NUMERICAL ANALYSES OF CONTINUA

by

PRAVIT BOONLUALOHR
B.E. (University of Sydney), M.EngSc. (University of N.S.W.)

A Thesis submitted for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

School of Civil Engineering

The University of New South Wales

ApriZ 1977
 DECLARATION

This is to certify that the work presented in this

thesis was carried out by the candidate in the School of
Civil Engineering, University of New South Wales, and
has not been submitted to any other University or
Institution for a higher degree.
 i

ABSTRACT

In this thesis, investigations using developments of the finite

element method as a tool for numerical analysis of continua are

presented. Both linear and non-linear analyses are considered. The

investigations include four fields of applications, i.e.

(1) Elastic-plastic analysis of anisotPopic ma.tePials

(2) Analyses of geotechnical pPoblems
(3) Elastic-plastic analysis of toPsion pPobZems
(4) Elastic-plastic analysis of contact pPoblems.
For the analyses of geotechnical problems, three important soil

structures are investigated, i.e.

(1) Settlement analysis of piles in ZayePed soil

(2) Finite element analysis of consolidation pPoblem
(3) Elastic-plastic analysis of shallow foundations.
A major emphasis in this study is placed on the use of higheP

oPdeP isopaPametPic elements and the initial swess technique to

increase the accuracy and efficiency of the analyses. Both compatible

displacement model and the mixed model are used for the investigations.

The numerical examples presented in this thesis demonstrate the

capabilities of the special finite element programs developed for

solving complex problems involving material non-linearity, non-

homogeneity and multi-phase materials. Complex boundary stress

conditions of the type encountered in torsion problems have been

successfully satisfied. The solutions are also developed for a new

class of problems, namely, the behaviour of elastic-plastic materials.

in contact with the contact area progressively increased due to

plastic strains.
 ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wishes to express his sincere gratitude to Assoc.

Prof. S. Valliappan and Prof. I.K. Lee for their supervision,

inuneasurable encouragement and support throughout the entire period

of the author's stay.

The author is particularly indebted to Prof. I.K. Lee, Head

of the School of Civil Engineering, for his advice and guidance on

the preparation of this thesis, and for his generosity with time and

attention, given during the sabbatical leave of Assoc. Prof. S.

Valliappan at the final stages of this thesis.

The author also wishes to thank Mr. H. Lunsman, Professional

Officer of the School of Civil Engineering who assisted in the

experimental phase of pinned column model in Chapter 6.

Thanks are also due to Mrs. N. Malanos for her patience and

care in typing an extremely difficult manuscript.

Finally, the author wishes to dedicate this humble contribution

to his parents and Miss C.P.Y. Wong for their personal encouragement

and enthusiasm, without which this ambition may not have been

fulfilled.
 iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

NUMERICAL ANALYSES OF CONTINUA Page

List of Symbols V
List of FigUT'es viii
List of Tables xiii
List of Appendices xiv
1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Objective and Scope of Study 1

12. Organization of the Thesis 2

2. LINEAR AND NON-LINEAR ANALYSES

2.1 Introduction 5

2.2 Theory of Plasticity 5

2.3 Finite Element Method 13

2.4 Concluding Remarks 32

3. NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS OF ANISOTROPIC MATERIALS

3.1 Introduction 33
3.2 Concepts of Plasticity for Anisotropic Materials 34

3.3 Determination of Anisotropic Parameters 37

3.4 Numerical Examples 42

3.5 Concluding Remarks 64

4. ANALYSIS OF GEOTECHNICAL PROBLEMS

4.1 Introduction 65

4.2 Settlement Analysis of Piles in Layered Soil 66

4.3 Finite Element Analysis of Consolidation Problem 80

4.4 Elastic-Plastic Analysis of Shallow Foundation 94

4.5 Concluding Remarks 107

 iv

5. ELASTIC-PLASTIC TORSION OF ANISOTROPIC BARS

5.1 Introduction 110

5.2 Element Formulation 111

5.3 Elastic-Plastic Analysis 117

5.4 Numerical Examples 119

5.5 Concluding Remarks 139

6. ELASTIC-PLASTIC CONTACT PROBLEMS

6.1 Introduction 140

6.2 Continuity Conditions Between Contact Surfaces 141

6.3 Flexibility Matrix for Combined Movements and

Reactions of Contact Pairs 144

6.4 Iteration Process for Contact Configuration

and Reactions 146

6.5 Proposed Technique for Elastic-Plastic Solution

of Two Bodies in Contact 147

6.6 Numerical Examples 148

6.7 Concluding Remarks 183

7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 185

APPENDICES 189

REFERENCES 200
 V

LIST OF SYMBOLS

Major symbols used in this thesis are listed below. All other

symbols are defined where they first appear.

[B] Strain-displacement matrix (See Eq. (2.59))

[D] Elasticity matrix

[DepJ Elastic-plastic matrix

[D£], [D0 ] Matrix containing differential operators for strain

and stress (See Eqs. (2.40), (2.41))

fv dV Volume integral

! 8 dS Surface integral

{d£} Incremental total strain component vector

. {dse} Incremental elastic strain component vector
. {dsP} Incremental plastic strain component vector

d). Plastic multiplier

E Young's modulus

{F},{F} Body force vectors

F(fo}) Yield flUlction

{aF} Vector containing partial derivativesof yield function
dO-
G Shear modulus

G(fo}) Plastic potential

[K] Global stiffness matrix

[K*] Non-linear global stiffness matrix

[k] Elemental stiffness matrix

k Permeability

[N] Shape function matrix

. {PL{@} Nodal force vectors

[P] Matrix containing derivatives of stress function

(See Eq. (2.70))

 vi

. {Q}, {LlQ} Nodal force vectors

. {q}, {qe} Nodal displacement vectors

{Rcr} Nodal force vector due to initial stress

{R} Nodal force vector due to initial strain
E

[s] Elastic compliance matrix

Geometrical boundary surface

scr Mechanical boundary surface

{T}, {T} Traction vectors

u Strain energy function

Complementary strain energy function

. {u}, {ii} Displacement component vectors

WP Total plastic work

x, y, z Cartesian co-ordinates

Anisotropic parameters

Coefficient of stress function vector (See Eq. (2iO))

Effective plastic strain

Initial strain vector

Strain components

~, n Local co-ordinates for isoparametric element

Yxy,Yyz' Yzx Strain components

\) Poisson's ratio

[v] Directional cosine matrix

µ Static coefficient of friction

ITC, llIT C Complementary energy functionals

TIP, llIT Potential energy functionals

p
ITR, LlITR Hellinger-Reissner :functionals

nw, llllw Hu-Washizu functionals

 vii

· {cr} Initial stress vector

0

cr cr cr Initial yield stresses obtained from uniaxial tests

ox' oy' oz
cr Initial effective stress
0

cr(K) Subsequent yield stress

cr1, cr2, cr3 Principal stresses

cr, cr, cr Stress components

X y Z
T T T Initial yield stress:es obtained from uniaxial tests
oxy' oyz' ozx
Txy' Tyz' Tzx Stress components
 viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. Page

2.1 Isotropic Hardening Rule 8

2.2 Kinematic Hardening Rule 9

2.3 Iterative Techniques 24

2.4 Initial Strain Method - Plastic Strain at Constant

Stress and Constant Strain 28

2.5 Initial Stress Method for Uniaxial Case 31

3.1 Tension Test Specimen at Angle 0 to x Axis 39

3.2 Stress-Plastic Strain Curve for Subsequent Parameter 39

3.3 Geometry and Mesh Configuration of Cantilever Beam 43

3.4 Load vs Deflection for Cantilever Beam 44

3.5 cr
X
vs Load - Cantilever Beam 44
3.6 Mesh Configuration and Spread of Plastic Zone for

Punch Problem 49

3.7 Pressure vs Displacement for Punch Problem so

3.8 Load vs Displacement for Thick-Walled Cylinder 52

3.9a Geometry and Mesh Configuration for Notched Bar 53

3.9b Spread of Plastic Zone for Notched Bar 54

3.10 Load vs Displacement for Notched Bar with Elastic

Anisotropic Properties 55

3.11 Mesh Configuration and Typical Spread of Plastic Zone

for Blanking Process 57

3.12 Comparisons of Load-Displacement Curves for Blanking

Process 58

3.13 Mesh Configuration and Typical Spread of Plastic Zone

for Cutting Process 59

3.14 Comparisons of Load-Displacement Curves for Cutting

Process 60
 ix

3.15 Mesh Configuration and Typical Spread of Plastic

Zone for Orthogonal Machining Process 61

3.16 Comparisons of Load-Displacement Curves for Machining

Process 62

4.1 Flexible Circular Footing on Finite Layer 69

4.2 Effect of Ep/Es on Settlement for Pile in Single

Finite Layer 70

4.3 Semi Rigid Pile in Single Finite Layer 71

4.4 Settlement Curves for Pile in Single Finite Layer 72

4.5 Shear Stress Along the Face of Pile in Single Finite

Layer 74

4.6 Pile in Two Layered Soil Mass, Hi/D = 5 76

4.7 Pile in Two Layered Soil Mass, Hi/D = 10 77

4.8 Pile in Two Layered Soil Mass, Hi/D = 20 78

4.9 Strip Load in Half-Space 86

4.10a Strip Load on Semi-Infinite Layer for Different V 87

4.10b Strip Load on Semi-Infinite Layer for Different H/a 88

4.11 Strip Load on Two-Layered Soil Deposit - Pore Pressure,

ki/k2 90

4.12 Strip Load on Two-Layered Soil Deposit-Settlement,

91

4.13 Strip Load on Two-Layered Soil Deposit - Pore Pressure,

92

4.14 Strip Load on Two-Layered Soil Deposit - Settlement,

93

4.15 Comparison of Bearing Stress - Settlement Curves 98

4 .16 Comparison of Yielded Zone at Various P/P Ratio 99

y
4.17 Comparison of Computed and Theoretical Ultimate

Bearing Capacities Single-Layer System,~= 0 Soil 101

 X

4.18 Average Bearing Stress vs Settlement Curves, Single-Layer

System, ~ = 0 Soil 102

4.19 Ultimate Bearing Capacity vs Depth/Width Ratio, Two-

Layer System, ~ = 0 Soil 104

4.20 Average Bearing Stress vs Settlement Curves, Two-Layer

System, ~ = 0 Soil 105

5.1 Equations for Boundary Element 115

5.2 Geometry and Finite Element Mesh for Triangular Section 120

5.3 Twisting Moment vs Angle of Twist for Triangular Section 121

5.4 Shear Stress Distribution Along AB for Triangular

Section 122

5.5 Geometry and Finite Element Mesh for Hollow Square

Section 124

5.6 Twisting Moment vs Angle of Twist for Hollow Square

Section 125

5.7 Distribution of Shear Stresses for Hollow Square

Section 126

5.8 Geometry of Hollow Splined Shaft 128

5.9 Finite Element Mesh for Hollow Splined Shaft 129

5.10 Spread of Plastic Zones for Hollow Splined Shaft 130

5.11 Twisting Moment vs Angle of Twist for Hollow Splined

Shaft 131

5.12 Distribution of Shear Stress for Hollow Splined Shaft 132

5.13 Finite Element Mesh for Circular Section 134

5.14 Spread of Plastic Zones for Circular Section 135

5.15 Twisting Moment vs Angle of Twist for Circular Section 136

5.16 Nonhomogeneous Square Section with Central Hole 138

6.1 Displacements and Reactions at a Pair of Potential

Contact Points 142

 xi

6.2 Geometry, Mesh Configuration and Plastic Zones of a

Cylindrical Body with Radius= 30 mm 149

6.3 Load vs Contact Distance for Cylindrical Bodies in

Contact 150

6.4 Distribution of Contact Stresses for Elastic and Elastic-

Plastic Case 151

6.5 Geometry and Mesh Configuration of Punch Problem 154
6.6 Pressure Distribution Along the Contact Surface 155

6.7 Displacement Profiles of the Contact Surface 156

6.8 Distributions of cry Along the Central Axis 157

6.9 Distributions of crx along the Central Axis 158
6.10 Distributions of Txy Along the Contact Surface 159

6.11 Comparison of Load Displacement Curves Between Upper

Bound and Lower Bound 161

6.12 Contact Stress Distributions for Ptmch Problem 162

6.13 Displacement Profiles Along Contact Surface,

(Jav 10o = 0.6 163

6.14 Displacement Profiles Along Contact Surface,

(Javlcro = 2.2 164

6.15 Plastic Zones for Various Ratios of O'avl~ 165

0

6 .16 Geometry and Mesh Configuration of Pin 167

6 .17 Geometry and Mesh Configuration of Eye 168

6.18 Applied Contact Force vs Contact Distance for Pin

and Eye 169

6.19 Nonna! Contact Stress Distribution for Eyeand Pin 170

6.20 Plastic Zones for Various Ratios of P/Dcr 0 171

6.21 Geometry and Mesh Configuration of Pinned Column 173

6.22 Contact Radius vs Applied Load for Test Specimen 174

6.23 Applied Load vs Displacements for Test Specimen 175

 xii

6.24 Distribution of Circumferential Strain on Surface

of Column 176

6.25 Plot of P/Py vs op/owp 177

6.26 Displacement Profiles for the Contact Surface 178

6.27 Pressure Distributions on the Contact Surface 179

6 .28 Distribution of Oz Along Central Line 180

6.29 Distribution of Or Along Central Line 181

6. 30 Typical Yielded Zones for Pinned Column 182

II.I Co-ordinate Definition for Isoparametric Element 192

 xiii

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

3.1 Material Properties for Anisotropic Materials 45

3.2 Maximum Pressures for Thick-Walled Cylinder 56

4.1 <f> = 0 Soil 106

5.1 Material Properties for Torsion Problems 123

5.2 Comparison of Shear Stresses 137

6.1 Material Properties for Contact Problems 152

 xiv

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix Page

I Yield Criteria 189

II Isoparametric Concept 191

III Coulomb's Static Frictional Relationship 195

IV Computation Times 196

 1

Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION

I.I OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE OF STUDY

Numerical techniques play an important role in the analysis of

a continuum. In the past, the relaxation technique was restricted

a great deal by the amount of arithmetical manipulation involved in

the analyses but with the introduction of computers, these restrictions

have been removed. More recently powerful numerical methods such as

the finite element method has been developed and this technique

provides a solution to complex problems requiring linear and non-linear

analyses.

The basic concept of the finite element method in engineering was

initially introduced by Turner et al. (1956). The intuitive idea was to

present an approximation of the continuum by discretization of solid

into component members similar to frame analysis. This component

member of continuum was later termed Finite Element by Clough (1960).

Argyris (1960) also provided significant impetus to the method by

proposing associated energy principles. During a short period, a

variety of finite element models have been developed. Up to 1974

alone, over two thousand contributing papers on the finite element

methods have been published (Whiteman, 1975). The method is now

widely used in engineering designs as well as in research studies.

The main objective of this thesis is to investigate the use of

'
the finite element method in the analysis of a continuum. Four

fields of applications have been considered, namely

(1) Elastic-plastic analysis of anisotropic materials

(2) Analysis of geotechnical problems
 2

(3) Elastic-pZastic torsion of anisotropic bars

(4) EZastic-pZastic contact probZems
Thus the scope of this thesis is one of extensive developments, which
results in four different major computer programs.

1.2 ORGANIZATION OF 1HE 1HESIS

This thesis consists of seven chapters. Ch.apter 1 is concerned

with the objective and scope of this study, and organization of the

thesis.
Chapter 2 sUIIDnarizes the relevant basic concepts of linear and

non-linear analyses together with the theory of plasticity in detail.

In Chapter 3, an elastic-plastic analysis of anisotropic work-

hardening materials using the finite element method is presented.

The ~alysis is based on the generalized Huber-Mises yield criterion

extended by Hill for anisotropic materials. General expressions for
the anisotropic parameters in the yield criterion have been derived
both for initial yielding as well as subsequent yielding in the case
of work-hardening materials. The isoparametric quadratic quadri-

lateral elements have been used for the analysis and the initial

stress technique has been adopted for the iterative solution of the
non-linear problems. The results of the various numerical examples

have been compared with the available solutions.

In Chapter 4, analyses of geotechnical problems are presented.

Three important soil structures are discussed, i.e.
'
(1) SettZement anaZysis of piZes in Zayered soiZ. The
analysis is based on the two dimensional axisymmetric approach and
isoparametric finite elements have been used for diS;creti~ation of
the continuum. The case of a pile in a single layer has been
analysed by varying the different parameters involved in the problem._
 3

The results have been compared with the available solutions, to

assess the accuracy of the finite element analysis. The analysis
has been further extended to the case of a single pile on a two

layered system. The results obtained for this case indicate the
usefulness of the finite element analysis for more complex situations
normally encolllltered in practice.
(2) Finite element analysis of consolidation problem. This
section presents a finite element analysis for predicting the magnitud_e
and rate of settlement and the magnitude of the excess pore pressure
during the consolidation process as suggested by Sandhu and Wilson
(1969). The field equations for fluid flow in porous, linear elastic
media have been developed on the basis of variational principle. The
spatial domain is divided into isoparametric quadrilateral elements
whereas for the time domain, the analysis requires the solution of a
series of linear algebraic equilibrium and continuity equation

expressed in terms of the discrete values of displacements and excess

pore pressure fields with a step forward time integration sequence.
The results of the numerical examples are compared with the available
solutions.
(3) Elastic-plastic analysis of shallow foundations. This
section presents an elastic-plastic ~nalysis using the finite-ele~ent
method, to determine the load-displacement relationship and the
ultimate bearing capacity of shallow footings. The isoparametric
quadratic quadrilateral elements have been used for the idealization
of the soil mass. The initial stress technique has been adopted
for the solution of this non-linear problem by piecewise linearization.
The soil behaviour in the plastic range is based on Drucker's modified
von Mises yield criterion. The values of the bearing capacity of
the footings both on single as well as two layered cohesive soil ma~s,
 4

for various ratios of depth to width of the footing have been

presented. The finite element solutions are compared with the

available solutions.
In Chapter 5, an elastic-plastic analysis for the torsion of
anisotropic bars has been presented on the basis of a hybrid model
using the finite element method. The element formulation is based
on modified Hellinger-Reissner variational principle. The analysis
is applicable to nonhomogeneous and multiply connected sections and
it uses isoparametric linear quadrilateral element for the discre-
tization of the sections. The initial stress iterative technique

has been used for obtaining the elastic-plastic solutions. The

results of a number of numerical examples have been presented to

demonstrate the accuracy and efficiency of the proposed model.

In Chapter 6, an elastic-plastic analysis of contact problem,

using the finite element method is presented. The analysis is

based on the formation of flexibility matrix for combined movements

and reactions of the potential contact pairs. The contact con-

figuration can be determined by a systematic trial-error iteration
process based on the continuity conditions of the contact surfaces
and the Coulomb's static friction relationship. The elastic
solution is then extended to elastic-plastic solution by the use of
initial stress technique. The proposed method is applicable to
both contact with a rigid body and a more generalized case in which
elastic-plastic distortion of two bodies is considered.
Finally in Chapter 7 a brief summary and conclusions based on

the results of the study are presented. Also, recommendations for

further research are made.
 5

Chapter 2

LINEAR AND NON-LINEAR ANALYSES

2.1 INTRODUCTION

It is the primary objective of this chapter to present the

concepts involved in the solution of linear and non-linear problems

by the finite element method. Initially, a brief review is made

of the relevant concepts of the plasticity theory including the

yield criteria, flow rule, and incremental stress-strain relationship,

since the problems considered in this study involve elastic-plastic

regions. A brief review is also given of the basic equations of

a linear finite element analysis and the relevant finite element

models. Having established the linear analysis it is then possible

to extend the mathematics to the non-linear analysis since the

technique is to approximate a curve by a series of straight lines.

Techniques relevant to this study are then discussed.

2.2 THEORY OF PIASTICITY

The analyses developed in this thesis are based on the idealized

elastic-plastic model of a material. Although the theory of

elasticity was well established in the 19th century, the theory of

plasticity was not primarily developed in its present form until the

period 1950 (Hill, 1950) and there are continuing developments.

The plasticity theory considers the behaviour of the material

,

when irrecoverable (plastic) strains have developed together with the

recoverable (elastic) strains. For the idealized material it is

considered that irrecoverable strains first develop when the stress

state satisfied the particular yield criterion adopted. The incre-

mental strains thereafter are given by a flow rule. Stresses,

 6

incremental displacement fields and collapse loads can then be readily

determined from these concepts.

Featuy,es of the theory of pZasticity

The basic formulations of the theory of plasticity consist of
(1) yieZd criterion, to indicate onset of plastic flow
(2) flow ruZe, to relate the plastic strain increment
with the stress and the stress increment
(J) ha,rd,ening ruZe, to specify subsequent modifications
of the initial yield surface.

These concepts will now be discussed in more detail.

YieZd criterion
A yield criterion is a hypothesis concerning the limit of

elasticity under any possible combination of stresses. This

criterion is expressed as a scalar function of stresses and can be

visualised as a surface called the yieZd surface, inn-dimensional

space of stress components. The simplest form of yield criterion
may be written as
F({cr}) = cr
0
(2.1)

Where Fis a function of stress vector {cr} and cr0 is called the
initiaZ yieZd stress to be determined experimentally from uniaxial
test. Specific forms of well known yield criteria are to be found

in Appendix I.
FZow ru.Ze
According to flow rule, plastic strain increments can be
derived from a scalar function, known as the pZastic potentiaZ,
G({cr}). Firstly, it is assumed that there exists such a function

and secondly, the ratios of the components of the plastic strain

increments, {dEP}, are derivable by partially differentiating G, i.e~
 7

{de:P} = (2.2)

:1ere dA is a non-negative constant, called the proportiona'lity

~ 1

constant or the plastic multiplier.

The rule is sometimes referred to as the ncz,mality principle
due to the fact that the incremental plastic strain components are
in the direction of the outward nonnal to the surface of the plastic

potential.

When the yield criterion is also chosen to serve as a plastic

potential, the rule !s called associated flow PUle, thus

{dEP} = dtc{~~} (2 .,3)

When the plastic potential is defined separately as in the ortginal

fonn Eq. (2. 2), the rule is k:rrown as non-associated flow PUle.
Hardening :rule
Hardening rule specifies the subsequent modification of the
initial yield surfaces during plastic deformation. Two basic

hardening rules will now be discussed.

