress option
K0OC = K0NC OCR K0OC = K0NC OCRsin()

(Mayne&Kulhawy 1982)
Content
Introduction Hardening Soil - SmallStrain Hardening Soil Standard Model Parameters Parameter Identification Assistance in Parameter Selection Practical applications
Hardening Soil model List of parameters to be provided by the user (page 1) Small stiffness (HS-SmallStrain only) 1. 2. E0ref 0.7 kPa SCPT, SDMT, geophysical methods Triaxial test with local gauges, geotechnical evidence Elastic constants 3. E50ref kPa Triaxial test 4. Eurref 5. ur 6. m kPa Triaxial test Triaxial test Triaxial test Auxiliary variable 7. 3ref kPa Triaxial test
The Hardening Soil model with small strian stiffness - Model parameters Rafal Obrzud, GeoMod SA 30.08.2011, Lausanne
Hardening Soil model List of parameters to be provided by the user (page 2) Shear mechanism
8. 9. 10. 11. 12. c (Rf) emax kPa Triaxial test, in situ test Triaxial test, in situ test Triaxial test or the default value 0.9 Triaxial test Triaxial test on dense granular or overconsildated cohesive soil
Volumetric (cap) mechanism

13. 14. Eoedref oedref kPa kPa Oedometric test Oedometric test
Initial state variable

15. 16. 17. OCR / qPOP K0SR 0 -/ kPa kPa Oedometric test or in situ tests K0SR = 1-sin (or Ko-consolidation triaxial test) Init. stress conditions accounting for K0 = K0SR (for normallyconsolidated soil), K0 = K0OC (for overconsolidated soil)
Hardening Soil model

Comparison of corresponding soil parameters for selected ZSoil models
Corresponding soil parameters Small strain stiffness Elastic constants Failure criterion Dilatancy Cap surface parameters
Hardening-Soil E0 and 0.7
Cap none E and and c OCR , K0
Mohr-Coulomb none E and and c and emax None K0
Eur and ur E50 and m and c

and emax Eoed(can be determined from ) OCR , K0 and K0SR
Content
Parameter identification Report
The Hardening Soil model with small strian stiffness - Parameter identification Rafal Obrzud, GeoMod SA 30.08.2011, Lausanne
The HS model a practical guidebook
Contents: Theory Parameter identification Parameter estimation
Parameter identification Stiffness parameters Determination of G0 from geophysical tests SCPT, SDMT and others
with denoting density of sol and Vs shear wave velocity. (=0.15..0.25 for small strains)
In situ tests with seismic sensors: seismic piezocone testing (SCPTU)

(Campanella et al. 1986)
seismic flat dilatometer test (SDMT)

(Mlynarek et al. 2006, Marchetti et al. 2008)
Geophysical tests: (see review by Long 2008) continuous surface waves (CSW) spectral analysis of surface waves (SASW) multi channel analysis of surface waves (MASW) frequency wave number (f-k) spectrum method
Parameter identification Stiffness parameters Determination of G0 for sands from CPT
after Robertson and Campanella (1983)
Parameter identification Stiffness parameters
Estimation of E0 from E50
Estimation of E0 from E50
Estimation of E0 from Eur
HS-SmallStrain Non-linear elasticity for small strains Cohesionless soils

Influence of voids ratio Influence of confining stress p
after Wichtmann & Triantafyllidis
HS-SmallStrain Non-linear elasticity for small strains Cohesive soils

Influence of soil plasticity
after Vucetic and Dobry (from Benz, 2007)
approximation proposed by Stokoe et al.
Parameter identification Stiffness parameters Determination of E50 for sands from CPT
after Robertson and Campanella (1983) The Hardening Soil model with small strian stiffness - Parameter identification Rafal Obrzud, GeoMod SA 30.08.2011, Lausanne
Parameter selection Stiffness parameters

Undrained vs drained moduli theoretical relationship
Since the shear modulus is not affected by the drainage conditions
Parameter identification Oedometric modulus Eoed
where
Cc is the compression index
Since we look for tangent Eoed, 0, and *=2.303oedref
If
is known
Parameter selection - oedometric modulus Eoed Eoedref
E50ref
E50ref
but Eoedref
oedref = ref / K0NC
ref
Parameter identification Preconsolidation pressure and OCR
Laboratory: - Oedometer test (Casagrandes method, Pacheco Silva method (1970)) Field tests: - Static piezocone penetration (CPTU) (see reports by Mayne) - Marchetti flat dilatometer (DMT) (correlations by Marchetti (1980), Lacasse and Lunne, 1988) )
(from Lunne et al. 1997) The Hardening Soil model with small strian stiffness - Parameter identification Rafal Obrzud, GeoMod SA 30.08.2011, Lausanne
Parameter identification Other information from DMT
Parameter identification Strength parameters
Parameter identification Strength parameters Friction angle for granular soils from in situ tests SPT
CPTU
(Robertson & Campanella, 1983)
DMT
Upper bound Lower bound (Totani et al., 1999)
Content
The Hardening Soil model with small strian stiffness - Assistance in parameter selection Rafal Obrzud, GeoMod SA 30.08.2011, Lausanne
Initialization menu
Empty field reserved for numeric data (basic soil properties, specific soil properties, in situ test data) in Zsoil v2012
Initialization menu Non-cohesive soil setup
Initialization menu Cohesive soil setup
Initialization menu
HS Menu
Scroll
Parameter selection secant modulus Eur Typical values of the stiffness modulus which are provided in most textbooks are referred to as the "static" stiffness modulus Es
It can be assumed that they represent the values of the unloading/reloading modulus Eur In the basic parameter selection, typical Eur is taken as Es and the reference pressure is assumed ref=100kPa
Parameter selection secant modulus E50 In most practical cases:
In toolbox - ranges:
= 2 to 4
Parameter selection - oedometric modulus Eoed Eoedref
E50ref
E50ref
but Eoedref
oedref = ref / K0NC
ref
Parameter selection friction angle Multi-criterion selection depending on quantity of provided input data (soil keywords) Keyword: Density
Keyword: Soil type, Density, Gradation
Content
Practical applications Excavation in Berlin sand Engineering draft and the sequence of excavation
The Hardening Soil model with small strian stiffness - Practical applications Rafal Obrzud, GeoMod SA 30.08.2011, Lausanne
Practical applications Excavation in Berlin sand
Hardening-Soil
-5
-10
Distance from surface Y [m]
-15
-20
-25
HS-small HS-Std MC Measurements
-30
-35 -0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 Horizontal displacement Ux [m]
Practical applications Shallow footing Texas sand benchmark
Practical applications Shallow footing 1. DMT data

