Hello all,
According to my last post some weeks ago I now have translated the laboratory data from engineering strain to true strain with the following formula: epsilon(true)=ln(1+epsilon(engineering)). I compared then the the new values of the measurement data with the points on the graph of the ExCalibre output. And they a still different. For the Oedometer the measurement point (sigma 1/epsilon 1 true) is (1200/0,101) and on the graph of ExCalibre it is (1200/0,112). The same is for the triaxial tests. The maximum true strain epsilon 1 of the measurement is 0,197 and on the graph it goes until 0,244. Attached are the pictures of the ExCalibre output with the points and a picture of the excel table with the measurement values.
Is the transformation of strain different in ExCalibre or what can be the reason for that?
Regards Marco
ExCalibre Automatic Calibration
Related Articles
-
Initial Stiffness of CU test in Masin’s 2014 Model
Shen Wang||Constitutive Modelling|1 |Views 4,093
Hi, I am using Hypoplasticity model with explicit asymptotic boundary surface proposed by Prof. Masin in 2014. In this model, parameter ‘nu’ controls initial stiffness in CU test. But when […] -
Difficulties in calibration of triaxial test on Hochstetten sand by sand Hypoplasticity model
AKSHAY SAKHARE||Constitutive Modelling|2 |Views 4,478
“A hypoplastic relation for granular materials with a predefined limit state surface” paper by P. A. Von Wolffersdorff April 1996 include a triaxial test result of sample 10cm diameter and […] -
A question about the hypoplastic model in clay
Wenbo Gu||Constitutive Modelling|7 |Views 4,368
Hello, I am writting to ask how to get the elastic modulus or undrained strength of the soil in the simulation model by using hypoplastic model in clay? Is there […] -
Question on implementation of sand hypoplastic model with Abaqus umat
Kunpeng Wang||Constitutive Modelling|4 |Views 4,434
Dear all, I am a PhD student in China University of geosciences. Recently, I have been working on the simulation of a pile-soil interaction with Abaqus. I simulate the sand […] -
Regarding FRIC : As a beginner
Arun C||Constitutive Modelling|1 |Views 4,215
Sir, As a beginner of FRIC I am facing some difficulties to implement it. The downloaded FRIC code has been added to my pile soil friction model and trying to […] -
Hypo-sand UMAT problem
sobhan abedinnejad||Constitutive Modelling|2 |Views 4,237
Dear community I have 4 Question in implementation of Hypo-sand Umat in ABAQUS could someone kindly explain? 1. I checked the Umat file from (https://soilmodels.com/download/plaxis-umat-hypoplas-zip/) and i understand this subroutine […] -
Clay Hypoplastic Model ABAQUS UMAT
Hashmi Sohawon||Constitutive Modelling|3 |Views 4,483
Hi, I wanted to ask if the variables/parameters defined in the online Hypoplastic model manual for PLAXIS (https://web.natur.cuni.cz/uhigug/masin/plaxumat/node6.html) are the same for the ABAQUS UMAT? -
Looking for help
Axel Grauwinkel||Constitutive Modelling|4 |Views 352
Hello guys. I just tried to calibrate on soilmodels. I´ve done three CIUP-REC-test plus one oedometric test. As you can see in the images, that there is still something quite […]
Who is Online
No one is online right now
Search SoilModels Website
Recent posts
- Degradation ( disturbance ) of hypoplastic clay 23.4.2024
- Degradation ( disturbance ) of hypoplastic clay 23.4.2024
- Paper of Coulomb, C. A. (1773) 15.4.2024
- ABAQUS UMAT of hypoplastic clay model 6.4.2024
- Prague Geotechnical Days 2024 “Geotechnical monitoring” and 30th jubilee Prague Geotechnical Lecture by prof. Eduardo Alonso 5.4.2024
- UMAT for Creep-SCLAY model. 1.3.2024
- Cyclic tests with Triax element test driver 14.2.2024
- SUMMER SCHOOL ‘Numerical Modelling in Geotechnical Engineering’, Innsbruck – July 22nd-26th, 2024 1.2.2024
- COURSE IN SOIL MODELING – NTNU, Trondheim – October 14th to 18th, 2024 21.12.2023
- MSE walls design in Plaxis 11.12.2023
- sand liquefaction modelling in Anura3D 8.12.2023
- BCV bentonite experimental and modelling datasets 14.11.2023
Recent Comments
- Jh Xue on UMAT Implementation in Abaqus (Hypoplastic clay Subroutines)
- Santosh Katuwal on PM4Sand for Plaxis Download
- KHA DIDJA on SANISAND Abaqus UMAT and Plaxis implementations
- Debdip Das on SANISAND Abaqus UMAT and Plaxis implementations
- Ramon Varghese on SANISAND for FLAC3D Download
- Akhtyar Gul Shirzoi on ABAQUS UMAT of hypoplastic clay model
- KHA DIDJA on Animating Soil Models
- Jh Xue on Undrained Tests with Clay Hypoplasticity Intergranular
- Zhentao Liu on Problem in simulating CPT using SANISAND04
- Gertraud Medicus on ABAQUS UMAT of hypoplastic clay model
- Chen Zhiming on Download Package of Charles University Implementation of High Cycle Accumulation Model
- Konstantinos Chatzis on Cyclic tests with Triax element test driver
- Abhay Pratap Singh on Cyclic tests with Triax element test driver
- Giovanni Ciardi on Cyclic tests with Triax element test driver
- Konstantinos Chatzis on Cyclic tests with Triax element test driver
- Ismail Khan on Cyclic tests with Triax element test driver
- Kanika Lamba on Cyclic tests with Triax element test driver
- Arie Koot on How to model the settlement in soil due to water drawdown.
Hi Marco, my colleague Tomáš Kadlíček checked ExCalibre code, he will send you more details in a separate comment. Regards David
Hi David, thanks for the quick response.
Regards Marco
Hi Marco, I have checked the source code of ExCalibre and it is correct. In the case of compression, you should calculate strains as follows:
epsilon(engineering) = dL/L0
epsilon(true)= – ln( 1 – epsilon(engineering))
In this way, TRUE strains will be larger then ENGINEERING strains. True strains are related to the current hight of the specimen whereas ENG strains are related to the initial hight “L0”.
Therefore, when subjected to the same amount of settlement “dL” you should always obtain larger strain increment in the case of TRUE strains in comparison to the ENG strains.
Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Kind Regards,
Tomas Kadlicek
Hi Thomas,
now everything fit together. Thanks a lot.
Regards
Marco