Isotropic hardening PUle. According to this rule, the initial
yield surface expands isotropically in the stress space without

changing of shape or orientation (See Fig. 2.1). The subsequent

yield surfaces or loading SUPfaces may be written as

F({cr}) = cr(K) (2.4)

where cr-is known as effective stress and is a function of hardening

parameter K. This hardening parameter can be measured using either

work haroening or strain hardening hypothesis.
In the case of work hardening, K is measured as a function of

plastic work done through the entire loading history, defined by

a= K(Wp) (2. 5)

wP =-f{cr}T{dEP} (2. 6)
 8

/
/
/
,,,.- --- '' \
/

I
/ '
J
I
I I
I I
\ /
Yield Surface
\
' ·/
/

......._ - - _ _ ---- ~ Loading Surface

FIG. 2.1 ISOTROPIC HARDENING RULE

 9

---
I
I
I
0

'\ ..__
Yield Surface

' Loading Surface

FIG. 2.2 KINE~ATIC HARDENING RULE

 10

where wP is the total plastic work.

In the case of strain hardening, K is measured as a function
of effective pZastic strain, £P, accumulated through the entire

loading history, i.e.

-
(J = K(EP) (2. 7)

e:-p = fd£p (2.8)

d£p dwP (2. 9)

=
-
(J

where d£p is the incremental effective plastic strain.

From thermodynamic point of view, the work hardening hypothesis

is considered more favourable and has been adopted for this study.
Kinematic hardening ruie. According to this rule the initial
yield surface translates in the stress space without changing of
shape or size. This phenomena is known as Bauschinger effect.
The model was first proposed by Prager (1955), who assumed that the
translational movements are in the direction of plastic strains.
While the formulation is satisfactory in nine-dimensional stress
space, the yield surface deforms in the case of six-dimensional

stress space, plane stress, plane strain etc. To remove these

inconsistencies, Ziegler (1969) modified the rule by defining the
translation movement in the direction of the vector connecting

the centre of the yield surface and the instantaneous state of

stress, rather than normal to the yield surface as previously
assumed by Prager (See Fig. 2.2).
The kinematic hardening rule is,'however, not considered in
this study and therefore no detail formulations will be given here.

Incrementai stress-strain reZation

For any plastically deformed element, the incremental total
 11

strain is considered to be composed of elastic and plastic parts

(2 .10)
where {dE} is incremental total strain vector, {dEe}is incremental
elastic strain vector and· {dEP} incremental plastic strain vector.

The elastic strain increments are related to stress increments

by
(2 .11)

where [D] is the eZastiaity matrix.

The plastic strain can be given by the flow rule as

(2.12)

therefore

Determination of d')..
d').. can be determined from the condition of plastic yielding

which requires that the stress state must be on the yield surface, i.e.

. {aF}T· {do} - ao dK = o {;;?.14)

clo 3K
·From work hardening hypothesis Eq. (2.4)

(2 .15)

Eq. (2.14) then becomes

; {aF}T {do} - dO"· {o}T· {dEP} = 0 (2 .16)

c)o c)K

Substituting {dEP} into Eq. (2.16), we have

T - T
. {aF} . {do} - ao {cr} { aG} dA = o (2 .17)
acr aK ao
Thus

= .(2.18)
 12

However~ for the case of perfectly plastic~~ = O, and Eq. (2.18)

would fail. Therefore to derive at the expression which will be

valid for the case~~ = 0, care must be taken not to divide by-·~~.

If we premultiply [D] to equation (2.13) on both sides, then

{do} = [DJ {de:} - d).[D] {~} (2 .19)

Substituting· {do} from Eq. (2.19) to Eq. (2.17)

T - T
. {~~}' { [DJ {de:} - dA[D] {~~} } - ~~ {o} . {~~} dA = 0 (2. 20)

T - T T
d). ( {aF} [DJ {aG} ao{}'{aG}) = {aF} [D]{de:} (2.21)
dO ao + aK O ao ao
T
aF [D] {dd
d). = ao - (2.22)
T
. {aF} [D] {aG} + A
ao ao
where T
A =
aa · {cr} · {aG} (2.23)
aK dO'

Determination of A

Using isotropic work-hardening hypothesis,~~ can be obtained

by
(2.24)

Thus
dcr (2.25)
=
dK = -
O'

in which Ep = dcr or the slope of the effective stress-effective

d2P
plastic strain curve. Substituting Eq. (2.25) into Eq. (2.23), we
have
A = Ep {cr} T {aF} (2. 26)
o- ao

It can be shown that cr = · {o}T {~~} therefore Eq. (2.26) reduces to

 13

(2. 27)
Thus A is actually the slope of the effective stress-effective
plastic strain curve.
Elastia-pZastia matrix
Having obtained dA from Eq. (2.22), we can now substitute dA
into Eq. (2.13), thus
T
[D] {aG} {2.!..} [D]
acr acr
· {dcr} = [ [D] - ] {de:} (2.28)
T
. {c)F} [DJ {c)G} + A
acr acr

= [D ] {dd (2. 29)

ep
where [D ] is called the eZastia-pZastia matrix. For associated
ep
flow rule [D J is modified to
ep

(2.30)

Zienkiewicz, Valliappan and King (1969) presented this matrix in

the form of Eq. (2.30) for associated flow rule. Nayak (1971)
extended the formulation for non-associated flow rule as given in
Eq. (2.29). This matrix was used in the initial stress method to
successfully solve the case of perfectly plastic material by
Valliappan (1969).

2.3 FINITE ELEMENT METHOD

The finite element method is now widely recognized as a powerful
numerical technique employed in structural and continuum mechanics.
The bases of its derivation are so diversified that full review would

not be practical here. Moreover the full treatments of this topic are
 14

now well documented in many available textbooks (Zienkiewicz,1971,

Desai and Abel,1972, Strang and Fix,1973, Martin and Carey,1973,
Brebbia and Connor,1973, Gallagher,1975, Huebner,1975). Nevertheless
the importance of the variational principles cannot be left unmentioned
and, therefore, a brief review of these principles and the corresponding
models will be first presented. In the second section attention will
be given to the solution technique of non-linear analysis using finite
element method. Finally, more specific solution algorithms of the
method adopted for this study (the Initial Stress Method) are described

in detail.

Basia Zinear anaZysis

In small displacement theory of elasticity, governing equations
in rectangular Cartesian coordinates may be sununarized using matrix
notations as
(1) Stress equiZibriwn equations
[D 0 ] {a} + · {F} = o (2.31)
(2) strain-dispZaaement reZations
{d = (2.32)
(J) stress-strain reZations
. {a} = [DJ {e;} (2.33)
{E:} = [sl {a} (2.34)
(4) Boundary conditions
Mechanical
[v] {cr} = {T} on s 0 (2. 35)

Geometrical
{u} = {uJ on Su (2. 36)

. {a}T
in which = [ox, cry, a z' T
xy'
T
yz' ··-r zx ] (2.37)

. {E}T = (2.38)
[EX, Ey' Ez' Yxy' Yyz' Yzx]
 15

[D] is the elasticity matrix and [s] is the elastic compliance matri~
defined by
[s] = [nr 1 (2. 39)

[D 0 ] is the differential operator matrix for stress, defined by

a 0 d a 0
a
ax ay 3z
[Dcr] =
d a a a (2.40)
ay 0
ax ·az 0

a a a
0 0
az 0
ay ax
[D·] is the differential operator matrix for strain, defined by
£

0 0

a
0 ay .o
0 0
(2.41)
0

[v] is a matrix containing directional cosines of unit normal outwards

on the boundary, defined by

0 0 m 0

where 1 = cos
m

(x,v), m = cos (y,v), n

0

n
1

0
n

m :I
= cos (z,~).
(2 .42)

· {p} and· {T} are the prescribed body force vector and the prescribed
traction vector, defined by
{F}T = [X,Y,zJ (2 .43)
 16

(2.44)

where X, Y, Zand Xv, Yv, Zv are the components of prescribed body

forces per rmit volwne and the prescribed traction in x, y, z
direction respectively.
{g} and fu} are the displacement vector and the prescribed displace-

ment vector defined by

· {ti}T = [u, v, w] (2 .45)

(2.46)

where u, v, wand u, v, ware the displacements in x, y, z respectively.

s0 and Su represent the prescribed traction bormdary and the prescribed

displacement boundary respectively.

Conventional iJariational p>rinaiples

The role of variational principles is to provide an alternative way
of satisfying Eqs. (2.31) to (2.36) by the use of variational
functionals in integration forms. Four of these frmctionals will now

be discussed. Similar notations as Pian et al. (1969, 1974) will be used.

Pi>inaiple of stationary potential energy
This principle can be derived from the principle of virtual work.
Accordingly, a body will be in equilibriwn with mechanical bormdary·.

condition satisfied if the variation of the incremental potential

energy functional TI is zero, i.e.

p
Lillp = 0 (2.47)

with TI
p
= fy UdV - fy {F}T· {u} dV - fs {T}T - {u} •dS (2.48)
(J

where U is the strain energy function, given by

U = ½. {e:}T [D] {d (2.49)

in which {E} is derived from the strain-displacement relations of Eq.

(2.32). The finite element model associated with this principle is
 17

called the aompa:tibZe dispZaaement model.

PrinaipZe of stationa,py aompZementary energy
This principle can be derived from the principle of complementary
virtual work. Accordingly, a body which is in equilibrium with the
mechanical bolllldary conditions satisfied, will have the strain-
displacement relations and the geometrical bolllldary conditions
satisfied, if the variation of the complementary energy functional IT
C

is zero, i.e.

AfIC = 0 (2. 50)

with ITC = lv Uc dV - ls. {u}T {T} dS (2.51)

u
where Uc is the complementary strain energy function, given by

u = ½. {cr}T [s]· {cr} (2.52)

C

in which {cr}is derived from stress equilibrium equations of Eq. (2.31).

The finite element model associated with this principle is referred to
as equiUbriwn ,wdeZ.

Hu-Washizu prinaipZe
According to this principle the subsidiary conditions of the
fllllctional IT (Eqs. (2.32) and (2.36)) are treated as conditions of
p
constraint, incorporated in the fllllctional ITp by means of Lagrange
multipliers. Thus, by introducing {cr} in V and {p} on S as Lagrange
u
multipliers, the functional IT can be generalized as
p

ITW = l V u dV - f v {F}T {ti} dV - ls {T}T {u} dS

a

- lv {cr}T ({d - [D£] {u}) dV - ls. {p}T({u} - {ii}) dS

u
(2.53)

in which [D] is given by Eq. (2.41). The solution is then given by

e:
the stationary condition of the functional, i.e.

(2. 54)
 18

Hellinger-Reissner prinoiple
Hellinger-Reissner principle can be derived from the generalized

functional¾ by eliminating {p} and introduce

U =. {a}T {E} - U (2.55)

C

Thus

- f {f}T {u} dS - ls {T}T ({u} - {u}) dS (2.56)

Sa u
with mechanical boundary condition treated as a subsidiary condition.
The solution is again given by the stationary condition of the

functional, i.e.

(2.57)

The finite element model associated with this principle is referred to

as the mixed model.

f-1odified vari-ational principles

In the conventional variational principles, continuity of certain
field variables must be maintained across the interelement boundaries.
If this condition cannot be met, i.e. continuity along the inter-
element boundaries cannot be achieved, the conventional functional
may be modified by the use of Lagrangian multipliers to incorporate

the effect of discontinuity as conditions of constraints in the

functional.

The modified functionals are particularly useful for plate and

shell elements where conforming shape functions along the inter-

element are difficult to achieve. The finite element model associated

with this principle is referred to as hybri-d model.

 19

Finite element models

Only the two basic finite element models directly involved in
this study will be presented.
Compatible displacement model
The compatible displacement model can be derived by the use of
the principle of stationary potential energy. The displacement field
· {u} within each element can be given by

(2.58)

in which {u} is vector of displacement components, [N] shape fwiction

matrix, {qe} vector of nodal displacements, the subscript e represents

the element level.
The shape functions in [N] must be so chosen that compatibilities

along the interelement bormdaries are satisfied (See Appendix II).

The strain-displacement relation can then be obtained by differentiating
Eq. (2 • 58) , thus
. {e:} = (B] {q} (2. 59)
e
in which (B] is called strain-displacement matrix and contains
appropriate derivatives of (N].
The f'unct:ional II can be written in terms of n discrete
p
elements by

II
p
= z: Cly ½{e:}T [D] {e:}dV + fv {e:}T{cro} dV
n n n

- f . {F}T· {u} dV (2. 60)

V
n

where {cr 0 }is the initial stress vector.

To take into account the effect of initial strain, Eq. (2.59)

can be modified to
. {e:} = [B] . {q } - {e: } (2.61)
e o
 20

where{£} is the initial strain vector.

0

By substituting (2.61) into (2.60) and taking variation with

respect to {q }, we obtain
e

Lill = E ( [k] {qe} - {Pe}) = 0 (2.62)

p
n
in which
[k] = JV [B]T [D][B] dV (2.63)
n

. {Pe}= fv [B]T [D]{Eo} dV due to initial strain

n

- fv [B]T {cro} ~~ due to initial stress

n

+ JV [N]T {F} dV due to prescribed body force

n

+ JS [N]T {T} dS due to prescribed traction

a
n
(2.64)

Eq. (2.62) can be rewritten in global notation as

[K] {q} = . {P} (2.65)

in which
[K] = E [k] (2. 66)
n
. {q} = E . {qe} (2.67)
n
{P} = E {P}
e (2.68)
n
Together with the subsidiary condition {u} = {u} on S , Eq. (2.65)
u
can now be used to solve for displacements and stresses of the elastic
contintru.m due to the applied load {P}.
Mixed Mode 7,

In the mixed model, ITR is used. Two independent field variables

are now assumed, i.e.
(2. 69)
 21

(2. 70)
where [P] is a matrix containing appropriate derivatives of the stress

function, {S} is the vector containing the coefficients of stress

e
function polynomial.
Eq. (2.70), in fact, represents the equilibrium conditions given

by Eq. (2.31) with body forces eliminated, i.e.

(2. 71)

TI R from Eq. (2.56) can be rewritten as

TIR = r ( -lv ½{cr}T [s]{cr}dV - fy {F}T {u} dV

n n n

+ fy ({cr} + {cro}) T ( [DEJ {u}

n

- JS . {T}T {u} dS - ls {T}T ( {u} - {u}) dS (2.72)

n
un

For simplicity, the following conditions will be assumed

= · {ii} on su (2. 73)
n

and . {F} = (2.74)

[DE] can be obtained by differentiating Eq. (2.69), i.e.

[DE] {u} = [B] {qe} (2.75)
Substituting Eqs. (2.70),(2.73), (2.74) and (2.75) into (2.72), TIR

becomes

+ {Be}T [GJ {q} - . {q }T {Q}- {cr }T {E }) (2.76)

e e o o

in which

[H] = fy [P]T [S] [P] dV (2. 77)

n
 22

[G] =
'vn [p]T [B] dV (2. 78)

{Rcr} = 'vn [B]T {cr}o dV due to initial stress

(2.79)
{R} = fV [P]T· {e: } dV due to initial strain
e: n o
(2. 80)
{Q} =
's cr
[N]T {T} dS due to prescribed traction

(2. 81)

Taking variation of the functional ITR with respect to {Se}, we have

. {S} = [H]- 1 [G] {q} - [H]- 1 {R} (2. 82)

e e e:
Substituting Eq. (2.82) into Eq. (2.76) and taking variation with

respect to {qe}, we obtain

~ITR = E ([k] {qe} - {pe}) = 0 (2. 83)

n

in which
[k] = [G]T [H]- 1 [G] (2. 84)

{p }
e
= [G]T [Hr 1 . {Re: } -· {R,) V
+ {Q} (2. 85)

Again, Eq. (2.83) can be rewritten in global notation as

[K] {q} = {P} (2.86)

in which

. {P} = E . {p } ; {q}
e
=E {q }
e
[K] = E [k] (2. 87)
n n n

Thus, the general form of the force-displacement relationship

for linear analysis can be given by Eqs. (2.65) and (2.86), where [K]

is the global stiffness matrix, {q} is the global displacement vector

and {P} is the global applied load vector.

 23

Basic non-iinear anaiysis

In the case of non-linear analysis, the stiffness matrix can be
rewritten in terms of linear and non-linear contributions as

( [K] + *
[K]) {nq} = {nP} (2. 88)
* is the
in which [K] is the global linear stiffness matrix and [K]
global non-linear stiffness matrix. *
It should be noted here that [K]
is a ftmction of current displacement vector, i.e.

[K *] = fn ( . {q} + {nq } ) (2.89)

* also contains
Therefore {nq} in Eq. (2,88) is not explicit since [K]
the unknown vector {nq}. In order to solve for {nq} explicitJ.y,
* can be modified to exclude {nq}, e.g. [K]
[K] * can be determined on

the basis of displacement {q} from the previous increment only, rather
than current displacement {q} + {nq}, in which {nq}is still unknown.
This marching forward process without iteration is called the
incrementai method. It is obvious that the increment has to be l_ept
small to minimize the error due to the approximation of [K* ]. Other-
wise this cumulative error can be overcome by the use of equilibrium
check and corrective cycling procedure introduced by Hofmeister et al
(1971).
* can be deter-
Alternatively the non-linear contribution or [K]

mined by the process of iteration (See.Fig.2.3). Three of these

iterative techniques will now be discussed.

Successive suhstitution
In this method the effects of non-linearity are expressed as
pseudo force vector. The method is characterized by the recurrence
relation of the type

[K] {nq} n+i = · {t..P} (2. 90)

where {nQ} n is the pseudo force vector due to the effects of non-
linearity, defined by
 24

Load, p

Disnlacement, q

(a) Successive Substitution

Load, p

Disolacement, q
(b) Newton-Raryhson Iteration
Load, p

Displacement, q

(c) \fodified ~lewton Ra!)hson Iteration

FIG. 2.3 ITERATIVE TECHNIQUES

 25

' {LiQ} = fn({q} + · {Liq})n (2. 91)

n
in which n is the iteration number. The method converges when the
differences between {Liq} n+ 1 and {Liq} n are within the specified limit.
Newton-Raphson iteration
* is updated for each iteration.
In this method [K] The method
manipulates the use of the following recurrence relation

( [K] + (2.92)
in which

= [~]n (2.93)

{q}n+1= . {q}n + {Liq}n+1 (2.94)

{R} = [KJ {q}n + {LiP} + . {LiQ} (2.95)

n n
where {LiQ}n is..: the: pseudo force vector due to the effects of non-
linearity, defined by
. {LiQ}n = fn ( {q} + {Liq})n (2. 96)

and· {LiP} is the applied load vector. The convergence is satisfied

when {Liq}n+i becomes less than a certain specified limit.

Modified Newton-Raphson iteration
Though the convergence rate of the Newton-Raphson iteration is
much faster than the successive substitution, large amount of
computational effort required to compute and invert at each iteration,
becomes a significant drawback. To alleviate this problem the
* can be held constant for several iterations and is updated
matrix [K]
only when the rate of convergence,hegins to deteriorate. This
procedure is known as modified Newton-Raphson iteration.

SoZution techniques for pZastiaity probZems

Basically there are three solution techniques popularly used for
plasticity problems. Gallagher et al (1962) introduced the so-called
 26

initiaZ strain method for elastic-plastic analysis of heated complex

shapes. Marca! and King (1967), Yamada et al (1968) used sophisticated

fonnulation of elastic-plastic matrix in the so-called tangent stiff-

ness method. Zienkiewicz, Valliappan and King (1969) introduced an

alternative technique called initiaZ stress method in which the case

of perfectly plastic materials can be treated. Nayak and Zienkiewicz

(1972) introduced the a-aaaeZeration method to accelerate the conver-

gence process of the initial stress technique. There are, of course,

advantages and disadvantages inherited by each method. It has become

increasingly aware that the most efficient method would probably be

some combination of these three as demonstrated by Nayak (1971).

However, since this thesis does not engage in producing a new solution
technique, it is appropriate to select just one which is perhaps the
most versatile, as a tool for investigation. It is felt that the
initial stress method is versatile and adaptable for this purpose and
is thus selected for the work of this thesis. Brief discussions of

the three methods will now be presented.

Tangent stiffness method

The tangent stiffness method represents direct utilization of

incremental plasticity concepts. According to this method, the

elastic stiffness matrix is revised to form elastic-plastic stiffness

matrix that accounts for the inelastic material properties. The

transformation is accomplished merely be replacing the elasticity

matrix by the appropriate elastic-plastic matrix into the expression

for the stiffness matrix.
A major aspect of this method lies on the definition of load
increments since the stiffness matrix needs to be changed only when
certain elements are plastified. Yamada et al (1968) present a
careful procedure in which the load increment is adjusted to bring
 27

in plastified elements one at a time. This procedure, however,

takes up a lot of time due to the nature of load increments which are
very much dependent on the mesh configuration and sizes of the elements
near to the elastic-plastic interfaces. Yamada (1969) in later
publication suggests that the size of increments should be fixed

according to four elements yielding at a time to allow for a larger

load increment.
Marcal and King (1967), propose an approximate way of accowiting
for the transitional elements during a load increment such that
relatively large increments can be applied. According to this method
the estimate of the strain increment is asstm1ed to be composed
initially of purely elastic strains with a proportion of these strains
to the total strain increment,determined from the ratio of the strain
required to cause ~yield to the estimated strain, m. Subsequently
after yield the behaviour is assumed to be elastic-plastic. Thus
the weighted relation can be given as
{dcr} = m [D] {de:} + (1-m) [D
] {de:} (2.97)
ep
The tangent stiffness method can be classified as the incremental
method described in previous section.
Initial. strain method
In this method the non-linear effects are expressed as pseudo

forces due to the presence of plastic strains. The magnitudes of

plastic strains are obtained by the use of the successive substitution
iterative technique. Once the converged values of plastic strains are
'
obtained, the pseudo forces can then be calculated and ~pplied
together with the applied loads for that increment.
Two alternatives are possible to estimate plastic strains as
pointed out by Gallagher et al (1962) i.e. the effective plastic strain
can be taken equal to the increment AB at constant stress -
cr, or it
 28

C1

Plastic Str~in Increment

Constant Stress Assumption

Plastic Strain Increment

Constant Strain Assum~tion

0L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E

FIG. 2.4 INITIAL STRAIN ~1ETHOD - PLASTIC STRAIMS AT

CONSTANT STRESS AND CONSTANT STRAIN
 29

can be assumed to be equal to the increment CD, corresponding to the

relaxation of the stress at constant strain as defined by the path AD
(See Fig. 2. 4) .
For perfectly plastic material, the constant stress scheme fails
due to the lack of definite point, where the value of effective plastic
strain can be estimated. However, the constant strain scheme is
still valid for such case, since the projection CD can be obtained
without difficulties. Whang (1969) chooses the latter scheme to
solve plate and shell problems under the name initiaZ stiffness approach.
InitiaZ stress method
This method also bases the solution scheme on the use of pseudo
forces to take account of the non-linear effects. Instead of
calculating the pseudo forces using the estimation of plastic strain,
the method treats the stresses above yield as excess stresses to be
redistributed by pseudo forces to other parts of the continuum where
extra stresses can be undergone by the unplastified material. This
physical interpretation of the method contributes to its own advantage
of being easily comprehended. Furthermore, the method is versatile

enough to deal with perfectly plastic materials, work softening as

well as work hardening, associated and non-associated flow rules,
loading and unloading and convergence irrespective of size of increment
used, as pointed out by Nayak (1971}:.
This method is selected for the works of this thesis and there-
fore detail algorithm of the method will now be presented.
SoZution aZgorithms for initiaZ stress method. The basic
algorithm can be sl.DIIIllarized as follows
1. An increment of loading is applied and the corresponding
elastic stress and strain increments are determined, i.e.
· {Lia} = [DJ {Lid (2 .98)
 30

2. The increment of stresses· {~a} are added to the

previous existing stresses {a} to obtain the total

stress vector. A check is then made to see whether

F (fo} t {b.a}) <<\. If this condition is true then

the stress state is elastic. If not, then the stress
state is plastic and the process continues to estimate
the pseudo forces in step 3 and 4.
3. If F (fo} +· foa} )> or = cr 0 but F (fo})< cr0 then
the element is a transitional element and factor m,
to take into account the presence of elastic strains
prior to the elastic-plastic strains, is estimated
(See Eq. (2.97)). If F ({a}+ {b.a} )> or = a-
0

and F ({a}) = a-0 , then the element is already

plastified from the previous iteration, thus m = O.

