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

Modeling cyclic undrained sandy soil triaxial test using ABAQUS
Shile DongFinite Elements3 Views 3,855
Dear all, I am trying to use Abaqus to modeling undrained cyclic triaxial test for liquefiable soil. I am wondering how could I applied the cyclic load. I should apply […] 
DIANA with monopile follows Blum theory saving 10 m of length
Ab van den bosFinite Elements0 Views 3,321
Where the client was forced to make all his horizontal loaded Dolphins (piles) 10 m longer we could trustworthy proof that this actually was not necessary saving millions of cost […] 
Tochnog Professional Page moves
Dennis RoddemanFinite Elements1 Views 3,276
Hi All, Starting from Saturday January 26 2019 the Tochnog Professional page moves to http://www.tochnogprofessional.nl Best, Dennis Roddeman 
A problem of convergence from using Hypoplastic model in Abaqus
Joe ChuFinite Elements5 Views 3,659
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 […] 
How to replicate results for vertical cut in FEM program
Amine AboufirassFinite Elements0 Views 3,486
The equations for a vertical cut in cohesive material are given in several publications including Heyman (1973): The stability of a vertical cut (see attachment Equations1.jpeg) and Verruijt (2001) Soil […] 
SANISAND umat issue
Philip AlkhouryFinite Elements2 Views 3,566
Hello everyone; I have implemented the Sanisand constitutive model (UMAT) in abaqus in the scope of performing a dynamic analysis on a 3D soilpile interaction problem. I have succeded in […] 
Tochnog Professional overview movie in youtube
Dennis RoddemanFinite Elements0 Views 3,273
Dear All, We posted a small overview movie of Tochnog Professional in YouTube. For more movies see the complete channel. 
SANISAND 2008 model
MOHD SAQIBFinite Elements0 Views 3,288
Dear fellow, Anyone have SANISAND 2008 by Taiebat and Dafalias umat subroutine available for Abaqus. I have 2004 but I need 2008 one.
Who is Online
No one is online right now
Search SoilModels Website
Recent posts
 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 CreepSCLAY model. 1.3.2024
 Cyclic tests with Triax element test driver 14.2.2024
 SUMMER SCHOOL ‘Numerical Modelling in Geotechnical Engineering’, Innsbruck – July 22nd26th, 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
 Challenges in simulating geomechanical models using MohrCoulomb with Tension CutOff in Abaqus 20.10.2023
 Analys soil liquefaction with Abaqus under blast load 19.10.2023
Recent Comments
 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.
 Konstantinos Chatzis on Cyclic tests with Triax element test driver
 Jose Duque on Cyclic tests with Triax element test driver
 MohamadReza Kamali on How to model the settlement in soil due to water drawdown.
 Leo Alibert on MSE walls design in Plaxis
 Ignacio Zuloaga on MSE walls design in Plaxis
 Giada Orlando on Problem with VUMAT interface
 Michael Spyridis on Problem with VUMAT interface
 Ahmad Moeineddin on Problem with VUMAT interface
 Nikolay Suyo Calla on Hardening soil Model UMAT
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