KD [-]
0 0 DMT-1 DMT-2 1 5 10 15 20
Texas sand benchmark

OCR [-]
2. OCR interpreted form DMT data

0 0 10 20 30 40 50
DMT-1 DMT-2
Depth [m]
Depth [m]
Variable profile
10
10
Practical applications Shallow footing 3. Selecting qPOP

Vertical stress[kPa]
0 0 200 400 600 800

OCR [-]
4. OCR based on qPOP

0 0 10 20 30 40 50
qPOP
DMT-1 DMT-2 FE Model
Depth [m]
Depth [m]
Variable profile
vertical effectivve stress preconsolidation pressure
10
10
Practical applications Shallow footing 5. Interpreting and Setting K0

K0 [-]
0 0 DMT-1 DMT-2 1 FE Model 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Depth [m]
Variable K0 can be introduced merely through Initial Stress option
10
Practical applications Shallow footing Texas sand benchmark

Load [kN]
0 0 -0.01 -0.02 -0.03 -0.04 -0.05 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Experiement Hardening Soil SmallStrain Standard Mohr-Coulomb
Settlement [m]
-0.06 -0.07 -0.08 -0.09 -0.1 -0.11 -0.12 -0.13 -0.14
Summary
Hardening Soil-SmallStrain model: correctly reproduces a strong reduction of soil stiffness with increasing shear strain amplitudes is recommended for Serviceability Limit State analyses as it generally predicts soil behavior and field measurements more precisely than basic linear-elasticity models is essential for the engineering problems with unloading/reloading modes such as excavations, tunneling accounts for stress stress history which is crucial for problems such as footing, consolidation, water fluctuation is applicable to most soils as it accounts for pre-failure nonlinearities for both sand and clay type materials regardless of the overconsolidation state
The Hardening Soil model is not as difficult in practical use as you may think. When you run a simulation with the M-C model, as an exercise, try to run the Hardening Soil model as well.

ZSoilDay2011 HSmodels-Course v3.1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ZSoilDay2011 HSmodels-Course v3.1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Hardening Soil model with small strain stiffness

Model parameters Parameter Identification Assistance in Parameter Selection Practical applications

Triaxial drained compression test

Deviatoric stress [kPa] q= 1-3

350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0,00%

Plasticity (yielding) before reaching the ultimate state

Why do we need advanced constitutive models? ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS

Bearing capacity Slope stability

Basic models e.g. Mohr-Coulomb

Advanced soil models

Basic differences between implemented soil models Mohr-Coulomb q

Practical applications of the Hardening Soil model

Basic differences between implemented soil models Mohr-Coulomb q

Volumetric cap models q

Linear elastic domain

Linear elastic domain

Practical applications of the Hardening Soil model

Berlin sand excavation

Basic differences between implemented soil models Mohr-Coulomb q

Volumetric cap models q

Hardening Soil models q

Linear elastic domain

Linear elastic domain

NON-LINEAR elastic domain

Eur E=Eur Eur

Small strain stiffness in geotechnical practice

Stiffness in different models

Deviatoric Stress q [kPa]

140 120 100 80 60 40 20

Normalized soil stiffness G/G0 [-]

Mohr-Coulomb Modified Cam Clay Cap model

Linear elasticity at small strains

Axial Strain 1 [-]

Axial Strain 1 [-]

Perceived application of ZSoil models

Model parameters Parameter Identification Assistance in Parameter Selection Practical applications

Hardening Soil model to describe macroscopic phenomena exhibited by soils HS-Standard

Hardening Soil model to describe macroscopic phenomena exhibited by soils HS-Standard

depth or stress level)

Triaxial drained compression test - Texas sand

Deviatoric stress [kPa] q= 1-3

0 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00%

Hardening Soil model to describe macroscopic phenomena exhibited by soils HS-Standard

depth or stress level)

+ HS-SmallStrain for handling stiffness in a small strain range

amplitudes between 0.0001 0.1%)

Hysteretic, non-linear stress-strain relationship applicable in the range of small strains *

Hardening Soil model in ZSoil

Hardening Soil model framework

Activation of G0 degradation in the small strain range

Hardening Soil model framework

Secant stiffness in small strains

Hardening Soil model framework

Axial strain 1 [-]

Main mechanical features of HS model HS-Standard

isotropic (to handle important plastic volumetric strains observed in

deviatoric (to handle domination of plastic shear strains which are

Ultimate state described by Mohr-Coulomb criterion Rowes dilatancy

Model parameters Parameter Identification Assistance in Parameter Selection Practical applications

Non-linear elasticity for very small strains

Model parameters Parameter Identification Assistance in Parameter Selection Practical applications

Hyperbolic approximation of the stress-strain curve

For most soils Rf falls between 0.75 and 1

Hyperbolic approximation of the stress-strain curve