The stress strain relationship of Eq. (2.29) is then

used to determine the stress increment corresponding
to {b.E}, obtained from step 1.
] foE} [D (2. 99)
ep
The excess stresses which have to be released by
pseudo forces, are then calculated from
· { a0 } = · {t:.a} (2.100)

where· {a 0 } represents component of excess stresses

or initial stresses. The current stresses· {a}+{b.a}

are then corrected by taking off the excess stresses,

4. Pseudo forces corresponding to the excess stresses

are then computed. Thus, for the case of compatible
model
. {b.Q} (2 .101)
 31

CJ

o-----~---------------
FIG. 2.5 INITIAL STRE~S ~ETHOD FOR UMIAXIAL CASE
 32

s; The pseudo force vectors are th.en reapplied to the

continuum using original stiffness matrix.
6. The effective stress cr- 0 is then updated to a new

value according to work or strain hardening hypothesis.

7. Steps 2 to 6 are then repeated ~til the pseudo forces
reach sufficiently small values within the required
accuracy.
Valliappan (1969) was first to use this procedure to develop a
program incorporating triangular constant strain elements. The
process can be illustrated for a uniaxial case as shown in Fig. 2.5.
There are no problems if an unloading occurs, the stress-strain
relationship will automatically follow the elastic unloading path as
the elastic stiffness is used without any modifications. This method
can be classified as the modified Newton-Raphson iterative technique
* eliminated.
with [K]

2.4 CONCLUDING REMARKS

The primary objective of this chapter is to establish the relevant
basic materials necessary for the linear and non-linear analyses.
The finite element method forms a basic numerical method employed in
this study. As the non-linear analyses are based on the linear
analyses, whether these analyses make use of the incremental or
iterative schemes, it is therefore appropriate to first establish the
basic linear analyses and then proceed to show how these analyses can
be used in the non-linear situations. As for non-linearity, plasti-
city is the basic non-linear material behaviour considered in this
study and therefore the basic of which was treated first in detail.
 33

Chapter 3
NON-LINEAR ANALYSIS OF ANISOTROPIC MATERIALS

3.1 INTRODUCTION
In the past, most of the investigations of non-linear behaviour
of structures were based on the isotropic material properties, whereas
in many real problems the engineers have to deal with materials which
also exhibit some degree of anisotropy in their properties. Recently,
attention has been paid to the non-linear analysis of materials
exhibiting anisotropic deformation properties. (Whang,19~9, Yamada,
1971, Valliappan,1972). In this chapter the elastic-plastic analysis
of anisotropic materials will be treated for the various cases of two-
dimensional plane problems, i.e. cantilever beam, indentation, thick

walled cylinder, notched bar in tension and metal forming processes.

These analyses are based on Huber-Mises yield criterion extended
to anisotropic materials by Hill (1950). It will be seen that the
proposed analysis is applicable to both work-hardening and perfectly
plastic materials. The anisotropic parameters in Hill's criterion
have been determined for plane stress, plane strain and axisymmetric
cases, using a similar approach to that of Hu (1956). For the finite
element discretization, the isoparametric quadrilateral elements with
quadratic displacement variation (See Appendix II), as given by
Zienkiewicz (1971) have been used. The initial stress method discussed
in Chapter 2 has been adopted as the computational process in the
proposed elastic-plastic analysis.
The work discussed here has been progressively published as it
was completed and this particular section of the work was summarized
in the paper Non-Linea;r, Analysis for Anisotropia Materials by Valliappan,
Boonlualohr and Lee, published in International Journal for Numerical
 34

Methods in Engineering, Vol. 10 (1976), pp. 597-606.

3.2 CONCEPTS OF PLASTICITY FOR ANISOTROPIC MATERIALS

Hill's anisotropic yield cr.i--terion for a general three-dimensional
case with anisotropic axes coinciding with the x, y, z axes can be
written as

(3.1)

where -
a is the effective stress, a's are anistropic parameters.
The cases of plane stress, plane strain and axisymmetry will now be

discussed in detail.
Plane stress
If z is the direction normal to the plane, then the conditions

for plane stress are

0
z = T
yz = T
zx = 0 (3. 2)

(3.3)

By putting

= a 12 + a 31

= (3.4)

Eq. (3.3) can be written as

F°(fo}) =a= {½(a a 2+ a
11 X 22
a
Y
2) - a
12 X
a a
Y
+ 3 a
44
(3. 5)

To obtain the plastic strain increment, the flow rule Eq. (2.3) can be

used, i.e.
{de:P} = (3. 6)

where dEP is the effective plastic strain.

 35

Thus
dE: p a er - a er
X 11 X 12 Y

dE: p dE:p
= a er + a er
y 2a 12 X 22 Y (3. 7)

p 6a T
dyxy 44 xy

Plane strain
In this case dE:z = O, but oz is no longer zero. Thus the

general three-dimensional yield criterion, Eq. (3.1) can be used with-

out modification. However certain simplification can be made by
assuming only the plastic component of strain increment equal to zero
(Hu,1956) i.e.
dE: p = = 0 (3 .8)
z

Thus
{- a er - Ct er + (a + Ct ) er }d;>.. = 0 (3. 9)
···31 X 23 y 23 31 z 2<1

a erX + Ct er
31 23 y (3 .10)
er z = Ct
33
where
Ct
33
= Ct
23
+ Ct
31
(3 .11)

Substituting er z into the yield criterion, Eq. (3 .1)

2 2 !,; (3.12)
F(fo}) = d = {~ (er er ) + 3 Ct T } 2
2et X y 44 xy
33

where s = Ct
12
Ct
23
+ Ct
23
Ct
31
+ Ct
31
Ct
12
(3 .13)

Different iat :i:ng F with respect to {er}, we have

els ·P
A.

ck p "d~ (-er X +cr)S

y = --
2 a .a3 3 y (3.14)

dy p 6et Ct T
xy 33 44 xy
 36

Otherwise; if no simplification of Eq. (3.1) is made, the four

components of plastic strain increment can be given as

dE p '<l cr - (l cr - (l cr z
X _ 11 X 12 Y 31

d£p
dE p
y
=-- - (l cr + Cl. cr . - a. cr
'2cr 12 X 22 y 23 Z
(3 .15)

dE p - Cl. cr - a cr y + a cr
z 31 X 23 33 z

dy p 6 Cl. T
xy 44 xy

However Eq. (3.15) must be used with dE z in {dE} equal to zero, defined

by
. {dE}T = [dE dE O dy ] (3 .16)
X y xy

No difficulties arise in using Eqs. (3.15) and (3.16) with the finite
element method and this latter approach is thus adopted for the
analysis of plane strain case in this study.
Axisymmetry
The axisynnnetric problem is similar to the plane strain problem
in that they both have four non-zero components of stress. These
components are now denoted by
[dcr dcr dcr 8 dT ] (3.17)
z r rz
The yield criterion can now be written as
2 2 2
F({cr})= cr = ½[a (cr - cr) + a (cr - cr 8) + a. (cr8 - cr) ]
12 r z 23 z 31 r
1
+ 3 a T • 2 }'°2 (3.18)
55 rz

By the use of flow rule, we have

 37

de: p - a12 ar + a22 az - a 23 cr 0

z

de: p a a - a a - a a
r 11 r 12 Z 31 0

de: p - a a - a a + a a0 (3.19)
e 31 r 23 z 33

dy p 6 a T
rz 55 rz

3.3 DETERMINATION OF ANISOTROPIC PARAMETERS

This problem had been studied by Hu (1956), who demonstrated how
to detemine these parameters for the case of perfectly plastic
materials. By following the same principle, Whang (1969) obtained
the parameters for the plane stress case with work hardening materials.
In this section the general expressions for the anisotropic parameters
for both perfectly plastic and work hardening materials will be
derived.
Initiai parameters
The anisotropic parameters can be determined from yield stresses
in various directions, obtained from independent tests. The initial
parameters a , a , a , a are obtained by successively letting
11 22 33 44

all stress components in the yield criterion equal to zero except the
one llllder consideration.
Thus from the lllliaxial test in x direction, we have
- 2
a
12
+ a
31
= a11 = 2( -~O ) (3. 20)
ox
and from the uniaxial test in y~and z directions~- we have
a0 2
a
12
+ a
23
= a 22 = 2( -
troy
) (3.21)

ao 2
a
23
+ a
31
= a 33 = 2( - ) (3. 22)
0 oz
 38

similarly from a shear test, we have

1
cr-0 2
a = ( T ) (3.23)
44 3
oxy

where and
oxy are the initial yield stresses
aox' aoy' croz T

obtained from the four simple uniaxial tests and cr is the initial
0

effective stress adopted from one of the above four uniaxial test

values.

The three unknown parameters a , a· and a can be obtained

12 "23 31
by solving equations (3.20) to (3.22), thus
- - a- a a
a = (-0-)2 + (-0-)2 (-0-)2
12 .. a .r, a
oz
ox oy
a -
a- a-
a =- (-0-)2 + (-0-)2 + (-0-)2 (3.24)
23 aox aoy aoz
a- a- a-
a
31
= (-0-)2 - (-0-)2
aoy
+ (-0-)2
crox croz

In the case of plane stress, the simple tension test in the z

direction, perpendicular to the plane is however difficult to obtain

for thin specimen. This difficulty can be avoided by conducting a

simple tension test on a tensile specimen cutting at an angle 8 to the

x axis of anisotropy (See Fig. 3.1). The stresses are then trans-
formed to
aX = ae cos 2 8
ay = ae sin 2 8 (3. 25)

T
xy = ae sin e cos e

Substituting these new values in the y:ield criterion for plane stress

Eq. (3.5), we have

a. cos 2 8 a sin 2 8 -
= ½( + 3 a ao
a
12
~l.;;,1_ __
+ _2_2_ _ _ )
- ( - - - - - - - )2
·.Hn 2 8 cos 2 8 44 cre sin 8 cos8
(3.26)
 39

FIG. 3.1 TENSION TEST SPECIMEN AT ANGLE 8 TO x AXIS

a
ax

--- --- ----- .~!JX

a
ox ... ---- --- ----- a-
·~-
ti)

D
-
£' -D
£•
X
0
aX = a0 x + E~X E'X

a = a0 + E E!'.>
0

FIG. 3.2 STRESS-PL/\STIC ST'~/l.I~ CURVE FC-~ SUBSEOUD!T P!.\R/\.' 1~TF'1

 40

Substituting a , a and a from Eqs. (3.20), (3.21) and (3.23)

11 22 44

into Eq. (3.26), we have

a- 0 cot e a- 0 tan e a- -
ao
(l = ( ) 2 + ( )2 + ( _o_ )2
- ( 2
12 aox aoy T
oxy ae sine cos e )
(3.27)
In the case of 45° specimen, e = 45° , Eq. (3. 27) is simplified to

-
a a-0 a-
-
a
a = (...£_)2+ ( - ) 2 + ( - 0 - ) 2 ( _o_ )2 (3.28)
12 aox aoy Toxy a
045

where a is the initial yield stress of the 45° specimen. There-

045

fore in the case of plane stress a may be used instead of cr 0 z for

045

the determination of anisotropic parameters.

Subsequent pa:roameters

In the case of work hardening materials, the effective stress in-

creases with increasing total plastic work done on the material. These
increases cause the anisotropic parameters which are the functions of

yield stresses, to vary. The changes in yield stresses in any

direction depends on the total amount of plastic work done in that
direction. For an equivalent change in effective stress, the plastic

work done in each direction should be the same. Thus, by equating

the amount of plastic work done, corresponding changes of yield stresses
in various directions can be determined relative to the adopted

direction of a. This approach is similar to the one suggested by

Whang (1969).

For example, let the work hardening relation be linear with the
slope of E as shown in Fig. 3.2, then
px

wP = fa d£ P = ¾ £
2 X
p ( aox + ax) (3. 29)
X X X
where wP is the plastic work done in x direction, aX is the new
X

yield stress in x direction.

 41

Now EpX can be expressed in terms of Epx as

(J (J

E~ =
X - ox
(3. 30)
X E
px
Substituting Ep in Eq. (3.29), we obtain
X

wP 1
X
=
2 E
( (J
X
2 (3. 31)
px

Similarly the plastic work done in terms of the new effective stress
a is
1
=
2E
c cr2 (3. 32)
p
By equating Eqs. (3.31) and (3.32), CJ becomes
X

E
(J 2 = ..J?!. c cr2 - + (J 2 (3. 33)
X E ox
p

To correspond with Eq. (3. 24), the following notations will be used

- 0'2
131 = ( £..... )2 =
(J
X ( Epx/Ep) ( 0'2 - a0 2) + (J
ox
2

=
-
( £..... )2 =
a2 (3.34)
82 (J
y ( Epy/Ep) (
(J2 - a0 2) + (J
oy
2

= =
( E /E ) ( cr-2 - cr 2 ) + a 2
pz p o oz

where Epx' Epy' Epz are the slopes of the work hardening curves in
x, y, z directions and E is the slope of the work hardening curve for
p
-
the effective stress, CJ.

The subsequent parameters can now be written using 81 , 82 and 83 as

a = 2 81
11
a = 2 82 (3. 35)
22
a = 2 83
33
 42

and

Cl
12
= s1 + Sz S3

Cl
23
- - s1 + Sz + S3 (3. 36)

a
31
= s1 - Sz + S3

with

= (3. 37)
3 [( Gp/Ep) ( cr 2 - CT 2 ) + T 2 ]
o oxy

where Gp is the slope of the shear stress-plastic strain curve.

In the case of plane stress, if a is determined then a in

45 12

Eq. (3.36) is modified to

Cl = + Cl
(3.38)
12 44

with

( E
p45
/E
p
) ( cr 2 - cr
0
2) + cr 2
045
(3. 39)

where E is the slope of the work hardening curve in the 45°

p45

specimen.

In the case of axisymmetric problems, the porperties in r, z, 8

and rz directions are substituted instead of x, y, z and xy directions

in Eqs. (3.35), (3.36) and (3.37).

3.4 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES

Cantilever beam
This problem is a case of plane stress. Fig~: 3. 3 shows the finite

element division and the spread of plastic zone of a cantilever beam,

with the same material properties (isotropic) as assumed by Whang (1969).

The material properties are to be found in Table 3.1. For the loading
shown in Fig. 3.3, the vertical deflection at the free end and the normal
 y
I L = 8

1.0 f
t
4.. 0

2. 0 f
111m-l P/Pel = 1.5

2
4. 0 f

Ci -·1.0 • • . K J _, X
B
Horizontally Restrained

FIG. 3.3 GEOMETRY AND MESH CONFif,URATION OF CAMTILEVER BEAM

~
t,,I
 44

1.5 Tangent Stiffness

1.0
.
Beam Theory
Anisotropic} Initi a1
Stress
Isotropic ~ethod
0.5

n.oac;;..______..______...,____________
0.0 0.001 0.002 0.003
Deflection ·at B/L

FIG. 3.4 LOAD VS DEFLECTION FOR CA~TILEVER BEAM

Anisotropic
cr X /cr 0 at /l.

(Whang, l~f9)

·o _ _ _ _......__ _ _ _..,__ _ _ _1._,_ _ _--1_ _ _ _

~
0.0 0.5 l.O l.5 2.0
Pf Pel
FIG. 3 .5 crx AT THE f1QST STRESSED REGION VS LOJ\D
 45

TABLE 3.1 - MATERIAL PROPERTIES

PROBLEMS MATERIAL PROPERTIES

Cantilever beams Isotropic

E = 30000.0
V = 0.3
a- = 30.0
0

E
p = 3000.0
Anisotropic
E = E = 30000.0
X y
V
X
= Vy = 0.3
G = 11538.0
E = E = 3000.0
px PY
G = 1000.0
p
a = 40.0
ox
aoy = a oz = 30.0
T = 21.4
oxy
a-0 = 30.0

E = 3000.0
p

Rigid Punch. Isotropic

= 10000.0
E
V = 0.33
-a = 13.0
0

E = 1000.0
p
Anisotropic
Ey = Ey = 10000.0
V
X
= V y = 0.33
G = 3750.0
E
px
= EPY = 1000.0
G = 333.3
p
(Cont'd)
 46

PROBLEMS MATERIAL PROPERTIES

Rigid Punch (Cont'd) 0 ox = 0 oz = 13.0

0
.oy = 17.4
Toxy = 8.8
- = 13.0
00

E
p = 1000.0

Thick-walled cyliner Isotropic

E = 10000.0
V = 0.33
- = 10.0
00

E
p = 0.0 and 1000.0

Anisotropic
E
y = Ez = E0 = 10000.0
vr = vz = 0.33
G = 3750.0
E
pr = Epz = Ep0 = 0.0 and
1000.0
G
p = 333.3
0
or = 0 oe = 0 oz = 13.35
Toyz = 6.75
- = 10.0
0
0

E = 0.0 and 1000.0

p

Notched bar Isotropic

E = 30000.0
V = 0.3
- = 30.0
00

E
p = 0.0
(Cont'd)
 47

PROBLEMS MATERIAL PROPERTIES

Notched bar (Cont'd) Anisotropic

Case (a)
E
X
= 30000.0
E
y = 15000.0
.
V
X
= 0.3
V
y = 0.15
G = 10000.0

Case (b)
E
X
= 30000w0
E
y = 20000.0
V
X
= 0.3
V
y = 0.2
G = 12000.0
0
0 = 30.0
E
p = 0.0

Metal forming processes Isotropic

Case (~)
E = 7000.0
V = 0.2
0
0
= 24.3
E
p = 700.0
Case (b)
E = 3500.0
= 0.1
V

-
oo = 28.35
E
p = 350.0

(Cont'd)
 48

-.
PROBLEMS MATERIAL PROPERTIES

Metal forming processes Anisotropic

(cont 1.d) Case (a)
EX = 3500.0
Ey = 7000.0
\)
X
= 0.1
V
y = 0.2
= 2333.0
G
E = 350.0
px
E = E = 700.0
PY pi
G = 233.3
p
(J
ox = 28.35
(J
oy
= (J.oz = 24.3
T
oxy = 16.36
Case (b)
EX = 7000.0
Ey = 3500.0
V
X = 0.2
V = 0.1 y
G = 2333.0
E = E = 700.0
px pz
E
PY
= 350.0
G
p
= 233.3
(J
ox = (Joz = 24.3
(J
oy = 28.35
T
oxy = 16.36
and
- = 24.3
(J
0

E
p = 700.0
for both cases.
 t y

Rir?id I Punch

£
__
._- 1

6/b • 0.'J03

FIG. 3.6
~
MESH CONFIGURATION AND SPREAD OF ANISOTROPIC PLASTIC ZOME FOR PUNCH PROBLEM
+>-
1.0
 2 . 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . - - -...

_... +
...-,t-
_...+,...t' -----
Anisotronic~.,..-1- Isotrooic
1.5 ~ /

+/
13 L
,t
/
2 0
oy 1 .0 !p = t1ean Pressure
ti+t
Rigid
6
B
b = 2. 7
0.5
h
b = 1. 7
T

~
6/b
0.000 0.001 0.002 a. 0') 3 0.no~ 0.005 0.01)6

FIG. 3. 7 PRESSURE VS DISPLACEnENT FOP. PUMCH PROBLE~1

VI
0
 51

stress crx in the most stressed region for different ratios of P/P el
are plotted in Fig. 3.4 and 3.5 respectively. From these two plots,
it can be seen that there is a very good agreement between the results
of Whang (1969) and the present analysis.

In Fig. 3.4 and 3.5 the curve for the anisotropic case is also
plotted. Fig. 3.5 clearly shows the difference in the stress distri-
bution between the isotropic and the anisopropic cases.
Rigid punch
Plane strain condition is assumed for this problem. The finite
element mesh and the spread of plastic zone for the problem of rigid
punch are shown in Fig. 3.6 whereas Fig. 3.7 shows the displacement
curve for isotropic and anisotropic work hardening cases in a non-
dimensional form. The displacement curve for isotropic case coincides
exactly with that of Nayak (1971). Comparing the curve for isotropic
and anisotropic cases, it can be observed that the punch pressure for

the anisotropic case is considerably higher than the isotropic case.

Similar effects for other problems have also been reported in the

previous investigations by Hu (1956) and Valliappan (1972).

Thick-waZZed cyZinder
This problem is a case of axisymmetry. Fig. 3.8 shows the con-
figuration of the thick-walled cylinder analysed and the load displace-

ment curves for perfectly pastic (isotropic and anisotropic) cases, in

a non-dimensional form. As can be seen, the displacement curve for
isotropic, perfectly plastic case coincides exactly with that of Hodge
and White (1950). Table 3.2 shows relative accuracy of the present
analysis in comparison with the solution given by Hu (1956).
The previous investigations have established that maximum pressure

for a particular cylinder can be increased with the decreasing values of

yield stress in the axial direction, if the yield stresses in the other
 Is?troric_ } E = 0.1
0. 1 Am sotrop1 c P

0.80
-
0.75_-=._-=-= ===~ ~~~o~e~ ~
4~.....-
0~ -+ .
White (1950)
.
Isotro~nc_
}
E = o.o
p/oo
~t~<>vt-~
.... Anisotro~1c ~
?

