Dear all,
I’m trying to model multilayer soil in abaqus. To use the SaniSand umat in model I use the following parameters but no plastic strain at all. The unit system used is us(in). Are the input parameters incorrect?
Could anyone kindly help me solve this problem? Thanks a lot!.
problem with sanisand umat
Related Articles
-
SANISAND umat issue
Philip Alkhoury||Finite Elements|3 |Views 6,000
Hello everyone; I have implemented the Sanisand constitutive model (UMAT) in abaqus in the scope of performing a dynamic analysis on a 3D soil-pile interaction problem. I have succeded in […] -
Modeling of triaxial test sample by using hypoplastic subroutine
Naif Alsanabani||Finite Elements|7 |Views 5,082
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 […] -
Geostatic method for Abaqus/Explicit
Joe Chu||Finite Elements|3 |Views 6,466
Dear all, I recently conducted a numerical simulation of pile-soil interaction. I digged a vertical hole and insert the pile into that with general contact. Due to many reasons, I […] -
Tochnog Professional becomes free
Dennis Roddeman||Finite Elements|0 |Views 4,494
After several decades of development we are happy to announce that the Tochnog Professional finite element program has become free. Both for academic and commercial use. We are extremely grateful […] -
In Abaqus how do we use *DLOAD for defining both user-defined pressure and body force simultaneously?
Ashesh Choudhury||Finite Elements|0 |Views 1,436
In Abaqus how do we use *DLOAD for defining user-defined pressure and body force simultaneously? I want to user-define both body fore and pressure. -
DIANA 10.4 released with full Geotechnical possibilities 3D as always, but now also 2D!
Ab van den bos||Finite Elements|0 |Views 4,261
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 […] -
hypoplasticity model with Abaqus umat on Brno clay
mahdie masoudi||Finite Elements|5 |Views 5,425
Dear all, I am a Ph.D. student at Kharazmi University. Recently I have been trying to simulate a triaxial compression test using the hypoplasticity model for clay using ABAQUS. The […] -
An error in the SANISAND umat runtime
Zhentao Liu||Finite Elements|15 |Views 2,928
Dear all I was simulating a pile in a fully drained soil subjected to horizontal loads using ABAQUS (as shown in Figure 1) and noticed from the monitor that the […]
Who is Online
No one is online right now
Search SoilModels Website
Recent posts
-
Correct my Plaxis FEM simulation in foundation bearing capacity results 3.4.2026
-
mohr coulomb 2D yield surface vs 3D mohr coulomb yield surface 28.2.2026
-
Problem with GeoStudio (Seepage) software 16.2.2026
-
Prague Geotechnical Days 2026 3.2.2026
-
Postdoctoral position at COFS, UWA 28.7.2025
-
Hypoplasticity clay in ABAQUS 23.7.2025
-
Drucker-Prager Cap 29.5.2025
-
Abaqus RITSS with hypoplastic 9.4.2025
-
Fellin UMAT subroutine 2.4.2025
-
Hypoplasticity clay for triaxial compression in abaqus 26.3.2025
-
Abaqus RITSS methon for LDFE analysis with hypoplastic 17.3.2025
-
Request for VUMAT Implementation of Mohr-Coulomb, Drucker-Prager, or Drucker-Prager Cap 28.2.2025
Recent Comments
- Ding Yan on Download package of a complete dataset “Karlsruhe Kaolin – Cyclic tests (T. Wichtmann)”
- Arie Koot on mohr coulomb 2D yield surface vs 3D mohr coulomb yield surface
- Arie Koot on Multilaminate Model (Schädlich & Schweiger)
- Amir F on Problem with GeoStudio (Seepage) software
- Nabanita Saha on set cavitation limit in ABAQUS/STANDARD when using SANISAND umat
- Nabanita Saha on SANISAND Abaqus UMAT and Plaxis implementations
- Tian Fapai on SANISAND Abaqus UMAT and Plaxis implementations
- Heng Wang on Multilaminate Model (Schädlich & Schweiger)
- Zhang Hongwei on Download Package of Charles University Implementation of High Cycle Accumulation Model
- Ruimin Chen on Problem with VUMAT interface
- Nitesh Bhume on UMAT and oneAPI compiler issues. (SOLVED…i hope :p)
- Aleksandar Kostadinovic on Karlsruhe fine sand – Cyclic tests (T. Wichtmann)
- Amrane Moussa on Kadlíček, T., Ochmański, M., Mašín, D. and Duque, J. (2022) Report on Charles University implementation of high cycle accumulation model
- Ramon Varghese on SANISAND for FLAC3D Download
- Shuhan Cao on Hardening Soil or Hardening Soil-Small umat in Abaqus
- Kuikui Guigui on Hypoplastic Interface Model (Stutz et al., 2016)
- Kuikui Guigui on Download Package for Hypoplastic interface model and UMAT – FRIC interface
- Francisco José Mendez on Programme of the ALERT Olek Zienkiewicz school on Constitutive Modelling of Geomaterials, February 3 to 7, 2025, Prague, Czech Republic









Hey Yousef
The parameters look generally ok. Rather close to the original calibration of Dafalias & Manzari for Toyoura Sand. If you are using US units check if your G0 parameter, which is indeed unitless, is still 125 or is it different value.
Good luck
Piotr
Hello
Thank you for replay
G0 is a dimensionless constant, but by changing its value, PE is STEEL equal to zero.
Hey Yousef
As mentioned by Arie, PE is not calculated by the umat. It is calculated only by the constitutive models implemented in Abaqus. If you want to see if plastic strains occur from the umat, then read umat carefully and try to ask for your own output in log file. I am not sure if you can ask for the actual value of the plastic strain.
Piotr
What do you mean “no plastic strain”?
Sanisand umat does not calculate plastic strain: it is a kinematic hardening model with one backstress.
It only needs and calculates plastic strain rate.
Thank you for replay
PE in visualization always is zero
though with chang in load and b.c
is this correct؟
Or do you mean you miss plastic strain input?
Hardening behavior is described by the hardening parameters
i set depvar=36
and check pe in field output in step
and select umat in job
Something else needs to be done؟
select pe has no use: it is not calculated by sanisand.
You can select SDV output but then you get all 36 statevar. (you cannot select a few)
It will make your odb larger but it gives you more information.
c 1 … alpha_11 back stress, orientation of yield surface cone
c 2 … alpha_22
c 3 … alpha_33
c 4 … alpha_12
c 5 … alpha_13
c 6 … alpha_23
c
c 7 … void void ratio
c
c 8 … Fab_11 fabric tensor z
c 9 … Fab_22
c 10 … Fab_33
c 11 … Fab_12
c 12 … Fab_13
c 13 … Fab_23
c
c 14 … not used
c
c group 2: memory variables for shear reversal (SR) and other purposes
c
c 15 … alpha_sr_11 alpha value at stress reversal points (discrete update)
c 16 … alpha_sr_22
c 17 … alpha_sr_33
c 18 … alpha_sr_12
c 19 … alpha_sr_13
c 20 … alpha_sr_23
c
c 21 … not used
c 22 … not used
c 23 … not used
c 24 … not used
c 25 … not used
c 26 … not used
c 27 … not used
c
c 28 … not used
c
c group 3: variables saved for post processing or other purposes
c
c 29 … pore excess pore pressure (undrained case)
c 30 … p mean effective stress
c 31 … q deviator stress
c 32 … z Lode parameter (cos(3theta))
c 33 … dtsub suggested size of first time substep
c 34 … nfev number of function evaluation
c 35 … not used
c 36 … not used
c