Hi David,
I am trying to reproduce some Triaxial data from Coop et al. (1995) using the Hypoplastic Model with Intergranular Strain Concept on Triax.
So far, I cannot get a decent match for the normally consolidated clay. There seems to be a compromise between getting a resonable stress path and a resonable shear stiffness curve. Can you please provide some insights as to what I may be doing wrong?
Many thanks,
Hashmi
Connecting remote sensors to the Plaxis FEM 3D using python 26.7.2024
Intergranular Strain Extensions 16.7.2024
Abaqus Hypoplasticity Primary Variable Is Not Available 1.7.2024
Vumat to calculate excess pore in Coupled Eulerian-Lagrangian ABAQUS 1.7.2024
Drucker Prager Cap Hardening Model 20.6.2024
Soil model for sand under drained cyclic loading 15.6.2024
In Abaqus how do we use *DLOAD for defining both user-defined pressure and body force simultaneously? 15.6.2024
Issue in applying SANISAND04 UMAT to Boundary-Value-Problem 31.5.2024
Triaxial compression test using Mohr-Coulomb model in Abaqus 27.5.2024
The Mises stress calculated by the hypoplasticity model considering the intergranular strain is all 0 20.5.2024
Degradation ( disturbance ) of hypoplastic clay 23.4.2024
Degradation ( disturbance ) of hypoplastic clay 23.4.2024
©2024 SoilModels
Dear Hashmi, this is quite a typical shortcoming of hypoplasticity, which is explained in this paper: “Mašín, D. and Herle, I. (2007). Improvement of a hypoplastic model to predict clay behaviour under undrained conditions. Acta Geotechnica 2, No. 4, 261-268”. But this model has some other issues, for example it has not been yet combined with intergranular strain concept. In your case, I would focus on matching the stiffness curve by accepting inperfect stress path as inevitable hypoplasticity shortcoming. Regards David
Thank you for the prompt response David.
I will address further questions in a new post with a new pic.