0.5
z ~ p = Internal Pressure

I
.
,..
r- Ji 1:r:r:r:I
a
'"1
~(b)

J... . --
o.r~----L------;-----T---
a l 4-Gu(b)/j 0 a
2 3

FIG. 3.8 LO/\D vs DISPU\CE~-,rnT FOR THICK-!·IALLED CYLIMDrn

u,
N
 L
53
A
p

1--
s 5 ..,
FIG. 3.0a r.:rnr~ET~Y fl.ND MESH COMFIGUP-P.TIO~I FOR N~TCHED Rl'R
Cl'. 54

P/Py = 2.5

FIG. 3,gb SPRLL\D OF PLASTIC ZOME FQ~. '!OTC~:ED R/\R

 55
co
C'
- - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . - - - - - - - - - - C'
c~
C L.">
,-- ,-- ('.!
r--. (/)
II II II C r..,J
C ,.....
::>. ~ ::,. I-
w w uJ C C.'
w
'
I.J.J
X '
LL.!
X 'X
Lu
o ..
c.,
c~
c.
u
Itt
......
1..0 o.
C 0
c- o··
1--
c, C
V,
......
:z~
c::r.
>< L.1
l!i ,.._.
C' l-
o (/)
c~
C .....I
w
·----~-
c·:
C-
M Li..
0
0 I-
C !;L-!
L:.J
u
c::
.....I
0..
(/)
C-· ' ......
C Cl
0
V)
0 >
Cl
<
C
.....I
,.... c-
o
C
c·.
0
C·
,.... L.I') L,.., C
r--. LO ('.I
I
C
0 ...J Cl C'
Cl. 0
lb
 56

directions are kept constant. This is indicated in ;Fig ._3. 8 where the

curve shows that there is a decrease in the value of maximwn pressure

when the yield stress in the axial direction is increased. The dis-
placement curves for isotropic and anisotropic work hardening cases
have also been plotted in Fig. 3.8 and -the results for these cases
have been summarized in Table 3.2.

TABLE 3. 2 - MAXIMUM PRESSURES FOR THICK-WALLED CYLINDER

%
Case p/ao Hu Difference
Isotropic E
p = 0.0 0.80 0.812 1.5

E
p = 0.1E 0.92 - -
Anisotropic E
p = 0.0 0.75 0.755 0.7

E
p = 0.1E 0.83 - -

Notched haI'
In this problem, plane strain condition is assumed. Fig. 3.9
illustrates the mesh configuration and the typical spread of plastic
zone of the notched bars. Only the elastic anisotropy is assumed for
the three cases with the ratios of E /E = 1, 1.5 and 2. The load dis-
X y
placement curves plotted in Fig. 3.10 shows initial differencesin the
elastic slopes of the three cases. However since the plastic properties
are assumed to be the same, the threecurves converge to a similar
collapse load. This is as expected. Thus the elastic anisotropy

does not influence significantly the collapse load but influences

differencesin stiffness of the initial elastic portions.
Metal forming processes
In this section, three metal fonning processes are presented,

i.e. blanking, ~utting and orthogonal machining. Plane strain condition

 57

<i
I
•

2.5 1.0

FIG. 3.11 ~~ESH CCtlFIGURATION .n,ND TYPICAL SPREJ\D OF PLASTIC ZOME

FOR BLANKING P~OCESS

 0.:3 r p

r-
l
B Ri~id

0.61 oT
~

P/Bcr0
I --- -0---
Antsotro~ic Cases
___,,
OA I (l
~~
-------

o. 2 I I'// ,/ Case (a)

Isotropic {
-~- Case (b)

. . {---+-
/\nisotrop,c _ + _
Case (a)
Case (b)

0.0 V,

0.0 0.001 O.O'.J2 IJ.')03 00

o/B
FTG. 3.12 C0~1Pl'.RJ.S0r1S OF_ Lnf.D-DISPU\C[~~nn CURVES FO~ !3U·.MKH!'"1 PR()CESS
 59

1.5 2.5
-1
0.75

LI"')

0
o:;;·

7.5
FIG. 3 .13 t~ESH COMFIGUR.l\TION AND TYPIC./\L SPREAD OF PLASTIC ZONE

FOR CUTT FIG PROCESS

 0. 72_
p
I
q_ I
0.6 I- 'F'---i T
l. . oo =

B = 5.75
2~.3

r I I

OTj I IB
I I
P/o 0 B

--- --
_..D-- - -
OA
___,-o---
-----
~ o--<_Isctroni c Case

<==
0.2 Case (a)
Isotro11ic
Case (b)

Anisotronic { ---t- Case (a)

-+- Case (b)
0.0
0.0 0.002 Q. ')()l1, 0.005 618 0.003 0.01 0.012
0\
0

FIG. 3. lf; CO:~P/'~ISOMS OF LO/\D-DISPL.l\CP'.PlT Clff'.VES Ff'IR CUTTING P~OCtSS

 61

L!"
c-.:

3.5

15/15
y
= 0.5/
L.'"l

L
I~--_ _ ____:__:_:::,_7.5 _ _ _ _ ~

FIG. 3.15 nE5F cnr:FIGUP.AT!Of\! n!C' TYPIC_I\L SPrE/\l) OF PUSTIC zm 1E

FOR O~THOCC'~I/\L Ml'\CH HI If:t:: !='?OC~SS

 o.s.------r------,-------,,-----y------,i------,..-------
00 = 2~.3

B = 5.25

0.6

~ --
Rigid

~ ~
~ ---- ------
0.L'1

P/Ba 0

Case (a)
o. 2 I rl' / / Isotropic { _ --o- _ Case (b)

Case (a)
P,nisotrooic { =-=:=-= Case (b)

a.o~-----~-~'~-~~----;~~0.~-~~-0.w-
0. ') ·0.002 0.00~ 0.006 o.onc ').010 G.012 0.01'1
o/R
FIG. ~.16 C011PAR.ISOMS OF l.OAD-OISPL/\'~~··1tMT CUP\/FS F()R '11\C'-!P!P!r, P-RClCESS O'
N
 63

is asslUiled for these cases. Figs. 3.11, 3.13 and 3.15 show the mesh

configurations and the typical spreads of plastic zone of the three

processes. The investigation assumes four material properties. Two

cases are asslUiled to be isotropic on the basis of properties from the

horizontal and vertical axes of anisotropy. The other two cases are

asstuned to be anisotropic with anisotropic axes at 90° to each other.

These properties can be found in Table 3.1.

Blanking. Fig. 3.12 shows the load deformation curves of the

blanking process. It can be seen that the isotropic case (a) is

stronger in the elastic range but slightly weaker in the plastic range

than the isotropic case (b). Their differences can be shown as upper

and lower bounds for the anisotropic cases. However, between the two

anisotropic cases no significant differences can be detected. This is

due to the fact that the shear properties for both anisotropic cases

are common and the present loading configuration induces mainly shear

stresses. Thus for shear loadings in plane problems, the load-

displacement relationships are not affected by the anisotropic properties.

Cutting. Fig. 3.14 shows the load deformation curves for the

cutting process. Same material properties as in the blanking process

are asslUiled. Here again the orientation of the material anisotropy

does not influence the load displacement significantly since the

difference in the yield stresses between the two directions is only

10%, and the shear stresses are also partially predominant in the

yielded zones. The anisotropic cases again lie between the two bounds

of isotropic cases (a) and (b).

Orthorgonal maahining. Fig. 3.16 shows the differences of the

two anisotropic cases, more significantly than the previous two pro-

cesses. Thus in this particular geometrical configuration the load

displacement relationships are sensitive to the orientation of material

 64

anisotropy. Again the two anisotropic cases lie between the two

isotropic cases in the initial portion of the curves. However, the

anisotropic case (b) shows a slightly stiffer load displacement

relationship after the plastic yielding has occurred. This may be

due to the effect of anisotropic work hardening.

3.5 CONCLUDING REMARKS

A general mathematical formulation for the elastic-plastic

analysis of anisotropic materials with either perfectly plastic or

work hardening properties has been presented. It has been shown that

in general, four initial tests are necessary for the determination of

anisotropic parameters but they can be reduced to a minimum of three

for certain cases of stratified material, since the properties are

common within the strata.

The results of the numerical examples indicate the influence

of anisotropy on the maximum pressures and the load displacement curves

and hence the necessity of such analysis, as presented here, for

structures built with materials of anisotropy, should be carried out.

 65

Chapter 4
ANALYSIS OF GEOTECHNICAL PROBLEMS

4.1 INTRODUCTION
Soils and rocks are multi-phase materials and invariably possess
some degree of anisotropy and non-homogeneity, and it is common to
find that the stress-strain characteristic manifests non-linearity.
In the past, the geotechnical engineers have been compelled to model

the soils as a linear, homogeneous, isotropic material and, furthermore,

the existing analyses and computational techniques conunonly restricted

consideration to a one dimensional stress state. However, the advances

in numerical methods have provided the tools to allow more realistic

modelling of the soil properties and to analyse the multi-dimensional

stress state. It is clear that the finite element method has found

particular applications in solving previously intractable geotechnical

problems and the fact is illustrated by the analyses of thkee important

soil structures presented in this chapter. The specific problems

considered are
(1) Settlement a:nalysis of piles in layered soil.
(2) Finite element a:nalysis of consolidation problem
(3) Elastic-plastic analysis of shallow foundations
Considerable effort has been applied to the solution to the geo-
technical problems in numerous other universities and research estab-
lishments throughout the world for the past ten years and the contri-

butions here have complemented similar works carried out during the
period of the author's study.
In this chapter the analysis of a settlement of a compressible
pile is detailed and this led to the publication of the data required
to predict the settlements of a compressible pile in a multi-layered
 66

soil deposit (Valliappan, Lee and Boonlualohr, 1974). Subsequently

further works have been carried out by others.

The elastic consolidation detailed in this study is based on the

Biot theory originally presented by Sandhu and Wilson (1969) and later
by Hwang et al (1971). The particular contribution here involves the
use of isoparametric element which led to solution of the settlement

of a strip footing on a multi-layered soil. This work was also

published (Valliappan, Lee and Boonlualohr, 1974-a).

The detail study has also been made of the load settlement
relationship of a shallow strip footing on a multi-layered soil of

finite thickness. Again the use of isoparametric element with reduced

integration led to an effective solution of this problem as suggested by

Nayak and Zienkiewicz (1972). This work was also published (Boonlualohr,

Valliappan and Lee, 1974).

4.2 SETTLEMENT ANALYSIS OF PILES IN LAYERED SOIL

An analysis of the load-settlement behaviour of a pile or pile

group is commonly based on the representation of the supporting soil as

a layer of linear elastic, h.omogeneous, isotropic material. The

effectiveness of the analysis has been clearly established by studies of
a large number of field and laboratory investigations (Poulos,1974).

A more generalized representation of the soil layer is necessary

to take account of the influence of non-linear behaviour, anisotropic
soil properties and non-homogeneity. In this section the analysis of
the non-homogeneous situation of a layered soil is developed. The
relative complexity of the boundary conditions precludes the immediate
possibility of a formal solution except for certain limiting cases, and

the finite element analysis is the most expedient approach. Such an

analysis was applied to a surface footing which can be regarded as the
 67

limiting case of a pile of zero length. This analysis considered

both homogeneous and layered soil deposits (Lee and Valliappan,1974).

The results of preliminary studies of floating piles in layered

soils were previously reported by Youdale (1973) and Lee and

Valliappan (1973). These initial studies showed the need for a more
sophisticated element than the simple triangular element originally
used, since the behaviour of the actual structure is idealised by
the joint behaviour of the isolated elements interconnected by nodal

points, and therefore the accuracy of this method depends on the

efficiency of the nodal connectivity along the interelement boundaries.

Thus in the present analysis, the isoparametric quadrilateral element
(See Appendix II) was incorporated into the program and studies
completed for the relevant range of soil and pile parameters. The

discussion is limited to the settlement of a single pile in soil mass.

Since this can be analysed as axially-symmetric, the finite element

formulation for two dimensional axisymmetric approach has been used.

If the action of a group of piles, instead of a single pile is

investigated, then a complete three dimensional analysis has to be

carried out.
One of the major difficulties of the investigation was to establish

the accuracy of the nwnerical results. Solutions were available for

the limiting case of a flexible, circular, loaded area applied to the

surface of an isotropic layer of finite depth (Tsytovich,1963). Further

comparisons were possible with published results of piles in an isotropic

layer of finite or infinite depth (Poulos and Davis,1968, Butterfield

and Banerjee, 1971). These comparisons are discussed before proceeding
with the detailed results of a pile in a two layer soil deposit. Values
of ,the influence factor for settlement are then presented for a selected
 68

range of pile and layer geometry, soil parameters, and pile compress-

ibility.

Discussion of Results

Single layers
Poulos and others (e.g., Poulos,1974, Poulos and Davis,1968) have

published'eXtensivesolutions giving the settlement of a loaded pile.

The supporting soil is represented as a linear elastic, homogeneous,

isotropic layer supported on a rough, rigid base. These results

provide a basis for assessing the comparative accuracy of the finite

element solution.

A further important comparative solution is that of a uniformly

loaded circular footing. Such a footing could be considered to be

the limiting case of a pile of zero length. Consider the settlement

profiles shown in Fig. 4.1 in which xis the radius vector and a the
radius of the loaded area. In this figure the surface settlement
profiles obtained by the finite element analysis using 40 elements

and 147 nodes, are compared with the formal solutions. Two finite
element solutions are plotted in this figure for a layer thickness, H,

radius of loaded area (a= D/2) ratio of 5 and a layer thickness, layer
radius ratio of 20. The two solutions correspond to a Poisson's ratio

of 0.3 for a layer on a smooth, rigid base, and a Poisson's ratio of 0.4
for the layer on a rough, rigid base. The corresponding formal
solutions are shown as dotted lines, and it is seen that there is close
agreement between the formal and finite element settlement profiles.
The boundary condition shown in Fig. 4.1 is only for the smooth,
rigid base. The settlement of a single pile is expressed as

s = (4 .1)
 X/a
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
0.0
--o-- Finite Element Method JProblem as Shown
- -o- - Tsytovich (1963) on Sketch
~
0.5 v = 0. 3, Smooth Rigid Base ~ /~ + -
s ,,-o ::1=--- =--
-+-Finite Element Method} Limiting cas _ , , . ~ ·
.
- -+- -Tsytov1ch (1963) from~::;;...o~:.,,
F" 1/ ,.-
1g. '/
EsS 4.2 1/ C
aq 1.0 v = 0.4, Rough Rigid B a s e # + / 1.
S F/1/+
/ 1/ . ~ t t
/ 1/ .~t--'--------
..-,-·
...c,-_,,. ~ /'.Y
1.5 - -o- - / H = Sa
._-_-_-_-:.-:.:.~1-~+_....
I----- 11 4a

2.Q I I I ---·---·· ·~-§--- ---- I

FIG. 4.1 FLEXIBLE CIRCULAR FOOTING ON FINITE LAYER

°'
l,C)
 70
1.2 , - - - - - - - - - - - - , , - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - -

Limiting Case of p
Flexible Circular
Footing v p
=v
s
= 0.4
1.0
E , v L=SD
s s E
p

t--irf
30D

0.8 Rough Rig id Sase

V = 0.25
p
Limiting Case vs= 0.4
as above
I
p
0.6
Centre Line
SE D
I= _s_
p p

0.4

0.2

Poulos

0.0----------"-----------'----------J
1 10 100 1000

E
FIG. 4.2 EFFECT OF P/Es ON SETTLEMENT FOR PIL~ IN SINGLE FINITE LAYER
 0.2:

= 2.0
Es
L H
"s
D
I
p
0. l Rough Rigid Base
E
P/Es = 1000

o-- -·-o-...--._
---------- __,,.__ - -

Finite Element Method

- --<>- - Poulos (1974)
0.0
~---~!:----~~------1.---..J
0.0 10
L/o
20 30

FIG. 4.3 SEMI RIGID PILE IN SINGLE FINITE LAYER

....'-I
 72

0.4

I
p
0.3

.. Ip
= SE D
_p_s_
·o:3

0.2
1.0 2.0 L/ 0.0
H
o.s 0.2S

~1 E
P;E = 10
s

p.2
L/ = 5
D

L/ = 10
D

I'p
0 .1 L/ D -- 25

SE D
I = s
·p -p-

0.
':------:-L-------Jl--------1~----.....J
1.0 1.5 2.0 L/ o.o
H 0.5 H
IL 0.25
E
(b) P;E = 1000
s

FIG. 4.4 SETTLEMENT CURVES FOR PILE IN SINGLE FINITE LAYER

 73

where Pis the load applied to the top of the pile, Dis the diameter

of the pile, E .is the modulus of the soil layer and I is the influence
s p
factor. Values of I are shown in Fig. 4.2 as a function of the com-
p
pressibility of the pile. The compressibility is expressed as the
modular ratio E /E, where E is the modulus of the pile material.
p s p
These results can be directly compared with the earlier results based on

the Mindlin solution for the elastic layer (Poulos,1972,1974). Fig. 4.2
shows such a comparison and it is evident that there are significant

differences between the results of the two analyses for compressible

piles. It should be noted that the settlement corresponding to the

limiting case of a pile with the same modulus as the soil (E~p /E s = 1)

should be the value corresponding to the formal solution for a uniformly

loaded surface footing (compare Fig. 4.1). The results of the two

analyses converge with increasing pile stiffness and agree quite closely
for rigid piles. It should be noted that no results are given by
Poulos (1974) for values of E /E between 1 and 10.
p s
Fig. 4.3 shows the effect of two different ratios of layer thickness

to length of pile on the influence factor I for various ratios of length

p
to diameter of pile. The pile considered in this case was semi~rigid
with Ep /E s = 1000, driven into a soil mass with a rough rigid base.
For these two cases the results from Poulos (1974) are also plotted in

Fig. 4.3 for comparison. The results from the finite element analysis
compare well with the results from Poulos (1974) for the case H/L = 2.0.

The discrepancy between the two results for the case of H/L = 1.2 may be
attributed to the influence of boundary effects.
Values of the settlement influence factor for a very compressible
pile (E /E = 10) and for a stiff pile (E /E = 1000) are shown in
p s p s
Figs. 4.4(a) and 4.4(b) respectively. These results correspond to a
Poisson's ratio of the soil of 0.4. A reasonable approximation for
 ,rDL
\y --r- 74
0
E
p/E =1000
s
E
p/E =
s
0.25

..,_/L

0.50

0.75

1.00--------------=--~_;::c.,JL-----...L- - - - - - - - - - '
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
(a) L /D = 5

T irDL
7>
o.o ,--r--:::::~~;;;;:==::~~~~---,------.-----, xy

0.2

0.5

0.75

1.0 ~~--:L::------:--':------1-----1..----====:::r::~~===----_J
0.25 0.5 0.75 1.0 1.25 1.5 1.7$

(b) 1./ D = 10

FIG. 4.5 SHEAR STRESS ALONG THE FACE OF PILE IN SINGLE FINITE LAYER
 75

other values of v is to ass1..UI1e that the settlement influence factor is

s
inversely proportional to (1 - v s2 ) .

The vertical shear stress distributions along the length of com-

pressible pile with a ratio of L/D = 5, are plotted in Fig. 4.5(a) for
different ratios of Ep /E, varying from 10 to 1000. An increase in
s
pile rigidity leads to an overall decrease of shear stress in the

upper sections of the pile. Fig. 4.5(b) shows similar distribution

of shear stress along the length of a semi-rigid pile (E /E = 1000)
p s
with a ratio of L/D = 10 for two different ratios of H/L (1.2 and 2.0).

It is seen that there is not any appreciable difference in the shear

stress distribution between these tw cases.

Multi-layered soils
Many soil deposits are commonly formed from layers of soils of

varying stiffness, and one of the primary functions of a pile fotmdation

is to transmit loads through compressible layers to a stiffer stratum.

It is possible to present settlement influence factors for a two layer

system, but for more than two layers it is necessary to make use of
the individual analysis. In Figs. 4.6 to 4.8 the settlement influence

factor is defined as
S. E1D
Ip = p (4. 2)

where E1 is the modulus of the upper soil layer of thickness H1 over-

lying the layer of modulus E2 , thickness H2 on a rough rigid support.
There are several variables which should be considered. Of greatest
significance are the ratio of length of pile to thickness of upper
layer, the ratio H1/H 2 , the ratio H1/D, the layer modular ratio E1/E 2 ,

and the pile compressibility Ep/E 1 . The sensitivity of I to the

p
individual values of these ratios varies and typical results which are
of practical importance are presented in this ~~lysis.
 76

o.s - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , - - - - - - - - - , , - - - - - - - - ,

Ep/E 1 = 1000

'V1 = V2 = 0. 4 H
p 1/H = 1
2

E , V L H
l 1 l

0.25 E ,v H
2 2 2

Rough Rigid Base

E
ii~ = 0.1

E 1 /m
ii~=
0.0 .___ _ _ _ _ _-1,_ _ _ _ _ _ _...__ _ _ _ _ _ _...__ _ _ _ _ __

0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4

Depth Ratio L/H

l

FIG. 4.6 PILE IN TWO LAYERED SOIL MASS, H1/o = 5

 77

0.25,---------r--------T""--------,.-------

E
1 /E • 10
. 2

0.2
Ep/E1 = 1000

"1 = "i = 0.4

\) = 0.25
p
UD
1
Ip • p
I
p

· 0.1

0.1

s 1/ •

0.0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _,_,,..___ _ _ _ _ _...,__ _ _ _ _ _--J

0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4

Depth Ratio L/H

1

FIG. 4.7 PILE IN n~o LAYERED SOIL MASS, H110 = 10

 78

0. 2..--------r-------~.-----------------
Ep/E1 = 1000

vp = 0.25

I
p
0 .1

0.0 11----------'-------....IL---------'-------_,J
0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4

FIG. 4.8 PILE IN TWO LAYERED SOIL MASS, H1; 0 = 20

 79

So, in this analysis the results have been restricted to a semi-

rigid pile supported by a soil deposit consisting of two layers of

equal thickness. Three ratios of H1/D(S, 10, 20) have been used in

the evaluation of I • For each value of H1/D three stiffness ratios

p
E1/E 2 (10, 1, 0.1) have been considered.
The results in the form of the influence factor for settlement of

the top of the pile for various ratios of L/H 1 are given in Figs. 4.6,
4.7 and 4.8. Also included in the figures are the curves for limiting

case of E1/E 2 = 0 which corresponds to the single layer analysis pre-

viously discussed (e.g., Figs. 4.4(a) and 4.4(b)).

