Premium
A general modelling of expansive and non‐expansive clays
Author(s) -
Robinet J. C.,
Pakzad M.,
Jullien A.,
Plas F.
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
international journal for numerical and analytical methods in geomechanics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.419
H-Index - 91
eISSN - 1096-9853
pISSN - 0363-9061
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1096-9853(199910)23:12<1319::aid-nag31>3.0.co;2-x
Subject(s) - oedometer test , plasticity , yield surface , expansive clay , geotechnical engineering , viscoplasticity , yield (engineering) , rheology , stress (linguistics) , expansive , geology , mechanics , finite element method , materials science , structural engineering , engineering , constitutive equation , composite material , physics , soil water , soil science , linguistics , philosophy , compressive strength
This paper presents an elastoplastic model for saturated expansive and non‐expansive clays. The original feature of this model is that a plastic mechanism is introduced during unloading to take into account the irreversible swelling of the macroporosities. These strains are induced by the repulsive stresses which are unbalanced at the scale of the microporosities. Thus two yield surfaces are activated: a classical contact yield surface ( F C ) similar to an associated modified Cam‐clay approach and a swelling yield surface ( F R−A ) based on the non‐associated plasticity. The formulation considers that for the normally consolidated stress states, the strains are mainly produced by an increase of the contact stresses. For the overconsolidated stress states, the repulsive stresses balance the external stresses. The rheological parameters are easily determined from the results of either triaxial or oedometer tests. The model is then used in a finite element program, using the classical concepts of plasticity, especially for the loading–unloading criterion based on the sign of the plasticity multiplier. Simulations of the convergence of a gallery (under an earth retaining structure) sunk at great depth in Boom clay are presented. The results are compared with those obtained with the Cam‐clay model. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.