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

Tochnog Professional 100 element free version, www.tochnogprofessional.nl
dennis roddemanFinite Elements0 Views 292
The Tochnog Professional finite element program is now available as free version with 100 elements. It can be downloaded without registration from http://www.tochnogprofessional.nl. Several commercial and free pre and postprocessors […] 
Presentations on hypoplasticity applications, D. Mašín, NGI 2017
David MašínFinite Elements0 Views 1,580
Based on some requests, I share here two presentations on hypoplasticity applications. One is related to simulation of various boundary value problems, the other focuses on simulation of cyclic and […] 
How to replicate results for vertical cut in FEM program
Amine AboufirassFinite Elements0 Views 277
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 […] 
finite element modeling of ISAHP for sand material
arad ahmadi radinFinite Elements1 Views 165
On the simulation of the cyclic mobility effect with an ISA hypoplastic hypoplastic hypoplastic model, is it possible to simulate 3D liquefiable sandy soil by available umat file which is […] 
Geostatic method for Abaqus/Explicit
Joe ChuFinite Elements2 Views 362
Dear all, I recently conducted a numerical simulation of pilesoil interaction. I digged a vertical hole and insert the pile into that with general contact. Due to many reasons, I […] 
Tochnog Professional Page moves
Dennis RoddemanFinite Elements1 Views 207
Hi All, Starting from Saturday January 26 2019 the Tochnog Professional page moves to http://www.tochnogprofessional.nl Best, Dennis Roddeman 
Calibrate hypoplastic model
sahar saabFinite Elements2 Views 206
I am trying to calibrate my sand using Excalibre. I tried some triaxial element tests using Abaqus. However the results are different between Excalibre and Abaqus. 
DIANA with monopile follows Blum theory saving 10 m of length
Ab van den bosFinite Elements0 Views 110
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 […]
Who is Online
No one is online right now
Search SoilModels Website
Recent posts
 Hypoplasticity & Recent Stress History 20.1.2020
 hypoplasticity models in free Tochnog Professional 14.1.2020
 Problems with the UMAT subroutine check_parms_DM of the SANISAND constitutive model 11.1.2020
 Tochnog Professional overview movie in youtube 29.12.2019
 Tochnog Professional becomes free 18.12.2019
Recent Comments
 David Mašín on Hypoplasticity & Recent Stress History
 David Mašín on Problems with the UMAT subroutine check_parms_DM of the SANISAND constitutive model
 Meng Xiaowei on Problems with the UMAT subroutine check_parms_DM of the SANISAND constitutive model
 David Mašín on Problems with the UMAT subroutine check_parms_DM of the SANISAND constitutive model
 Tekial Tesfay on Modified Cam clay model now supported in automatic calibration software ExCalibre
 MOHD SAQIB on Download Package of Matlab Driver
 David Mašín on Modified Cam clay model now supported in automatic calibration software ExCalibre
 Mehtab Alam on Modified Cam clay model now supported in automatic calibration software ExCalibre
 Mehtab Alam on Modified Cam clay model now supported in automatic calibration software ExCalibre
 David Mašín on Modified Cam clay model now supported in automatic calibration software ExCalibre
 Mehtab Alam on Modified Cam clay model now supported in automatic calibration software ExCalibre
 Oscar Juarez on 3D analysis with Basic HypoPlastic Model
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