One of the .important practical aspects highlighted by these results

is the influence of the length of the pile relative to the thickness of
the upper layer, since it is common practice to insist on driving the
pile a significant distance into the stiffer underlying layer. Con-

sider from Fig. 4.6 the effect of driving the pile to a depth of 0.8 H1
compared with driving depths of H1 and 1.2 H1 . For the particular

case of the underlying layer ten times stiffer than the upper layer, the

predicted settlements for these three driving depths are in the ratio
of 2.66 : 1 : 0.76 respectively. It is therefore evident that the
settlement is considerably reduced by driving the pile to the interface

compared with the situation when the base of the pile is located a very

short distance above the interface. There is, by contrast, only a

relatively small reduction in settlement by locating the pile into the
stiffer layer. It should also be noted that the sensitivity of the
settlement to the depth of piling is reduced as the H1/D is increased.
For H1/D = 20 (Fig. 4.8) the settlement ratios corresponding to the
ratios quoted,for H1/D = 5 are 1.78 : 1 : 0.86.
The results given in Figs. 4.6 to 4.8 were obtained for v and v
1 2

of 0.4. There is an increase in I for increasing values v and v

p 1 2
 80

and, again, as an approximate guide the value of Ip could be considered

to be inversely proportional to the mean value of V1 and V2. If the

influence of Poisson's ratio is to be more accurately established it is

necessary to carry out the analysis for the specific values of v 1 and

v2.

4.3 FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF CONSOLIDATION PROBLEM

It is usual to analyse the process of Consolidation on the basis

of the one dimensional theory originally developed by Terzaghi (1943).

This theory is, however, incomplete and many contributions have since

been made which eliminate some of the basic discrepancies (Lee, 1968).

Among these contributions, the important one is the generalized theory

of Biot (1941, 1955) which satisfies the equilibrium, strain compat-

ibility and (linear) constitutive relationships, as well as the

continuity relationships. It is noted that Terzaghi's theory is based

on the continuity relationship. The Biot approach provides the

opportunity for obtaining the rate of settlement and the rate of

dissipation of excess pore pressure under a multi-dimensional strain

state.

The time dependent variables at any point are the three displace-

ment components plus the excess pore pressure. During the process of

consolidation, the total stresses will also vary although the effective

stress parameters of the soil skeleton are considered to be constants.

Certain analytical solutions to the consolidation problem

described by the three-dimensional Biot theory have been obtained for

axi-symmetric and plane strain cases. These contributions have been

detailed by Lee (1973). However, these solutions are applicable only

to limited situations due to the complexities encountered in the

practical problems. Features such as non-homogeneity, anisotropic

 81

material properties, complex geometries and arbitrary botmdary

conditions are difficult to incorporate in the analytical methods.

The development of powerful numerical techniques such as the finite

element method (Zie'Okiewicz, 1971) has reduced many of these difficulties

and it is now possible to analyse many of the previously intractable

consolidation problems. The finite element formulation based on the

variational principle has been proposed by Sandhu and Wilson (1969) and

the procedure has been extended to include a logarithmic time increment

by Hwang et al. (1971). An alternate procedure using the finite element

method has been developed by Christian and Boehmer (1970).

In this section, the finite element analysis of consolidation

problem is described. The formulation is based on the variational

principle postulated by Sandhu and Wilson. The analysis uses the

isoparametric quadrilateral elements with quadratic interpolation both

for the displacement field and the pore pressure field. Thus, there are

three variables at each of the eight nodes of the element. The time

domain is divided into a number of small time intervals and linear

interpolation over a time interval is used.

The results for the problem of strip load on a single layer are

compared with the available solutions and the application of the

method is extended to the important practical case of a multi-layered

soil deposit.
Variational prinaiple
The Biot theory considers that the soil is saturated, the pore

fluid is incompressible, the strains are small and the soil skeleton is

a linear elastic material. The functional to be minimized in the case

of an initially lllldeformed soil mass is defined as

 82

- f ½g * {f}T * ({D }p + p 2 {F}) dV

V p
n

- f {t}T * {u} dS + f g * Q* pdS ( 4. 3)

son SPn

in which* denotes the convolution product such that

t
V * W = f v({r},T) W ({r},t-T) dT (4.4)
0

and

g = 1 (4.5)

where {cr} is the stress vector, {£} is the strain vector, {cr} is the
0

initial stress vector, {u} is the displacement vector, {f} is the fluid

flux vector, {F} is the body force vector,' {r} is the position vector,

· {T} is the prescribed traction vector on surface S , Q is the

crn
prescribed flow normal to the surface S , pis the pore pressure, p 1
Pn
and p 2 are the mass density of the soil and the pore fluid respectively,

t and T denote time, n is the number of element, [D] is the elasticity

matrix, and {DP} is the vector containing the differential operators,

defined by

. {D }T = [ ~ ~ ~ ] (4.6)
p ax ay az
The boundary conditions to be satisfied are
( 4. 7)

and
- = {v } T{f}
Q on S (4.8)
p Pn

in which [v] is as defined in Eq. (2.42) of Chather 2 and. {v}

p
 83

is defined by
· {v }T = [1 m n] (4.9)
p

where 1, m, n are the directional cosinesnormal to the boundary surface.

Finite eZement ideaZization

The spatial domain is divided into isoparametric quadratic quadri-

lateral elements (See Appendix II). Two field variables in term of the

nodal values can now be defined as

. {u} = [Nu] {qe} ( 4 .10)

p = {Np}T{pe} (4.11)

where [Nu] and {Np} contain the shape functions defined by the

quadratic interpolating polynomial. · {q} and {p} are the displace-

e e
ment vector and the pore pressure vector at the element level, denoted

by the subscript e.

The strain-displacement relationship Eq. (2.32) can now be given

as
. {E} = [B ] {q } (4.12)
u e
where [Bu] contains appropriate derivative of {u} in Eq. (4.10).

The pore pressure gradient can be obtained by differentiating

Eq. (4.11), thus

{D }p = [B] {p} ( 4 .13)
p p e

The volumetric strain conditions can be given as

(4.14)

The fluid flux vector {f} can be expressed by Darcy's flow law

as
. {f} = [H][B ]{p} + [H]{p 2 F} (4.15)
p
where [H] is the permeability matrix and. {p 2 F} is the fluid body force

vector.
 84

By substituting Eqs. (4.10) to (4.15) into the functional of

Eq. (4.3) and minimizing the functional with respect to {q} and {p },
e e
the following set of matrix equations can be obtained
[K 1]{q} + [c]{p} = -{M 1 } + {M2} + {P 1 } (4.16)

[C]T{q} - g *[K2]{p} = g * {M3} - g * {P2} ( 4 .17)

in which
[K 1 ] = E f[B ]T[D][B] dV ( 4 .18)
n V u u
n

[K2] = E f [B ]T[H][B ] dV (4.19)

n V p p
n
[c] = E J {B~} {N }T dV ( 4. 20)
n V p
n

{Ml} = E f [B ]T {cr } dV (4.21)

n V u o
n
. {M2} = E f [N ]T {p 1 F} dV (4.22)
n V u
n

{M3} = E f [B ]T[H]{p 2 F} dV (4.23)

n V p
n
{P 1 } = E f [N ]T {T} dS (4.24)
n s u
an

. {p2} = E J {N } Q dS (4.25)
n s p
Pn

Eq. (4.16) and (4.17) are the governing equations for the consol-
idation of porous elastic solid. Eq. (4.16) is the equilibrium equation

and Eq. (4.17) represents the continuity of flow conditions.

The displacements and the pore pressures at any specified time
t +~tare determined using the values already obtained at time t. In
the present analysis, a linear interpolation is used to ensure continu-
ity of the displacements and pore pressures over a small time interval.
Thus, the change in convolution product over the time interval ~t can
 85

be expressed in terms of the values at t and t + 8t by

(4.26)

( 4. 27)

in which

( 4. 28)

and

(4.29)

At time t = O+, no dissipation of the fluid within the mass has

taken place and hence for the first very small time interval, {F 2 } can

be taken to be zero.

Discussion of results
The analysis described in the previous sections was used to evaluate

the excess pore pressures in an elastic half-space under a pervious

strip load. The geometry considered for the finite element analysis is

shown in Fig. 4.9. The finite element mesh consists of 93 nodes and

24 isoparametric quadratic quadrilateral elements. The vertical

boundary was taken at a distance of 10a from the surface whereas the

horizontal boundary was taken at Ba from the centre of the loaded

area. The horizontal and vertical distributions of excess pore pressure

have been plotted in Fig. 4.9(a) and 4.9(b) for T = 0.1 where the

adjusted time factor, T, is defined as

f =
ct ( 4. 30)
a2

where tis the actual time and C is the adjusted coefficient of

consolidation defined by

e = (4.31)
 86

x/ a
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
0

0.2 f = 1.0

z/a = 0.5

0.4 \) = 0
Schiffr.ian et al.
~ Fhd te Element
Method
0.6

a) Horizontal Distribution of Excess Pore Pressure

Excess Pore Pressure p/q
0.25 0. 5 0. 75 1.0
o~=:c.:=--,-----,---,-----,
- Schi.f fman et al. (1969)
1.0 o---o Finite Element Metho
x/a = 0

'\) = 0
2 .0
£ f = 0.1
I q
3.0

4.0
z

f Free

Impervious Base
5.0

b) Vertical Distribution of Excess Pore Pressure

FIG. 4.9 STRIP LOAD IN HALF-SPACE

 0. 25

-Gibson et al. (1970)

o--<,Finite Element Method
0.30
x/a = 0
H/a = 1
0.35
:31 O" 0.2
c.., "' £
+,I
~
Cl,)
15
0.40 I
Cl,)
.....
+,I
+,I
Cl,)
V) 0.45
z~ Free X

Drainage H
I

0.50

Impervious Base
0. SS I I I t 11 I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I
10- 4 10- 3 10- 2 10- 1 101
10°
Ct
Adjusted Time Factor~ = --
a2
Effect of Poisson's ratio on Settlement

FIG. 4.1Oa STRIP LOAD ON SEMI INFINITE LAYER 00

.....
 0

0.1

0.2
c::
.....,0 0.3
~

....
'O
~
0.4
0
Ill H/a = 5.0
c::
0.5 ,,,,,,,,--
" "'
0
u H/a = oc;~ 't A H/a = 10.0
~ /
0 0.6 H/a = 1.0
~
...,~ · H/a = 2.0
t).() 0. 7
V
0

0.8

0.9

1.0
-4 -3
10- 2
10 10 10- 1 101 10 2
1.0 10 3

Adjusted Time Factor T = Ct

82

FIG. 4.1Ob STRIP LOAD ON SEMI-INFINITE LAYER 00

00
 89

in which G is the shear modulus, k is the coefficient of permeability

and Y is the unit weight of water. In Fig. 4.9, the finite element
w
results have been compared with the analytical solutions given by

Schiffman et al. (1969) and a good agreement between them can be

observed.

Fig. 4.10 shows the effect of Poisson's ratio on the surface

settlement, w, of a semi-infinite layer on impervious base subjected

to strip load over a finite area. The geometry for the analysis is

also shown in Fig. 4.10, with the vertical boundary at a distance of a

from the surface and the horizontal bolllldary at a distance of 4a from

the centre of the loaded area. The finite element mesh consists of

79 nodes and 20 elements. From Fig. 4.10 it can be seen that there is

excellent agreement between the finite element solution and the analyt-

ical solution given by Gibson et al. (1970).

The present analysis has also been extended from homogeneous case

to the case of nonhomogeneous layered deposit. In Fig. 4.11, the

geometry of the layered deposit is shown. The finite element mesh

consists of 93 nodes and 24 elements. The excess pore pressures and

the settlements were evaluated for the following four different cases

(a) k1/k2 = 0.5, GI = G2

(b) k/k2 = 2.0, G1 = G2

(c) ~= k 2 , G /G = 0.5
1 2
(d) k1 = k2 , G1/G2 = 2.0
The results in the form of distribution of vertical and horizontal

excess pore pressures and variations in surface settlements for these four

cases have been plotted in Figs. 4.11 to 4.14. In presenting these

results, the adjusted time factor, T, has been taken to be as defined

by Lee (1973). When selecting the definition of the time factor for a

layered deposit it is logical to choose the total thickness of the

 90

x/a

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0.

0

f 0.0005

--
=
er
:::..
I!> 0.2 0.5
I-
""ll k /k =2.
.,, 1 2
I!>
s..
-
~

~
s..
0.4
0
Q., k /k
1 2
= o.s
Ill
Ill
Q)
u 0.6 /k
X " = 1.0
UJ 1 2

0.8

a) Horizontal Excess Pore Pressure

0.25 0.5 0.75 1.0 p/q
0
..,.....--k /k = 0.5
1 2
k /k
1 2
= 1.0
k /k =
1 2
1.0
£ T. = 0.0005
I
I
a~
2.0

-
X
a k G
cu
N

k G
3.0 2 2

tz
9a Ba
4.0

5.0
b) Vertical Excess Pore Pressure

FIG. 4.11 STRIP LOAD ON TWO-LAYERED SOIL DEPOSIT

 0.5

k /k • 0.5
l 2

:. -I
t!)
c,"
~
1.0

+,.l
s::
C,
I=
t k /k
l 2
= 2.0 /k
2
= 1.0

C)
..-4
+,.l
+,.l
C)
U)
1.5

2.0 -5
10 10- 4 10- 3 10- 2 10- 1 10°

Adjusted Time Factor f

Effect of Coefficient of Permeability on Settlement

FIG. 4.12 STRIP LOAD OM TWO•LAV,1:RED SOIL DEPOSIT

.....
1.0
 92

x/a
0.5 1.0

r::1' .
......
Cl,
C> o. 2
'"'
:,
ti)
It)
G /G
1 2
=
C>

'"'
0.
= 1.0
C> 0.4
'0"'
0.
ti)
ti)

u
C> = 0.5
><
·W 0.6

0.8
a). Horizontal Excess Pore Pressur~
0.25 0.5 0.75 1.0 p/q
0

1.0 G /G = G /G = 1.0
l 2
1 2

2.0

3.0

4.0

s.o ...,____,._____..___.......________....____

b) Vertical Excess Pore Pressure

FIG. 4.13 STRIP LOAD ON TWO-LAYERED SOIL-DEPOSIT

 0

0. 5

1.0

•-I
Cl
r:r
Cid

..,
i
..,..,
r-4 2.0
t>
Cl)
C /G G /G
1 2
l 2

3.0

,o-s 10 -'1 10-· 3 10- 2 IIJ-1 JOO

Adjusted Time Factor T

F:ffect of Shear Modulus on Settlement

FIG. 4.14 STRIP LOAD ON TWO-LAYERED SOIL DEPOSIT 1,0

C;I
 94

deposit, H, and the equivalent coefficient of consolidation of the

whole deposit C, in preference to the values of any particular layer.

Thus,
et
t = ( 4. 32)
H2

where,
H2
e =

(m1h1 +
m,h,) (_'.'_, + h,) ( 4. 33)
kl k2

in which

1 1
-m1 = Gi I (1-2-v l ) and -m = G2/(1-2-v 2) ( 4. 34)
2

where h 1 and h 2 are the thickness of the layers.

Since there are no available solutions, to compare these results,

the values of excess pore pressures and surface settlements for the

cases of k 1 = k 2 and G1 = G2 have been plotted in Figs. 4.11 to 4.14.

From these plots it can be seen that the curves for nonhomogeneous

cases are as expected compared to the homogeneous cases.

4.4 ELASTIC-PLASTIC ANALYSIS OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS

In the traditional approach to the analysis or design of a found-

ation system the pressure causing instability by shear failure of the

supporting soil is first determined. This pressure is commonly, and

somewhat erroneously, termed the ultimate bearing pressure. By

factoring the ultimate bearing pressure an allowable bearing pressure

with respect to stability is then established.

Since the methods of analysing the foundation stability are

based on the assumption that the soil is a rigid-plastic material, the

settlement of the foundation at the state of instability cannot be

 95

predicted. Further analyses, which consider the compressibility of

the supporting soil, are then required to establish the foundation
settlements. It is evident that the primary function of a foundation
system is to restrict the total and differential settlements to within
values which can be tolerated by the structure (Feld, 1957, Polshin and
Tokan, 1957) and it may be necessary to reduce the allowable bearing
pressure below the value calculated by factoring the ultimate bearing
pressure (Skempton, 1951).
Numerous foundation stability analyses, of varying rigour, have
been made since the publications of the well known approximate solutions
of Terzaghi (1943), and Meyerhof (1951). At the time these contribu-
tions were made the complexity of the basic problem led to some

approximations being made in these analyses but it is a tribute to the

instinct and ability of the pioneers in this field that more rigorous
bound plasticity solutions obtained by the use of associated (Sokolovski,

1956) and non-associated (Cox, 1963, Davis and Booker, 1971) flow rule
soil models have shown the original solutions are generally satisfactory
for practical purposes. There has also been numerous laboratory and
field experiments which show the validity of the predicted value of
ultimate bearing capacity (for example, Milovic, 1965).
One upper bound solution to the ultimate bearing pressure can be
obtained by the assumption of a single circular failure surface. This
approach was applied by Button (1953), Siva Reddy and Srinivasan (1967)
to the case of a foundation supported on a layered soil deposit.
These authors did not recognize that the values obtained were in
excess of the correct solution and should, by comparison with the
equivalent solution for a homogeneous supporting soil, be appropriately
reduced. Complete and rigorous solutions for the layered soil do not
appear to have been published.
 96

It is usual to calculate the immediate settlement of a foundation

by use of the linear elastic analysis. In recent years this method

has been also extended to the calculation of total final settlement

thus replacing the anomalous one dimensional analysis. The primary

problem with the use of the linear elastic theory is that the aonsta:nts

are stress dependent and mless this feature is taken into accollllt some

technique of averaging the values of the constants to obtain a single

representative value must be adopted. (Lambe and Whitman, 1969).

The finite element method provides the analytical technique for

incorporating in an analysis the variation of the constants with

stress level, and thus predicts a load-settlement relationship for the

foundation. The allowable bearing pressure and the ultimate bearing

pressure are then simply recorded as two particular points on this

curve, and there is no longer any need to adopt the basically different

analyses for ultimate bearing pressure and settlement.

In this section, an analysis is presented for the determination

of bearing capacities, using the finite element method. The present

analysis treats the soil as an elastic-plastic material obeying

Drucker's modified von Mises yield criterion. The nonlinear behaviour

of the soil is accounted for by using the initial stress method,

described in Chapter 2. This procedure results in a considerable

reduction in the computer time compared to the method given by Desai

and Reese (1970) which modifies the material, properties during the

load history. In order to illustrate the application of the proposed

method, the bearing capacities of shallow footings on single and two

layered clay deposit with varying ratios of depth to width of footing,

have been determined and compared with the available solutions.

Finite element model and yield ariterion
In the finite element idealization of the soil mass, isoparametric
 97

quadratic quadrilateral elements have been used. The basic formulation

of the isoparametric elements and the derivation of the element stiff-

ness matrix have been given by Zienkiewicz (1971) (See Appendix II).

For the elastic-plastic analysis, the soil is considered to be

elastic-perfectlyplasti½ obeying the modified von Mises yield criterion

proposed by Drucker and Prager (1952). This yield criterion is of the

form
k
f = cxJl + J2 2 = K (4.35)
+ cr + cr (4.36)
y z

and J2 = _!__ [(cr - cr ) 2 + (cr - cr ) 2 + (cr - cr ) 2 ] + T2 (4.37)

6 X y y Z Z X xy

where a and Kare constants depending on cohesion, c and friction,¢

of the material, defined by

a =
tan¢ (4.38)
k
(9+12 tan 2 ¢) 2

3c
K= (4.39)
(9+12 tan 2 ¢)~

The stress-strain relationship can then be determined using the

procedure given in section 2.2.

Discussion of results
Footings on a homogeneous layer
Fig. 4.15 shows the contact stress-immediate settlement curves for

a flexible, surface, strip footing supported on a homogeneous, iso-

tropic, soil layer of finite thickness. The case considered here was

previously analysed by Lambe and Whitman (1969). Their results,

obtained by a lumped parameter method for an elastic-plastic soil model,

are plotted in Fig. 4.15. This curve may be compared with non-linear

finite element analysis using the initial stress method for the

Drucker's failure criteria.

It is evident that there is close agreement between the lumped

 98

---6-- Lambe & ~\lhi tman ( 1969)

-+- von Mise·s }

Initial Stress Hethod
----0-- Drucker-Prager

1000 953

-
N
E
'
......
-
~
.::.! t:'
..... = 34.5 MN/m 2
vi 500
Vl
Q)
C = 167. 7 k~~/m
s.. 8.1 m
+->
V: \) = 0.3
I
0)
C:
.,... .....
s.. 8.1 m ~
ltl µ
Q)
a:i i:::
0
N
•.-1
i-..
0
:r::
0
z
o_______________________________
Fixed _
0.0 0. l 0.3

Settlement of Surface Point at G_ (m)

FIG. 4.15 COMPARISON OF BEARING STRESS - SETTLEMENT CURVES

 L

/Uniform Pressure (P)

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0

Lambe & Whitman (1969). Initial Stress Method

FIG. ~.16 COMPARISON OF YIELDED ZONE AT VARIOUS P/Py RATIO

1.0
1.0
 100

parameter solution and the finite element solution incorporating

Drucker's criterion. The predicted ultimate bearing pressure using

the Drucker criterion is 830 kN/m 2 which is to be compared with the

correct plasticity solution of 5.14 cu= 862 kN/m 2 , It should be

recognized that the finite element analysis leads to a lower bound

solution and it is evident that the solution obtained is an excellent

lower bound solution. The analysis using the von Mises' criterion is

included for comparative purposes and, as anticipated, leads to a

higher estimate of the ultimate bearing pressure. It is well estab-

lished that the relationship between the stresses at failure of

saturated clays subjected to undrained conditions can be satisfactorily

expressed by the Drucker criterion and thus the analysis using this

criterion is applicable to the present problem.

Fig. 4.16 shows the progressive development of the plastic

regions. The extent of the plastic region developed when a contact

pressure is applied to the surface has been plotted in this figure.

