I tried to model sample of triaxial test in Abaqus program. I used hypoplastic subroutine. The parameters used in hypoplastic model was Hochstetten sand the given in website “https://web.natur.cuni.cz/uhigug/masin/plaxumat/node5.html”.
The used steps of analysis were as;
– First step is for applying confining pressure in the sample.
– Second step is for consolidation process (dissipation of excess pore pressure).
– Third step is applying deviator stress (axial stress).
The analysis was completed in first and second steps, but it was aborted in third step (note: the deviator stress was small).
Could anyone to solve this problem?
The boundary conditions are shown in attachments figures.
Modeling of triaxial test sample by using hypoplastic subroutine
Related Articles

DIANA 10.4 released with full Geotechnical possibilities 3D as always, but now also 2D!
Ab van den bosFinite Elements0 Views 261
We are pleased to announce that DIANA 10.4 is released with full 2D geotechnical possibilities. DIANA is already easy to use for full 3D geotechnical models, and now the more […] 
Calculation of coordinates of climbing formwork using hypoplasticity and pressuremter tests
Christian SchwabFinite Elements0 Views 221
Our article published in the latest issue of Ground Engineering 10/2017. Great combination of conepressueremetertesting (CPM) by FUGRO and advanced 3D Fem modelling by GEOLINK using hypoplastic constitutive equations to […] 
fortran format
sobhan abedinnejadFinite Elements1 Views 179
hi, every one i have problem with fortran format my abaqus is 6.14 and this version accept (.for) format for fortran but some subroutines are in (.f ) format is […] 
A problem of convergence from using Hypoplastic model in Abaqus
Joe ChuFinite Elements4 Views 193
Dear all, The sand hypoplastic model has been used to simulate the interaction between soil and pile. However, there is a bad convergence in the process of calculation. When I […] 
Tochnog Professional overview movie in youtube
Dennis RoddemanFinite Elements0 Views 278
Dear All, We posted a small overview movie of Tochnog Professional in YouTube. For more movies see the complete channel. 
ABAQUS modeling: Warning about unconnected regions when using hypoplasticity subroutine
Jasmine LokeshFinite Elements0 Views 238
I ran a simple 3D model with symmetry boundary conditions first using elastic material and then as hypoplastic using a subroutine. However, in the former case, I don’t get the […] 
Free Tochnog Professional list of capabilities and papers
Dennis RoddemanFinite Elements0 Views 216
Dear All, you can find a list with some of Tochnog Professional capabilities and application papers at: http://www.tochnogprofessional.nl/Tochnog_Professional_wikipedia_format.pdf Stay safe, Dennis Roddeman 
SANISAND dll
Emilio BilottaFinite Elements2 Views 391
Hi there, I’ve used successfully used SANISAND .dll with Plaxis 2016, but after switching to 2017 and now 2018 the .dll seems not to work (the parameter fields appear without […]
Who is Online
No one is online right now
Search SoilModels Website
Recent posts
 PM4Silt software 12.7.2020
 Factor of safety in Plaxis 3D using hypoplastic model for sand 9.7.2020
 Postdoc position in energy geotechnics at Aarhus University 8.7.2020
 ERROR Message when using UMAT_hcea with ABAQUS 3.7.2020
 Slope stability calculation with hypoplasticity using phic reduction available now in download section 30.6.2020
Recent Comments
 Jasmine Lokesh on ERROR Message when using UMAT_hcea with ABAQUS
 Lukas Reindl on ERROR Message when using UMAT_hcea with ABAQUS
 Jasmine Lokesh on ERROR Message when using UMAT_hcea with ABAQUS
 Arie Koot on PM4Silt software
 Daniel Valencia on Clay hypoplasticity with strength reduction (umat and Plaxis dll).
 Fernando Guzman on Download package of a complete dataset “Karlsruhe fine sand – Cyclic tests (T. Wichtmann)”
 Francisco Mendez on Calibration of the von Wolffersdorff model using Genetic Algorithms
 Wang Shun on Calibration of the von Wolffersdorff model using Genetic Algorithms
 Jasmine Lokesh on Hypoplastcity sand model
 Jasmine Lokesh on Hypoplastcity sand model
 David Mašín on Hypoplastcity sand model
 Jasmine Lokesh on Hypoplastcity sand model
Dear Neif,
– Please first check the results of the first two steps to see whether they are sensible, even better you may compare them with results of some element test drivers from SoilModels: this will consfirm that you have properly set the parameters.
– Then make sure you subdivide the shear stage into many small steps. It is not clear from your post whether you use intergranular strain or not. In particular the istrain version may require small step size as there is significant stiffness change during loading.
– If the simulation crashes, it should produce error file (something like fort.1) where some crash information should be given. You may also see some messages in log files of Abaqus project, which could help to find the source of the problem.
Regards David
Dear Dr. David
– The intergranular strain concept was used with value δ=0.00001.
– The magnitude of axial stress that used at third step is 1.0 kPa.
– The type of steps is soils (transient)
– The time period and increment size of third step were 0.1, and 0.001 respectively.
In term of the results of analysis of first and second step, there was no change in void ratio.
the analysis is incomplete in third step.
I need for helping for this problem please?
Dear Neif,
It seems that the second step was failed if there was no void change.
Have you ever try a triaxial test with only one element?
I prefer to start with elementary tests without intergranular strain
Regards
Dear Wang
Thank you very much for your helping.
I considered your noting for modeling sample without intergranular strain, but the analysis was incomplete in step 3 (applying axial stress).
In term of void ratio, i mean that the void ratio in first step (applying confining pressure) is equal to the void ratio in second step (consolidation step). on other word, the value of void ratio is constant in first and second steps which is equal as the void ratio that set in initial condition.
Hi,
just a couple of observations:
Why are the bc in the lower side fixed in vertical and horizontal direction? You only need to fix them in the vertical direction (they must be free to move in the horizontal direction specially in the consolidation phase).
I would advise you to model this first with a 2D model in axial symmetrical conditions and without intergranular strain. Start with 1 element and then you can slowly increase the number of elements or even dimensions if you need it and afterwards add with the intergranular strain parameters.
If the void ratio did not change it means there is no volumetric deformation. This might be the case if the confinig phase is not modelled correctly (check if the stress state changes correctly) or if the sample is able to deform (drained conditions)
Good luck.
Dear Oscar
Thank for help. I considered your noting, but i have the same problem.
When Hypoplastic model were replaced by MohrCoulomb and elasticity, the analysis was completed and there were volume changes throughout steps.
When Hypoplastic model were used, and there were no drainage conditions at top and bottom of sample, the analysis was completed and here were no volume changes throughout steps.
Is there parameter in hypoplastic umat subroutine or in hypoplastic model (12 parameters) that control or prevent the volume change of the sample of triaxial?
I modeled initial void ratio as uniform value. If are there other method to model initial void ratio (predefined field), provide me this method please.
Hi Naif,
not to my knowledge. I have worked with the von Wolffersdorf hypoplastic model without a problem. I am thinking the problem lies in assigning the initial void ratio. You can check this value in Abaqus output by looking at the system defined variables (sdv).
Good luck solving your problem