The pressure ratio shown is the ratio of the contact pressure, p, to the

contact pressure which produces first yield in the idealized supporting

soil, Py· Results obtained by the initial stress method are

compared with the lumped parameter solution and even with only nine

isoparametric elements shown the results are virtually identical.

This aspect has been considered in much more detail and it is clear

that only a limited number of isoparametric elements have to be used

to obtain a satisfactory accuracy.

The procedures discussed in this sectiorraredirectly applicable to

the analysis of shallow and deep footings, including piles (Valliappan,

Lee, and Boonlualohr, 1974). The ultimate bearing pressure for the

case of a rigid strip footing supported on a homogeneous, isotropic,

~ = 0, layer is shown in Fig. 4.17 as a function of the depth to width

 101

2000

,... 7.32 m

E = 206.9 MN/m 2 Smooth

Rigid
Boundary
Iv = o.3
1500

-
-
....
E
z:
~
Smooth Rigid Boundary

.,...
u
ttS
P.
ttS
Initial Stress Method
u Meyerhof (1951) Using Isoparametric
c·, One Layer Elements
C:
.,... with Side Friction
~ 1000
QJ
c.::i
QJ
.µ
ttS
E
.,...
...,
,....
=:> Initial Stress Method
Using Triangular
Elements

0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

0/13
FIG. 4.17 C0~1P.L\RISON OF CQt.1PUTED AND Tl-lE()RETICAL ULTIM/HE BEARING

CAP/\CITIES SIMSLE-LAYER SYSTEM, <P = 0 SOIL

 1900
1705

1500

-
N
E
.........
z
.:,,!.
....... = 1.0
V)
V)
I 1090
Q)
s...
.µ
VJ 1000
Ol 0.5
C
.,...
s...
ttl
Q)
co

~-
Q)
C;
ttl
s... ~·D/B=0.0
Q)
>
cc
500

o-
o.o- - - - - -0.5
- - - - - - 1.0
- - ' - - - - -1.5
- - - - - - -2.0
· - - - - - -2.5
-
Settlement at Centre Line of Footing (m x 10- 2 )
-
0
N

FIG. 4.18 AVERAGE REARING STRESS ~S SETTLEMENT CURVES, SI~IGLE-LAYER SYSTE~, ¢ = 0 SOIL
 103

•
ratio, Dj . The contact surface is considered to be free of shear
8
stress. The specific values of D;B used in the analysis were 0.5,

1. 0 and 2 .0. In Fig. 4.17 the values of ultimate bearing pressure

are compared with values previously obtained using a finite element

analysis (Lemcke, 1974) and with the results of the well known Meyerhof

analysis with and without side adhesion. Lemcke used, as a first trial

to the solution of this problem, triangular elements. The comparative

values obtained by use of the triangular and isoparametric elements

clearly show the errors which can arise, and the need for establishing

the accuracy of the results obtained with a specific type of element.

In the present analysis the sides of the foundation were considered

to be perfectly rough, that is, the vertical displacement of the soil

along the interface was equal to the settlement of the footing. The

horizontal interfacial displacements were made equal to zero.

Fig. 4.18 shows the contact pressure - immediate settlement

relationships for the four depth-width ratios.

Footings on a wo tayered system

The analysis can be extended to the case of a multi-layered soil

deposit. For the present purpose the analysis will be restricted to

a two layered system and the specific system examined is shown in Fig.

4.19. The upper and lower layers are considered to be of equal thick-

ness (2 .14 m), of modulus (207 kN/m2) and Poisson's ratio (0. 3), but

possessing undrained shear strengths of 121 kN/m 2 and 144 kN/m 2

respectively.

As discussed earlier, a simple upper bound solution to the

ultimate bearing capacity can be calculated by the use of a single

circular arc failure surface. This method (Button, 1953) was used

to establish the upper bound solution corresponding to a specific

depth-width ratio. In Fig. 4.19 these values are shown for a range
 104

7.32 m

2000
D = 0. 92 m
I
2.14 m
• E1, V1, C1 Smooth
Rigid
Boundary
2 .14 m

I Smooth Rigid Boundary

1500

E = E2 = 206.9 MN/m-2
.........
N
E v1 = v 2 = 0.3
........
z
.:,,(. c1 = 120.7 kN/m 2
.......
c 2 = 143.7 k:'l/m 2
•r-
u Initial Stress Hethod
C'O
P. Using Isoparametric
C'O
u Elements
gi 1000
•r-
s..
C'O
Q)
co Initial Stress Method
Q)
.µ Using Triangular Elements
•r-
C'O
E +

5001,_._ _ _ _ ___.._ _ _ _ _ __.__ _ _ _ _ _....__ _ _ _ __

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
D/B

FIG. 4.19 ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY VS DF.:PTH/ 1 /IOTH RATIO, THO-LAYER

SYSTEM, cp = 0
 2500

2065

2000
D/B = 2.0

........
N
E
........

-
~
z

C /)
1500
- - - - - - -
D/B = 1.0

=~.0,-----.J'-.-;z!;_.........,.:o,---rl')..O----
-----'.,.. ,...,.,..r~
C/)
QJ
s...
.µ
V)

O'l D/B = 0.5

C:
•r-
1000
s...
~
co I / /'
- ~ ...,.D/B=O.O
QJ
O'l
,0
s...
QJ
>
ct: 500

0
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Settlement at Centre Line of Footin~ (m x 10- 2 ) .....
0
U1
FIG. 4.20 AVERAGE BEI\RIMG STRESS VS SETTLE~1ENT CURVES, T'·!O-LAYER SYSTEr1, 4> = ') SOIL
TABLE 4.1. ~ = 0 SOIL

Ultimate Final Settle-

Bearing_ Ultimate ment as% of
Case D/B
Capacity Settlement Footing
fkN/m 2 ) (rn) Width

Single layer 0.0 666 0.0179 0.98

E = 206. 9 MN/rrt 0.5 867 0.0206 1.12
\) = 0.3
1.0 1090 0.0194 2.12
C = 120. 7 kN/ir. 2

= O. 92 m 2.0 1705· 0.0193 4.22

D

T~o layers 0.0 760 0.0298 1.63

E1 = E2 = 206.9 MN/m 2
. 0.5 1000 0. 0311 1. 70
"1 = "2 = 0.3
1.0 1320 0.0269 2.94
c1 = 120.7 kN/m 2
2.0 2065 0.0287 6.29
c2 = 143.7 kN/m 2
D = 0.92 m

--
0
°'
 107

of D;B from Oto 2.

It can be argued that the Button solution can be improved by

reducing the values slightly. The actual reduction is suggested

by the difference between the Button value for a surface strip footing

(5.50 cu) and the correct solution (5.14 cu), that is a reduction of

7 per cent. A further refinement which takes into account the influence

of depth in this reduction does not seem justified.

The influence of the type of element on the numerical results is

clearly seen by comparing the curves obtained by use of the triangular

and. isoparametric elements and shows the extreme importance of exam-

ining the accuracy in any particular finite element analysis.

Fig. 4.20 shows the contact pressure-settlement relationships for

the footing. The D/B ratios are 0, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0. Values of

the ultimate bearing pressure are shown.

Table 4.1 is a summary of the calculated values of ultimate

bearing capacity. The settlement and the settlement as a ratio of·

the footing width are included in this table. Results for both the

single layer example (Fig. 4.15) and the two layer example are given.

4.5 CONCLUDING REMARKS

The following conclusions can be drawn from the studies of the

three soil structures, presented in this chapter.

Settlement analysis of pile in layePed soil

The finite element analysis provides the basic tool for analysing

the behaviour of a pile in a layered soil. Although the present

analysis has been confined to consider only the case of an isotropic

two layer system the analysis is equally applicable to more complex

situations involving anisotropy, non-linearity and a multi-layered

deposit.
 108

The influence factor for calculating the settlement of a semi-

rigid pile is presented. When a limited number of parameters define

the problem, the finite element program can be used to provide tabulated

data or graphical results for the relevant ranges of the parameters but

this should not be attempted for more complex situations. In the

latter case individual analyses have to be carried out for the

specific parameters.

The results of the finite element analysis using isoparametric

quadrilateral elements compare well with other published results for

rigid piles, but the accuracy of the results obtained to date for

compressible piles has not been resolved.

It is clearly established that piles should be driven to, or

slightly into, a stiffer llllderlying stratum if a reduction in settle-

ment is required relative to the settlement of a pile supported in

the upper soil layer.

Finite element analysis of aonsolida.tion problems

The finite element analysis of consolidation of saturated elastic

media, using the isoparametric quadrilateral elements, has been

successfully developed. In this analysis, both the displacement and

the pore pressure fields of the element are assumed to be quadratic,

and good agreement between the finite element solution and the

analytical solution can be observed.

The application of the method to both homogeneous and nonhomog-

eneous soil deposits has been illustrated. Since the shape of the

time-settlement curves for a two layered system is geometrically

similar to that of single homogeneous layer, it may not be necessary

to analyse the whole spectrum of cases. But for a system with more

than two layers it may be necessary to analyse each case individually.

 109

Elastic-plastic analysis of sha.llow foundations

The finite element method has been applied to the analysis of a

strip footing on a homogeneous soil deposit and on a layered soil

deposit. Isoparametric elements were used in the initial stress

method to predict the contact pressure-inunediate settlement relationship

and the ultimate bearing pressure. A comparison of the latter

pressure with the correct plasticity solution for a deep homogeneous

layer (862 kN/m 2 ) showed that the (lower bound) finite element

solution predicted an ultimate bearing pressure (830 kN/m 2 ) slightly

below the correct value.

Major errors can be introduced by the use of triangular elements.

A detailed investigation has shown that an adequate accuracy can be

achieved with a limited nwnber of isoparametric elements.

Use of the finite element analysis leads to a complete contact

pressure-settlement relationship and thus obviates the need for

considering stability and settlement separately.

Sample computation times are to be found in Appendix IV.

 110

Chapter 5

ELASTIC-PLASTIC TORSION OF ANISOTROPIC BARS

5.1 INTRODUCTION

The analytical solutions of St. Venant torsion problem based

either on the theory of elasticity or the theory of plasticity, for

simple cross-sections can be readily found in the literature. However,

in many practical engineering problems the torsional effects have to

be investigated for structural members involving irregular cross-

sections, multiply connected regions, made of nonhomogeneous and

anisotropic materials possessing elastic-plastic rather than elastic

or plastic characteristics and probably for strain-hardening plasticity

rather than perfect plasticity. It is almost impossible to obtain

closed form solutions for the problem incorporating all the above-

mentioned complexities. Most solutions available for the torsion

problems which include most of the complexities have therefore been

obtained using numerical techniques such as finite difference and

finite element methods. Valliappan and Pulmano (1974) provided

elastic solutions for the case of nonhomogeneous, anisotropic and

multiply connected sections using the finite element method. The

various other elastic solutions available for some complex cases have

been referred to by Valliappan and Pulmano (1974).

Among the numerical solutions available for the elastic plastic

torsion, one of the earliest was by Shaw (1944) for the case of a

hollow rectangular section using the finite difference technique.

The other elastic-plastic solutions have been published by Hodge and

co-workers and Yamada and co-workers. Herakovich and Hodge (1969)

adopted quadratic programming and finite element method for analysing

multiply connected sections. Stout and Hodge (1970) used a stress

 111

function approach combined with finite difference technique to solve

multiply connected sections. The aforementioned solutions of Hodge

and co-workers were however obtained for perfectly plastic materials.

Yamada et al. (1968) treated the elastic-plastic torsion based on the

finite element displacement formulation. Later, Yamada et al. (1972)

used a hybrid stress model for the elastic-plastic analysis of St.

Venant torsion problems which included anisotropic and strain-hardening

properties as well as multiply connected regions. Their finite element

formulation was based on the simple triangular element, and hence both

stress function and warping function were considered to be linear in

an element.

In this chapter, an isoparametric mixed element for torsion has

been developed on the basis of Hellinger-Reissner principle. For

the elastic-plastic analysis, unlike the tangent stiffness approach

adopted by Yamada et al. (1972), the initial stress approach as

described in Chapter 2 has been used. The element formulation is

given in a general form so that it can be applied to any isoparametric

element. However, the numerical examples have been solved using the

isoparametric linear element.

The work discussed here has been progressively published as it

was completed and this particular section of the work was presented

in the paper EZastopZastic Torsion of Anisotropic Bars by Boonlualohr

and Valliappan, published in Journal of the Engineering Mechanics

Division, ASCE, Vol. 102, No. EM6, December, 1976, pp. 995-1008.

5.2 ELEMENT FORMULATION

In this formulation the Hellinger-Reissner variational principle

described in Chapter 2 is used. Two independent field variables are

therefore assumed, i.e.

 112

(5.1)
and

(5. 2)

where {o} is the stress vector, {S} is the vector containing coefficient
e
of stress function polynomial and [p] is the matrix containing appro-

priate derivatives of the stress function; {u} is the displacement

component vector, {qe} is the nodal displacement vector and [N] is

the shape function matrix (obtained from Appendix II).

For the present case of torsion problems, the stress function can

be assumed as

(5.3)

Thus
{o} a4>
= T
yz = -ax (5.4)

T
a4>
xz ay

= -1 0 -y -2x O
[ (5.5)
0 1 X O -2y.

= [P] {S} (5.6)

(5. 7)

In Eq. (5.3) the number of terms of S depend on the degree of

accuracy required in the evaluation of shear stresses. Moreover, it

is desirable to use only sufficient terms in order to have comparable

accuracy for both shear stresses and warping displacements. Thus,

for isoparametric linear quadrilateral element (See Appendix II), only

six terms in Sare required since this will give linear variation in

shear stress within an element, which is comparable to linear variation

in displacements.
 113

Only one displacement component is assumed for a torsion problem,

i.e. the warping displacement. Thus Eq. (5.2) can be rewritten as

(5 .8)

where w is the warping displacement component, {N} is the shape

function vector.
The strain vector{£} can then be obtained by differentiating
Eq. (5.8), thus

{d =
aw
-+ 0x (5. 9)
=
ay
aw
ax - 0y

= (5 .10)

where
(5 .11)

in which w1 , w2 , w3 , w4 are the nodal warping displacements and 0

is the angular twist per unit length of the bar.

The stress-strain relationship can be given as

{cr} = [D]{d (5.12)

or
{d = [s] {cr} (5.13)
in which

:J
[D] = (5.14)
[:yz
and
[sJ = [or 1 (5.15)

= (5.16)
[1/Gyz
0 :/Gxz]
 114

where G and G are shear modulii.

yz xz
Further steps in the formulation are the same as given in Chapter

2 for the mixed model (Eq. (2.72) to Eq. (2.87)). In this application

{R£} due to initial strain is not considered, thus the formulation

reduces to
[K] {q} = - {R } + {Q}
cr (5 .17)

in which

[K] = i: [G]T [Hr 1 [G] (5 .18)

n

= i: f [B]T {cr } dV (5 .19)

0
n Vn

{Q} = i:f . {N}T {T} dS (5. 20)

n s
cr
where
[G] = (5. 21)

[H] = f [P]T [S] [P] dV (5. 22)

Vn

and

= (5. 23)

where {cr} is the initial stress vector, {T} is the prescribed

0

traction vector.

Eq. (5.20) can also be expressed as

= M] (5.24)

in which Q1 , Q2 , Q3 are the nodal shear forces and M represents the

applied torque.
Boundary Element
At the boundaries, the value of the stress function~ should be

zero or constant. In the stress function approach, the zero value for
 115

Boundary Line Y = aX+b

Y--Yk
a = _,J"--'_
Xj-Xk

FIG. 5. l EQUATIONS FOR BOUNDARY ELEMENT

 116

~ can be easily accommodated whereas the constant value which happens

to be the case for multiply-connected regions, cannot be easily

accounted for (Valliappan and Pulmano (1974)). For these situations,

the proposed mbred model is more advantageous, since the constant

value for the stress function along the boundary can be substituted in

the formulation itself.

Referring to Fig. 5.1, let the equation of the line j-k.

along the boundary be

y = ax+b (5.25)

Substituting this into the stress function given by

(5.26)

and equating it to the constant value of c.

C = f3 0 + f3 1 x + f3 2 (ax+b) + f3 3 x(ax+b) + f3 4 x 2 + f3 5 (ax+b) 2 (5. 27)

Rearranging the factors of x and x 2 , Eq. (5.27) can be written

as

(5. 28)

In order to satisfy Eq. (5.28) uniquely for any value of x

between x 2 and x 3, the coefficient terms of x and x 2 must vanish.

'Ihus,

f3 1 + af3 2 + bf3 3 + 2abf3 5 = 0 (5.29)

af33 + f34 + a2f3s = 0 (5. 30)

Solving Eqs. (5.29) and (5.30), the values of f3 1 and f3 4 can be

obtained as

= -af3 2 (5.31)

= -af3 3 (5. 32)

 117

Substituting these values in the stress function and differ-

entiating, the stress values can be determined as

[: : l.[- !i ]·[: (b+2ax-y) (2ab+2a 2 x)l

X 2y
(5. 33)

= [P] {B} (5. 34)

It should be noted that the values of a and bin Eq. (5.34) can

be easily obtained from the equation of line j-k. However, for the

boundary along a line parallel toy axis (x 2 = x 3 ) the value of a

becomes infinity and hence Eq. (5.34) cannot be used as such. For

this case, a new expression in terms of 8 1 , B3 and B4 can be obtained

using x =din the stress function, thus

= [P] {B}

(5. 35)

5. 3 ELASTIC-PLASTIC ANALYSIS

Yield criterion
In the particular case of St. Venant torsion problem, Hill's

anisotropic yield criterion Eq. (3.1) can be reduced to

= a- =
k
F (3 T2 + 3 Cl T2 ) 2 (5. 36)
N
~55 yz ee xz

where cr is the effective stress, ct 55 and ct 66 are the anisotropic

parameters.

Anisotropic Parameters
The initial anisotropic parameters can be obtained by conducting

two independent shear tests and letting the shear stress in the
 118

direction other than the one under consideration to be zero in the

yield criterion, thus

- 2
Cl5 5 = !_ ( Oo) (5. 37)
3 T
oyz

and
1
a 2
(l6 6 = 3 (_.£.)
T
(5. 38)
oxz

where T and T are the initial yield stresses under shear and cr
oyz oxz o
is the initial effective stress adopted from one of the two stresses

T and T
oyz oxz
For example, in the case of isotropic materials a 55 = a 66 and

hence

ao = 13Toyz or 1'3Toxz (5.39)

The subsequent parameters for the case of the work-hardening

materials can be obtained using the concept of plastic work done in a

load increment as given in Chapter 3. The new parameters can be

written as
(12
= (5. 40)
3[(G /E) (a 2 - a2) T2 ]
pyz p oyz

(5 .41)
3[(G /E) (cr 2
pxz p
- 0)
o
+ T2
oxz
]

where a- is the current effective stress, E is the slope of effective

p
stress - effective plastic strain and G , G are slopes of shear
pyz pxz
stresses.

Stress-strain relationship
The incremental plastic strains can be obtained by differentiating

the yield criterion given by Eq. (5.36) as

 119

=
~[CX.55
a
Cl
Tyz
66
T
l
xz (5 .42)

The elastic-plastic matrix of Eq. (2.30) can then be readily obtained

using {dEP} in Eq. (5.42).

In an elastic-plastic analysis, after an element has yielded,

the elastic-plastic matrix [D ] of Eq. (2.30) has to be used to relate

ep
the incremental stresses and strains instead of the elasticity matrix

[D] in Eq. (5.12). This will involve computing the stiffness matrix

for that element and thus solving the whole set of simultaneous

equations once again. Instead, various iterative techniques can be

used to inc·orporate the effects of yielding without modifying the

stiffness matrix. Here, the initial stress iterative technique as

described in Chapter 2 has been used for this purpose.

5.4 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES

EquiZatePaZ tnanguZaP seation
In order to demonstrate the accuracy of the proposed method and

to show the advantage of using the isoparametric element, the torsion

of an equilateral triangular section with isotropic properties was

considered. An exact solution as well as finite element solutions

based on displacement model and hybrid model are available to this

problem for E = 0. Due to symmetry, only a sixth of a triangle as

p
shown in Fig. 5.2 was used for the analysis. The material properties

are the same as used by Yamada et al. (1972) and are given in Table 5.1.

Fig. 5.3 shows the curve for the twisting moment versus the angle

of twist per unit length. The maximum twisting moment of 47,580 Nm

obtained by this analysis compares well with the theoretical torque of

49,050 Nm for fully plastic state.

 120

>-
er
t-
w
:I
:I
>-
V)
I

Lt..
0
w
z
-'

0"'-------------~x

FIG. 5.2 GEOMETRY AND FINITE ELEMENT MESH FOR TRIANGULAR

SECTION
 490.5 FULLY PL AST IC TORQUE
C\I 5
0
.- -475.8PRESENT SOLUTION--:;:_-:;:_+-=+=-+--r--:p=-""T-+-+
+-+-
- +__,,,,.
X
+.........
E
4 /
z
I /
-..
:I 3 I
....
z
w
:I 2
0
~
(!)

-....z 1
-
'1)

~
....
0 1 2 3 -4 5
ANGLE OF TWIST PER UNIT LENGTH 8 (rod./mm)x1O- 4

FIG. 5.3 TWISTING MOMENT VS ANGLE OF TWIST FOR TRIANGULAR SECTION ....N
....
- -20
0 '
,,
=t

-
)<

---,
~"-

-
"'
Q.
2'.

t-J
N
)(
-4
+"+~
V)
-6 +~----+
----+---+---~ -
V)
I.LI
0::
I- -+
V) + PRESENT SOLUTION
er
4:(
-6 EXACT SOLUTION
w
3:
V)

A B

FIG. 5.4. SHEAR STRESS DISTRIBUTION--ALONG AB TRIANGULAR SECTION

.,_
N
N
 123

TABLE 5.1 MATERIAL PROPERTIES

PROBLEMS MATERIAL PROPERTIES

Equilateral Triangle G = 79106. 2

Ho 11 ow Square a = 244.9
0

Hollow Splined Shaft E = 0.0

p
Circle (Isotropic)

Circle (Anisotropic) G
xz = Gyz = 79106.2
T
oyz = 134.8
T = 148.3
oxz
a = 256.-8
0

E
p = 0.0

Nonhomogeneous Material 1:

square with G
xz = Gyz = 79106.2
central hole T
oyz = 134.8
T
oxz = 148.3
a- = 256.8
0

E
p = 0.0

Material 2:

Gxz = Gyz = 26365.5

T = 93 .1
oyz
T = 102.8
oxz

= 178.2
= 0.0

Note: Stress unit is given in MPa

 t

ct - I I - +·R=o:ift] )2mm
_ f 5·2 mm

[7 l-~-5-2+-~m-.
~-_J1' =-J
~7-2mm ~ ,

>
Q: I

A ,
~·=--1-+--L-
1-
w 4..
,~
-;_~~
u. k:: I ~
oI I ,~ ':,
.o
W' "~

z ,~
:JI I I I I() v

FIG. 5.5 GEOMETRY AND FINITE ELEMENT MESH FOR HOLLOW SQUARE SECTION ....N
.i:,,.
 12 - - - . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
---.-----~+-+-+-+-+-+-t::,+-+-+-+-
10.9.l PRESENJ /+
SOLUTIO~
10

-
E

z
I 8 II
-..
:I 6
1--
z
w
:I - + - PRESENT SOLUTION
0 4
~ ~ HODGE (QUADRATIC PROGRAMMING)
(!)
z
--~~ 2 t-.
....

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
ANGLE OF TWIST PER UNIT LENGTH: 9 (rad/mm)x10- 4
....
FIG. 5.6 TWISTING MOMENT VS ANGLE OF TWIST FOR HOLLOW SQUARE SECTION N
VI
 20------------------------

~B

0
.- 10

-><
It,

-
0..
:E:

Cl)
o-- e ,ay = 1-2
t,J 5 -tr- e I ey = 1-a
818y=2·6
- a - 8/ 0y =4·2
OI - + - FIRST YIELD ( 8/0y = 1·0) I
A B

FIG. 5.7 DISTRIBUTION OF SHEAR STRESSES FOR HOLLOW SQUARE SECTION

....N
°'
 127

The shear stress T along the line AB is plotted in Fig. 5.4 and
xz
it can be observed that the present numerical solution agrees remark-

ably with the exact solution. It is worth mentioning that the

curve obtained by the present method using isoparametric quadrilateral

element is smooth when compared to the solution obtained by Yamada

et al. (1972) where the curve was represented by steps due to the use

of triangular elements, which is to be expected.

HoZZow square section

A hollow square section was investigated so as to assess the

applicability of the proposed model to multiply connected regions.

The isotropic material properties, (Table 5.1), and perfectly plastic

condition were assumed.

The dimensions of the section analysed and the finite element

mesh are shown in Fig. S.S. The plot of the twisting moment versus

the angle of twist per unit length is shown in Fig. 5.6, and it can be

seen from the plot that the present solution is very close to that

obtained by Herakovich and Hodge (1969) using quadratic prograilDiling.

Fig. 5.7 shows the distribution of the shear stress along the

line AB for various increments of angle of twist. These stress

distributions are almost the same as those obtained by Yamada et al.

(1972) and Stout and Hodge (1970) and hence their curves have not been

reproduced in this figure.

HoZZow splined shaft

A more complex (geometrically) problem of multiply connected

region is a hollow splined shaft which was analysed for elastic

torsion by Shaw (1944) using finite difference method. In order to

show the versatility of the finite element method, the hollow shaft

was analysed for elastic-plastic torsion using the mixed model

developed in this chapter.

 128

'
R/3

--
R=18mm

FIG. 5.8 GEOMETRY OF HOLLOW SPLINED SHAFT

 129
t-
i.I...
~
V)
Cl
-
I.JJ
z
J
c..
V)
~
....1
J
0
::c
0:::
0
LL..
::c
V)
Lu
:::iE:
t-
z
I.JJ
:::iE:
I.JJ
J
I.JJ
-
I.JJ
t-
z:
.....
LL.
tt,
.
.
-
(!J
LL.
 ,

/_/-
/_/-
_/_/
_/ 8/8y===2·4

3·8 ,~ 1·2

/_/ 1·6

L/-
FIG. 5.10 SPREAD OF PLASTIC ZONES FOR HOLLOW SPLINED SHAFT
....
~
0
 2
0
T""
---------------~----
1844.3
-+-+-+-+-+

-
X -+
+-+- + .
+,,,.
//
E 1·5 /+'
I
~ /+
-
:I I~
a:.:.
z 1·0
w
:I
I
0
~
C)
z 0·5
1--
cf)

~
1--

0 1 2 3
ANGLE OF TWIST PER UNIT LENGTH: 8 (rad./mm)x10-4

FIG. 5.11 TWISTING MOMENT VS ANGLE OF TWIST FOR HOLLOW SPLINED SHAFT
....
....
~
0 100 200
+ - - ~ STRESS SCALE AT GAUSSIAN POINT
( MPa )

~~~~~ 33,20
---e>- ELASTO

.-,,_._ ~
139. 3'l..._v.
130,26
y 43. 19
-+
\ ~--
\-· --.

~/-~ C +
\==-+
~
I::::=:
135.45 ----+ - - 101,47
0 )( - - - - -

FIG. 5 .12 DISTRIBUTION OF SHEAR STRESS FOR HOLLOW SPLINED SHAFT ....
~
Iv
 133

The dimensions of the shaft are shown in Fig. 5.8 whereas the

finite element mesh is shown in Fig. 5.9. The material properties

are given in Table 5.1. Due to symmetry, only one-twelfth of the

section was considered for the analysis. The development of plastic

zones for various values of 0/0 is plotted in Fig. 5.10. The curve
y
for the twisting moment versus the angle of twist per unit length is

shown in Fig. 5.11 and it can be observed that the value of maximum

twisting moment obtained for the section at the convergence of the

solution is 1.84 x 10 6 Nm. The shear stress at the Gaussian

points of the elements near the external and internal boundaries of the

hollow shaft are plotted in Fig. 5.12 for both elastic and elastic-

plastic solutions. No comparison of the present solutions with the

results of Shaw (1944) has been made since Shaw's results are only

for elastic analysis.

Circular seation
The effect of anisotropy in plastic torsion can be shown by

considering a circular section which was analysed both by Hill (1950)

and Yamada et al. (1972). For the sake of comparison the section was

considered to be made of perfectly plastic material and the material

properties assumed are given in Table 5.1. Both Hill and Yamada et

al. used an elliptic yield criterion whereas in the present analysis

the anisotropic parameters were used in the yield criterion given by

Eq. (5.36). The ratio of yield stresses (1.1) in shear was kept to

be the same as Hill.

Due to symmetry, only a quarter of the section was analysed.

The finite element mesh is shown in Fig. 5.13 and the development of

plastic regions is plotted in Fig. 5.14, which is similar to the one

obtained by Yamada et al. It can be observed that the non-yielded

zones form an elliptical shape, which is the result of the particular

 134

t
I

- - - - ----- - - - - _....__ ___,_ - - - <t

,,._ _ _ _ _ _ 10 mm _ _ _ _ _____.. I

FIG. 5.13 FINITE ELEMENT MESH FOR CIRCULAR SECTIOM

 135

0
0
0 0
0
0
0
2·2
0
0
2·6 1·6
0 0

0
1·4
0
0
0 1·2
0
9/8y=3·0 0
0 0
• 0 1·0

L
0 0
0 0
0
0 0
¢_

FIG. 5 .14 SPREAD OF PLASTIC ZONES FOR CIRCULAR SECTION

-
~
)( 3
- 294:.30 ISOTROPIC
-------------+~+ ° +r-ttr+r+1r+
-
E
290. 38
ANISOTROPIC
.....,,¾-t -,;+o+
/'1°
0-f
0

'
z:
/
_2
:I
..
I-
z - + - ISOTROPIC
w
:I
0 1 o ANISOTROPIC
:I
(!)
z
~
~
I- -
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
ANGLE OF TWIST PER UNIT LENGTH 9(rad/mm)x10-L

FIG, 5.15 TWISTING MOMENT VS ANGLE OF TWIST FOR CIRCULAR SECTION ....
~

°'
 137

anisotropic yield criterion used in the analysis. Fig. 5.15 shows the
curve for the twisting moment versus the angle of twist per unit length.

The maximum twisting moments obtained both for isotropic and aniso-

tropic cases compare well with the results of Yamada et al. and also

the value of 2.904 x 10 4 Nm obtained for anisotropic case is very

close to the value of 2.943 x 10 4 Nm given by Hill's approximate

solution. Even though the effect of anisotropy in this case is

negligible, it would be pronounced if the section is made of material

with considerable anisotropic characteristics.

TABLE 5.2. COMPARISON OF SHEAR STRESSES

NONHOMOGENEOUS SQUARE SECTION WITH CENTRAL HOLE

T
Max. Shear Stresses (GSa)
No. of Elements Reference
Point A Point B Point C

42 ( 4 node) 1.460 0.876 1.021 Present analysis

18 (12 node) 1.468 0.905 1.046 Valliappan &Pulmano

(1974)

16 (8 node) 1.422 0.833 1.098 Noor &Anderson

(1975)

Note: a is the width of the square section.

Nonh.omogeneous squaPe section uJith aentPal hole

Fig. 5.16 shows a nonhomogeneous square section with circular

cut out at the centre. Only half a section was analysed due to

symmetry. Region 1 has a shear modulus which is three times that of

region 2. Within both regions anisotropic parameters were adopted

for the yield stresses as given in Table 5.1. This problem has
 3---------------------..-----r----r-----
264.9
---
~2453 -- - - - - - -
ISOTROPIC
-
ANISOTROPIC - +-+-+-..--+-+--:;=.+=+-+-+~-+-
- - - - r-+- - ~ ~~0:-
~
N +: - -
0
~
1 0-
~

-
)(
+.

C
E 2
z

-
I

:I
I
10mm
2
MATERrAL MATERIAL
1

t-
z
w
:I
0
:I
l_~.I --A
---'----1~--'---------
X

~5mmi1c, mm ~B
(!)
1 ... 20 mm _ _ _ _:J_,.
z
t- - + - ISOTROPIC
V)

~ - o - ANISOTROPIC
I-

....
t,,:i
00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10
ANGLE OF TWIST PER UNIT LENGTH: 9 ( rad/mm )><10- 4
1=1r, ~ 1 f; NnNl-lnMnr,J:"NJ:'nl I<:: <::nllAQJ:' <::J:"rTrnN WTTI-I ("J:'NTRAI I-Int J:'
 139

previously been solved elastically using isoparametric elements on

the basis of both stress function formulation (Valliappan and Pulmano,

1974), and mixed element approach (Noor and Anderson, 1975). For

the elastic analysis, the shear stresses obtained at the points A, B

and C in Fig. 5.16 compared very well with the results given by

Noor and Anderson (1975), Valliappan and Pulmano (1974). The

comparison is shown in Table 5.2. Fig. 5.16 also shows the curve

for the twisting moment versus the angle of twist per unit length.

The difference in the values of the maximum torque between isotropic

and anisotropic cases can be noted.

5.5 CONCLUDING 'REMARKS

The elastic-plastic solutions to St. Venant torsion problem

using mixed finite element, have been deuetoped, The formulation

is based on modified Hellinger-Reissner principle and is applicable

to isotropic and anisotropic materials as well as to simple and

multiply connected sections. The results of the various examples

solved indicate the accuracy of the method and the advantage of using

the mixed model over the stress function approach. The isoparametric

linear quadrilateral element has been used in the analysis. However,

no difficulty is envisaged in using other higher order elements for

further research.
 140

Cha.pter 6
ELASTIC-PLASTIC CONTACT PROBLEMS

6.1 INTRODUCTION

In the analysis of the distortions of two bodies progressively

pressed together, it is necessary to consider the nonlinearity intro-

duced by the increasing area of contact. It is well recognized that

even linear elastic bodies manifest such non-linear behaviour as shown

by the classical theory of Hertz (1896) who developed solutions for

bodies composed of linear elastic materials and with simplified

geometry. It is not surprising to find that several investigators

have applied the finite element method to this problem (Wilson and

Parsons, 1970, Chan and Tuba, 1971, Scholes and Strover, 1971, Yamada,

1971, Ohte, 1973, Tsuta and Yamaji, 1973, Francavilla and Zienkiewicz,

1975), but these analyses have been restricted to a consideration of

a linear elastic material except the elastic-plastic analysis of

Hardy et al. (1971). In the latter analysis one of the bodies is

considered to be rigid. In the more generalised case analysed by

the author plastic distortion of both bodies is also considered.

The immediate need to solve this specific problem was initiated

by a new technique of column construction developed by a Sydney

consultant (Woolacott, Hale, Corlett and Jumikis) in which the junction

between two segments of the columns of a IS-storey framed building

were connected by a lenticular steel disk designed to distort plastic-

ally as the load increased. Each column segment was a six metres long

mild steel billet 30 x 30 cm in cross-section.

In this chapter a technique is developed to analyse this problem

by considering an elastic-plastic model of material behaviour. The

technique described was found to be effective and particularly suitable

 141

for the contact pressure problem as demonstrated by numerical

examples discussed in this chapter.

6.2 CONTINUITY CONDITIONS BETWEEN CONTACT SURFACES

When two deformable bodies are pressed together the contact area

will be controlled by the external load and the deformation properties

of the material. Thus the criterion to be satisfied is that the

compressive stresses over the contact area are common to both bodies

and the deformations normal to the contact area are also common.

Two extreme contact conditions can be recognized, viz.

(l) smooth ease where the surfaces are assumed frictionless,

thus shear stresses are zeros over the contact surfaces

(2) Pough ease where it is imagined that no slip takes

place on the two surfaces and the tangential displace-

ments are common to both bodies.

In fact, the real situations are intermediate between these two

extremes and can also be modelled by the use of Coulomb's statie

fnetionaZ PeZationship. This situation may be termed fPietionaZ

ease.
DispZaeement eompatibitity of eontaet sUPfaees
If 6va and 6vb are the incremental displacements of a pair of

potential contact points in the direction normal to the contact surface

a and b respectively (See Fig. 6.1), then the combined movement of

this pair of points can be defined as

= (6 .1)

Now if oV is the gap between this pair of potential contact points,

then the combined movement, 6v, can not go beyond the space of this
C

gap, thus
oV - 6v C > 0
-
(6. 2)
 142

X
a) Convention for positive dis~lacement pair

X
b) Convention for positive reaction pair

FiG. 6.1 DISPLACE1·1ENTS MID RE/\CTIONS AT A PAIR OF Pcn:~!TIJ\L cm!TJ\CT POPITS

 143

As load increased, oV must also be adjusted for the value of current

gap. Thus oV can be defined as
= 0 - V (6. 3)
0 C

where o0 is the initial gap before any deformation and v C is the

total combined normal movement at this pair of points.

Similarly, the combined movement in the tangential direction can

be defined by

tiu = (6 .4)
C

where tiua and ti~ are the incremental displacements of this pair of

points in the tangential direction on the surface a and b respectively.

For the rough aase, the tangential displacements are common to

both bodies over the contact surfaces and therefore the combined

tangential movement tiu C must vanish, thus

= 0 (6. 5)

Statia equiUbriwn of aontaat surfaaes

The normal and tangential components of reactions between the

two contact surfaces must be in equilibrium. This condition can be

given by

tip = (6 .6)
a

and (6. 7)

where tipa• tipb are the normal incremental reactions on the surface a

and b of a pair of points, and tiqa• tiqb are the tangential components

(See Fig. 6.1)

The normal components of reactions given in Eq. (6.6) must always

be aompressive, i.e.

p + tip < 0 (6. 8)

For the smooth aase, the tangential components of reactions in

 144

Eq. (6.7) are reduced to zero. Thus,

= 0 (6.9)

Statia frictional relationship

In the case of frictional slip the tangential components of

reactions must be determined from the normal components of reactions

by the use of Coulomb's statia frictional relationship, i.e.

q + ~q I ~ µ IP+ ~P I (6.10)

where I q + ~q I and Ip+ ~p I represent magnitudes of the tangential

and normal components of total reactions,µ is the static frictional

coefficient.

6.3 FLEXIBILITY MATRIX FOR COMBINED MOVEMENTS AND REACTIONS OF

CONTACT PAIRS
In order to relate the combined movements in the tangential and

normal direcfion at the pairs of potential contact points to the

reactionsacting on these pairs, the flexibility matrix of following

relationship can be formed.

[c] {~p} = {~u} (6 .11)

m m

where [C] is the flexibility matrix, {~p} is vector containing values

m
of equal and opposite pair of reactions on the potential contact

surface, given by

T
{~p} = [ .... ~q ~p .... ] (6.12)
m

where ~q and ~p represent the tangential and normal pair of reactions,

defined by
(6 .13)

~p = (6.14)

{~u} is vector containing corresponding values of the combined

m
 145

movements at each pair of contact points, given by

{fi.u }T = (6.15)
m

FoT'rtlation of [C] matrix

By applying a pair of unit forces (equal and opposite) in the

tangential and normal direction to each pair of potential contact

points in turn, various columns of [C] can be obtained from the

combined movements at each of the potential contact pair, thus

C(I,J) = fi.u (I) (6.16)

m
for

fi.p (J) = 1 (6 .17)

m

where J is the position at which the pair of unit forces is applied,

I is the position of the pair at which the combined movement fi.u or fi.v
C C

is determined.

[C] matrix for smooth case

For this case, the tangential components of reactions on the

surfaces are zeros, thus only the normal components of reactions and

combined displacements need to be included in {fi.p} and {ti.u }. [C]

m m
matrix is then modified accordingly.
[C] matrix for rough case
For this case, both tangential and normal components are necessary

and thus [C] remains tmmodified as in Eq. (6.11).

[c] matrix for frictional case

For this case, two types of reactions can occur, i.e. those at the

pair of potential contact points where there is no frictional slip and

those at the pair where frictional slip occurs.

At the pair where slip occurs, the Coulomb's static frictional

relationship as given in Eq. (6.10) must be used. The tangential

component of reaction is now a function of the normal component of

 146

reaction and must therefore be expressed in terms of ~p. This can be

done by the expressions derived in Appendix III. By substituting these

expressions into the flexibility relationship, the modified coefficients

of [c] can be obtained. In effect, the coefficients of [c] for the

tangential components are eliminated and the coefficients for the

normal components are modified to include frictional terms due to

the tangential components.

Those at the pair where there is no frictional slip, the

coefficient of [c] matrix remains, however, unaltered. Thus [c]

matrix is to be modified according to the slipping conditions of the

contact surfaces for the frictional case.

6.4 ITERATION PROCESS FOR CONTACT CONFIGURATION AND REACTIONS

Since the combined displacements and reactions in the flexibility

relationship of Eq. (6.11) are both unknowns, systematic trial and

error process needs to be used to determine the correct contact

configuration for a particular applied load. The iteration process

used in this chapter starts by a trial {~u} obtained from the

m
overlapping of displacements of the potential contact pairs. Eq. (6.11)

is then used to solve for the reactions {~p} required to correct

m
this overlapping displacement by

{~p} = (6.18)
m

Once {~p} is obtained the continuity conditions from section

m
6.2 ar~used to check for any tensile normal components and any

tangential components which do not obey Coulomb's static frictional

relationship. If normal component of reactions is in tension then this

component must be set to zero. If tangential component of reaction

does not satisfy Coulomb's static frictional relationship then [C]

 147

matrix must be modified accordingly for the slipping case. The new set

of {~p} is then used to calculate {~u} according to the new modified

m m
[c] matrix. The process is then repeated until all the assumed

continuity conditions before and after iteration are the same. The

correct contact configuration and reactions are then obtained. The

contact reactions, which are normal and tangential to the surfaces,

are then resolved to the global co-ordinates and reapplied together

with the applied load increment to obtain incremental stresses, strains

and displacements for that particular load increment.

It is to be noted here that the flexibility matrix of Eq. (6.11)

includes only the necessary potential contact pairs and thus this

matrix is actually a small matrix with dimension equal to the number

of degrees of freedom of the assumed contact points. Solution of

Eq. (6.18) therefore does not take up too much computation time.

Moreover, the number of iterations required to obtain converged con-

figuration is not as large as one would expect all combinations of

possibility to be. It is usual to obtain a solution within four or

five or perhaps less iterations.

6.5 PROPOSED TEOINIQUE FOR ELASTIC-PLASTIC SOLUTION OF TWO BODIES

IN CONTACT

The technique proposed here makes use of the initial stress method

in redistributing excess stresses from the plastic zones to those

regions that can still undergo extra stresses. This technique is

particularly suitable for the contact problem since the changing

conditions of the boundary contact surfaces can be solved without having

to modify the global stiffness matrix. The solutions otherwise would

require numerous reassembling of the stiffness matrix for plasticity

and boundary contact conditions and also the necessity to solve this
 148

matrix again.

Here for each iteration, after the displacements are obtained,

the overlapping of potential contact pairs will be checked and the

solutions for the contact configuration and reactions are obtained by

procedure in section 6.4. These reactions are then reapplied

together with the applied load for that iteration to solve for the

incremental stresses, strains and displacements. The initial stress

method is then used to determine the pseudo force vector for stresses

above yield. These pseudo forces are then reapplied to the

structure with original stiffness unchanged. The process is repeated

until the magnitude of these pseudo forces are within the tolerance

limit of accuracy. Details of the initial stress method are to be

found in Chapter 2.

It was found that redistribution of excess stresses while contact

area is increasing can be obtained within a few iterations. With

respect to this advantage the proposed technique is quite efficient

and proved to be successful in many cases of applications presented

in the next section.

6.6 NUMERICAL EXAMPLES

CyZind?icaZ bodies in contact

In order to verify the program developed in the present study, the

behaviour of two cylindrical bodies in contact and subjected to diametrical

loading was investigated, and the results compared with the plane strain

elastic solution originally determined by Hertz in 1896. The geometry

and the finite element mesh discretization are shown in Fig. 6.2.

Isoparametric quad:Patic quadrilateral elements are used for this

analysis. Due to symmetry of geometry and loading configuration only

one quarter of the cylinder needs to be considered. Material properties

 149

N
-\0

0
. N
r-,..
N
·O
.
16.5 r.m ....... .......
0.. II 0.. II

9.2 mm
FIG. 6.2 GEOMETRY, MESH CONFIGURATION Ano PLASTIC ZONES OF A CYLINCRICAL

BODY \</ITH RADiUS = 30 mm

 0

6 p
Elastic Solution by
Hertz and Present
Analysis
5

0
LOAD (P/Z)
(kN) 4

P = Total Applied Load

3
D = Diameter = 60 nm /

2 Elastic-Plastic
/0 Solution by Present
Analysis
/fj
1 /0
0 ~~
0.0 0.5
Contact Distance (mm)
1.0 1.5
-
u,
0

FIG. 6.3 LOAD VS CONTACT DISTANCE FOR CYLINDRICAL BODIES IN CONTACT

 ·.·2000 --o- Elastic ·

P/2 = 0.61 kN
-+- Elastic-Plastic
-o

Contact Stress 'O

ay (MPa}

---0 P/2 = 0.27 kN

1000
P/2 = 0.61 kN
-Q >
-~ s..
~~
~\
....
0.00 0.25 0.5
Contact Distance (mm)
0. 71 1.00
-
VI

FIG. 6.4 DISTRIBUTION OF CONTACT STRESSES FOR ELASTIC AND ELASTIC-PLASTIC CASE
 152

TABLE 6.1

MATERIAL PROPERTIES

Problem Material Properties

Two cylindrical bodies E = 2.057 X 10 5

\) = 0.3
(10 = 294
Ep = 0.0

Punch problem Body A ~lastic)

E = 6.171 X 10 5
\) = 0.3
Body B
E = 2.057 X 10 5
\) = 0.3
CYo = 98
Ep = 0.0

Eye and Pin Eye

E = 0.690 X 10 5
\) = 0.3
-
CYo = 35
Ep = 0.0
Pin ~lastic)
E = 2.069 X 10 5
\) = 0.3

Pinned Colunm E = 2.069 X 10 5 (30,000 ksi)

\) = 0.3
-
CYo = 207 (30 ksi)
Ep = 0.0

Note all stress units are in MPa unless indicated otherwise

 153

of the cylinder are to be found in Table 6.1. Typical plastic zones

are also illustrated in Fig. 6.2.

Fig. 6.3 shows the plots of load vs contact area for both elastic

and elastic-plastic analyses. It is evident that the elastic

solution obtained by the present analysis agrees closely with the

solution using Hertz's analysis. However, in the case of elastic-

plastic analysis no solution has been published to the author's

knowledge. As anticipated, larger contact areas are predicted for

a specific load when plastic strains are taken into account. Although

only one elastic plastic curve is shown there is in fact a family of

such curves, each one corresponding to a specific yield stress.

Fig. 6.4 shows the distribution of contact stresses for both

elastic and elastic-plastic analysis. Two load cases are presented.

Again, the elastic stress solutions are within 5% of Hertz's

solution. The elastic-plastic analysis for the present case (a 0 = 294

MPa) shows the maximum stress about 50% lower than the elastic case

for the same load level.

Punah problem
Further confidence in the effectiveness and accuracy of the

program was obtained by considering the particular contact problem when

the contact area remains constant. Fig. 6.5 shows the geometry of the

problem and it is clear that this configuration could represent a

rigid punch penetrating a larger mass of material or it could

represent a strip footing supported by a stiff soil or rock. These

two extreme cases can be used to establish the upper and lower bound

solutions of this problem for the elastic-plastic analysis.

Another advantage of solving this particular problem is that the

result from the present finite element program can be compared with

an existing solution for the elastic case. Okubo (1952) obtained the
 154

100

a
av = Average Applied Stress

Interface Contactµ= 0.0 and 0.4

0
0
N
300
y

0
0
<:;i·

•
I
FIG. 6.5 GEOMETRY AND ~ESH CONFIGURATION OF PUNCH PROBLEM
NP= 69, NE= 49, NB= 12
 -2.2 . Exact Solution (Okubo, 1952)

0 Ohte (1973)
-2.ol Present Analysis
y -+-

• Ba --I
I,
-1.BL I AlTHa

> -l.4L
B
,Fx of
+

rtl
b
........
b>,
I I
Bb
q_
I
-1.0
r +
fl
f"-

0.6 '------.i-----~------!"'~---~~----~
0.2 0.4
x/Ra
0.6 0.8 1.0
....
FIG. 6.6 PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS ALONG THE CONTACT SURFACE (J1
(J1
 0.6
Exact Solution (Okubo. 1952)

0 Ohte (1973)
0.5
-+- Present Analysis

0.4

>
,0
b
,0
0.3
cc

-C\J
.........

<-0
<-0
0
I

......... 0.2
LLl
I

0. 1

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.3 1.0 1.2 1.4

x/Ba ....
FIG. 6.7 DISPLACEMENT PROFILES OF THE CONTACT SURfACE, 60 = DISPLACfMENT AT CENTRE, VI
0-,.

5 = DISPLAr[~f~!T ALONS ~ONTACT SU~FACE, E = YONG'S MODCL~S OF 801H GODIES

 157

2 ,-----,-----r---~----r------:i.------
oJ
0 Ohte (1973)

1
- + - Present ,ll,nalysis
hr
0 -------------~--::f~)!- . 3
0
~-------

/j
-1 µ = 0.410 0

\ot
-tO
co
/+
>, -2

II
-3

!l
-4
0.0
rr
~--.....,_~-~~---------------
-0.2 .... -0.6 -0.8 -1.0 -l .2
oy/oav

FIG. 6. 8 DISTRIBUTIO;lS OF ay ALONG THE CENTRAL ,/\XIS, x = 0.

 158

µ •
l\
o.oo/+. f ~ • 0.4

0....,... ~
Os.---_.Li:__ _ _ _ _ _ --=-+------,=-----~

JJ = 0.4
-1

- rel
O'.l
>,

-2

0 Ohte (1973)
-3
+ -+- Present /-\na lys is

-4
0 .4 0.2
1 0.0 -0.4 -0.6 -0.8

FIG. 6.9 DIST~IBUTIONS OF o ALONG THE CENTRAL AXIS, x = 0

X .
 1.4 -+

0 Ohte (1973)
1.2 11- ~

- + - Present Analysis

1 .0 'I- 1-

j
+
0.81- I -

>
ttl
-2.>, 0.6
X
11-
l-
i
l-'

0.4 1-
+ ..
J,
0.2 .... __L
.f.
µ•0.4

- - --0
,,
+/0
/ +
-
- +
I +-o------- +-o -
I I _l I

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 ....en

x/Ba l,C

FIG. 6.10 DISTRIBUTION OF Txy ALONG THE CONTACT SURFACE, y = 0

 160

exact solution to this problem, and later Ohte (1973) showed that the

finite element method could be used to obtain satisfactory solutions.

Fig. 6.6 shows the comparisons of contact stresses between the

present analysis and the solutions by Okubo (1952) and Ohte (1973).

The general agreement is acceptable except near the region x/Ba = 1.0

but it is clear that the accuracy can be improved by using a more

refined mesh. This aspect was shown by Ohte (1973). In Fig. 6.7

similar comparisons for the displacement profiles of the contact

surface are shown.

Distribution of stresses cr X and cr y along the central axis for

both smooth contact surface,µ= 0.0 and frictional case,µ= 0.4, are

presented in Figs. 6.8 and 6.9. In Fig. 6.10 the shear stress

distribution, Txy along the contact surface for the frictional case

is shown. It can be seen that in all of these comparisons good

agreements between the present analysis and the available solutions

are obtained.

Having verified the program for the elastic case, the analysis

is then extended to the elastic-plastic case as shown in Fig. 6.11.

In this figure the ratio of Young's modulus for the two bodies (Eb/Ea)

is assumed to be 0.33. The surface of contact is assumed to be

frictionless(µ= 0). Since no solution is available for the

elastic-plastic case, it is necessary to establish the upper and lower

bound solutions for the present analysis. The upper bound for this

case can be obtained by the solution of rigid smooth punch, which

corresponds to the case Eb/Ea= 0.0. The lower bolllld can be

established by the case of a strip loading, which corresponds to Eb/Ea= 00

The analyses for these two cases are obtained using ordinary elastic-

plastic analysis program from Chapter 4 (Elastic-plastic analysis of

shallow foundation). As can be seen, the present case of Eb/Ea= 0.33

 ~
l-Lt · Oav _,-!--rs=-+.;:;. 6 ==---6"-
A
/ _/,A:---9,----«>-
2.olli
~//r./
B
60

Ci, fl
. . -+- Eb/Ea · Smooth punch)
' 1g1d
= 0.0 (R"

-o- Eb/Ea = 0. 33

1.0 -9- Eb/Ea = 00 .(Strip Loading)

-
10

0
0

>
It)
Note: Ea, Eb are Younq's Modulus of Body
A and B Res~ectively

0.0
0.0 -0. l -0.2 0 /R -(0.3 A) <J.4 -0.5 -0.6
0 'a X 1')-"-, .....
FIG. 6.11 C0MP/\RIS0N or- L(),AJ) DISPLl'C[~1EMT CU'.1VES BETHEP.I UPPER 80UN0 (Rrr,rn S~-100TH PUNCH) A~ID
LC'"!ER B0U~ID (~T~JP L0ADH!G)
-
Q\
 3.IJ

-o- Eb/Ea = 0.33

-+- Rigid Smooth Punch (Fb/Ea = 0.0)

~/.2 --- ~~
0
2.0
___ o

--+

-
lb
0

/i1
to~
b >,

1.0

--o /oa/Oo = 0.6 --o

__+
~ f.I
--+ 2 0-----0------0- -
+----+-----+-
0.0 0.'.:'.:i
x/Ba
0.5 0.75 1.0
-
Q\
N

FIG. 6.12 CONTACT STRESS DISTRIBUTIONS FOR RI~ID S~OOTH PUNCH AND Eb/Ea= 0.33 Pl!MCH
 163

\ \\ .
,::;,·
ID
-o-o+
C
II

- 0

"~~
IC
N
,--
>
n::s
0
I-
~

ao-~ o,o t C
II
>,

'°-·'\,._\I
\, + ,--

\l
u
c:(
LL.
c.:::
co ::.:J
V)
0
I-
u
+ ~
n::s C'.(
c::, I-·-
-.......
>< C
8 1..0 u
II C CD
z
("0
("0

0
II
-
I.J.J

1.1.!
.n
n::s

:+ 0 -0-
<;j-

C
C
...J
er:
(/)
Li.I
...J
......
Li..

\.0

0
II 0
-
L.Lj

.0
L.L.J
n::s C
0:::
a..
I-
z
w

-
N
0 II ~
lb w

- ------
0
n::s u
> w ex:
n::s ...J
b .n a..
w V)
,.....
0
+ 0 -0- 0
0 ("0
,--

ID
,- (',! CV") -<;j· LI") ll) r---
0 C 0 0 0 0 0
0 C"' 0 0 C" 0 0 t.:.'
C C' C" C 0 0 C ..... ,
LL.
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I I I I I I
'
\i19
 -0. 002 ,--,----..-----r-----,...-----r-----y---...-----

a
av
;ao = 2.2

v·r:
-0.003

-0.004

-0.005 Eb/Ea=')
f
-
\ Eb/Ea" 0.33
~ \ ~
<tl
cc
' -D

o - - - - - +0
.

\' +
0 --+-+
-o-o
Wr
-0.006
/9
?
-0.007
Eb/Ea·~ ?~/
{>
-0.()08...__..__ _ _...___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __.___ __..._ _ _....___
0.0 0.2 (). 4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
x/Sa
FIG. 6.14 DISPLACE~ENT PROFILES ALONG CONTACT SURFACE, y = 0 AT a 13 0 = 2.2
-
a-
.::,.
nV
 165

q_

a
av

a
av
1a o = 1.272

FIG. 6.15 PU.\STIC Z()tlES FOR VARIOUS RATIOS OF oa/0 0

 166

compares quite well with the two bounds.

Fig. 6.12 shows the contact stress distributions for the rigid

smooth punch and the present case of Eb/Ea= 0.33. Two load levels

are plotted, i.e. cr /cr 0 = 0.6 for the elastic solution and
av
Oavfcr 0 = 2.2 for the elastic-plastic solution.

Displacement profiles of the three cases are also compared for

these two load levels in Figs. 6.13 and 6.14. Typical plastic zones

at various load levels for the present case of Eb/Ea= 0.33 are

illustrated in Fig. 6.15.

Pin and eye

This problem is used to demonstrate the case of curved boundary

contact surfaces. The geometry and mesh configuration of the pin and

eye are shown in Figs. 6.16 and 6.17. These configurations are the

same as given by Francavilla and Zienkiewicz (1975). Isoparametric

quadratic quadrilateral elements are used for this problem since

curved boundary can be fitted without using excessive number of

elements. Again due to symmetry only half of the section is considered.

The tolerance between the pin and eye (Reye-Rpin) is assumed to be

0.005 for the present analysis. The material properties are to be

found in Table 6.1. Plane stress condition is assumed for this case.

Fig. 6.18 shows the plots of applied force vs contact distance for

both elastic and elastic-plastic analyses. The normal stress

distribution, along the contact surface for the two analyses are shown

in Fig. 6.19. The general shapes of the elastic stress solutions

are similar to those reported by Francavilla and Zienkiewicz (1975).

However, no solution is available for comparison with the elastic-

plastic case. The plastic zones for various ratios of applied loads

are also illustrated in Fig. 6.20.

 167

"·
"
I "" \ I

r---+---+---+---....f---..L.-x

FIG. 6.16 GEOMETRY AND ~ESH CONFIGURATION OF PIN

 1. 75

. ,. 6 12 -~-

-----·· ·-
N
N

----.J
u,
/~/
/_,,,--
..,,,,.. .,,,,,,..
NP= 275
"IE = 72
NB= 38
Gap Cl~arance Between Pin and Eye, 6G
= (Reye-Rpin)(l-cos e)
....
FIG. 6.17 GEOMETRY AND MESH CONFI~URATION OF EYE (1\
00
 l.G----r----,----r---r---,----7

I
I• p
1 . L!-.

I I.
I
1 .21- l

o.l •20
0.3
I l
I I
e

Elastic
0. L!

0 11/12 TT/6 IT/A 11/3 5n/12 !1/2 ....

0'
0 (~arlian) I.O

FIG. F.18 APPLIED C0NTACT Fn~c~ vs cnNT~~T DISTA~CE Fn° PI~l AND EYF
 170

'). 3

0.6

') ')
'# • t..

o.r,.,______,_______.__~---L---.:.....---'----J
0 IT/8 TI/~- e 3IT/3 IT/2

a) Elastic Normal Contact Stress

0.8..-------r-----~---------------

0.6

OA
0 0
0
lb
--.......
C:
b

0.2
0. l 0

OJ) 0 i"l/8 Ti!': 8 3Il/'"; Ii/?.

b) Elastic-Plastic ~lormal Contact ~tr~ss
FIG. 6.19 ~IORf- 1/-\L co;JT.I\CT STRES~ 1JISTRF3UTim! /\Lrw: C1V 1TACT SL1P.FI\CE
 I
• 1 71

10°
C
..........
Cl..

I.J...
0
V>
C
......
l-
e:(
0:::
V>
:=>
C'>
......
c::
c:·
p
=
>
Do0 0
0:::
I.J...

V:·
w
z
a
t---J

u
......
I-
V>
:s
Cl..

C
C'J

I.D

p
= 0.2
Do 0
p
= 0.3
Do 0
p
= 0.2
Do 0
 172

Pinned aoZwnn
This is the problem which initiates the development of the present

technique for elastic-plastic solution of two deformable bodies in

contact. The geometry and mesh configuration of this problem are

shown in Fig. 6.21. The dimensions are for a quarter scale model of

the actual size colunm. Experimental investigations using this scale

model are also carried out for comparative purposes. Axisymmetric

isoparametric linear quadrilateral elements are used for mesh

discretization. In this figure, Ra represents the radius of initial

contact between colunm and the lenticular disk, Rb represents the

radius of the disk and Re the radius of the colunm. Due to symmetry

only the bottom half of the colunm setting is solved with line of

synunetry of the disk at the top as the datum for zero displacement.

At a distance of 4 in (10.16 cm) away from the contact surface along the

length of column, the pressure is assumed to be distributed uniformly

and can be represented by uniform loading P.

Fig. 6.22 shows the comparisons of applied load vs contact radius

between the present analysis and the experiment. Two cases of

analysis are assumed, i.e. smooth contact surface withµ= 0.0 and

the frictional contact surface,µ= 0.4. Good agreement between the

two analyses and the experiments can be observed. Similarly the

centre displacements at point (0,0) (see Fig. 6.21) are compared in

Fig. 6.23. In Fig. 6.24 the distributions of axial and circumfer-

ential strains on the circumferential surface of colunm are plotted for

both present analyses and the experiment. Although good agreement

can be obtained for axial strains, the comparisons for the circum-

ferential strains are not as good. However, similar patterns of

strain distributions can be noticed.

 17.3
z
Ra= 0.312 in,Contact Surface (0.79 cm)
. Rb = 1.25 in (3 18 cm; Smooth Ri~ic!
I
"/////////////////////////// '/
- - .. 1 ·- ! 1 .
0 . 25 · 1
1 11 1 I ell 1n
. l n. I I I o 0 . Q39 7 cm )
( 0 . 6 4 c rri) •l --+---+--++14+-i+l+-+1J.I,.+W+-+--+--+--
,
1'
7 • (

-v,t:_-=-t~+-~t+L*i=·+-·~.- .:ri-•=;==;:'===-===~---_-----
,__.......--,,, -lj) ~ p"- f • R
/ •
/-K J ~
(0,0)

~---
;--~

4- .0 in
(10.16 C'l) •

R = 1 • 5 in ( 3 . 31 cm)
C

'
p

FIG. 6.21 GEOnETRY A~ 1D MESH Cl)NFiruq/\Til)M r.F PINNcO COLUMi!

 (cm)

-
100 0. 0 0.5 1.0 l. 5 2.0 2.5 3 ./J

400

75

300

50
200
p
- _ - Experiment
(X l 0 3 lbs) (kN)
25 - Present Analysis, µ = 0.0
Initial Contact 100
= 0.312 in -··- Present Analysis, µ = 0.4

. I I t 10
01 1 l 1 1.2
0.0 0.2 OA 0.6 0.8 1.0
Contact Radius (in)
FIG. 6.22 CONTACT RADIUS VS APPLIED LOAD FOR TEST SPECIMEN, Re= 1.5 in
....
'-I
"'"
 (cm)
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03

l 00 /
Displacement, R = Re 400

75
Displacement, R = 0 300

50 - - - Experiment (kN)
00
Load - - - Present Analysis, µ = 0.0
(x 10 3 lbs) -··- Present Analysis, µ = 0.4
25
l 00

0
--------~------------------0
0 ---
0.005 0.01 0.015
Displacement (in)
FIR. 6.23 APPLIED LOAD VS DISPLACEMENTS FOR TEST SPECIMEN, Re= l .5 in ....
-....J
u,
 176

1).0

~
~ Experiment
t)i.~
- l .Q

II
Present Analysis

Z./ Rc LEGEND LOAD

(lbs)
I 0 25,IJ00
-2.0 I
I + 50,000
I 75,00')
I I
6 +
- ') . ~- - '} . 3 -0.2 -0. 1 0.0 a. l 0.2
Ez(x ,0-3)

a) Distribution of axial strain alona R = Rc

0.0------------,,------------,,----,------,
-or~~---::s+~-
0 --o
\
+.~+
!'
---t::.
-6~---
J
6 -6
/
I r· I :'
/ /. / ./
/ / / /.
/ / ..
-1.0
/
+/ + 6/ 61/

!/ ,' // /
oo + + 61 6
I I I
Experiment
I \ I
\ I
-2.0 I \ Present Analysis
\ µ = 0.0
\ Present ft.nalysis
\ \ µ = OA
00 + +
0.0 0. l 0.2 ().?
E 0 (x 10- 3 )
b) nisbtrihution of circumferential strain alona ~ = Rc
FIG. 6.24 DISTPI8['Tff•rl 0F CIRCUMFERENTIAL ST':./l~fl m1 TH~ SURFACE OF COLLJHf·i
 177
::: ..
......
0..
C
,-.... C :c
C
I-
0 C,
,--
.....,
-,-
,., <:t II
E c::
u c.
-'-
r-
,-.... C ;-
N N II
cc E
II II
d
..,.J

. _J
C
u
LL
C
E E
LJ..i
~-- z:
,_.
......
_J n.
I
.....:. 0:: u
u.,
.0.
1-
=:,
t.: C
II ....
LJ.1
;r:
I-
L, ......
_:..
c:; .,_
z. ~
C
_..J =:,
,-- C < _J
0
C
C
;;__ u
/ II ,..... C
......
0- w...
E
~ 0----- /_ I--
u
LLJ
C
LLJ
--0-- ...J ;;:..:
LL ~~
uJ _j
Cl
~
II 0:::
I-
o. :::·
'-0 LJ._!
C u
L.fl
·-o > 0. <.!,
0
Lr.
...... 0

II
E
......
'>. 0
c-,
N

C')
,-J
l..Qo..
-
<o
<o
(/)
>

3:
0
C:
...J
<
~:
0
......
II II II I-
~ -
u
:
>,
E E E 0... u.J
...J
0,
t
LL
x:. 0..
~
LLl
LL C,
0
<>=
~
II
I-
0
~1 0 0 0
8
II
E:

C
_J
a.. <o
p
:s:
LO
E N
,-,
.c
,--
I.D
<.!,
,_.,
LL
Ui -=:: M N ,..... C
0 Cl 0 C C 0
-
0..
a_

>,
 178

q_

P/Py=0.12

.___ ___
;,.'

, .,,,,.,·,-::·~:-·-·-·-·-·-·-·--,--,-- - - - - - - - - - -

.
.I
1

I.- · L .
: - · - -.---:---
--·
µ = o.o

.... -:.~~~-
....-:•
. _,1·--·-·-·-·
_,, _.,
P/P
y
= 0.24

P/P = 0.36
y

. _L µ = 0-~---:/
.---·:
==== ===============::::::::::::-=

I=~_:-==:::::..,· ..........

µ = 0.4

Scale Vertical 1 unit= 0.005 n 5

0 0.5 1.0 Re
Hori zonta 1 1 unit =
6

where n · =
s
~
1.5

FIG. 6.26 DISPLACEMENT PROFILES OF THE cornACT SURFACE

 -100

-600
µ = 0.0
-80

-500

-60 ·-::--~

\ 1-40~
,I I
I
/ \
I
'
\
\ \ I
-300
{MPa)

-40

Oz = 0.12
(ksi) I 0

+
P/Py
P/Py = 0.24
I \ \ -t -200

-20 I-
~ P/Py = 0.36 I I I ... _100

0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___..._______.___ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

0.0 0.25 0.5

R/Rc

FIG. 6.27 PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS ON rHE CONTACT SURFACE, Z = 0

-
.......
'-0
 180

oz (ksi)

0.17 ------------,~---:~-n------,
0 -20 -40 -30

0.0

-0.5

-1.0

JJ o-= 0.0
Z/Rc

0 P/Py = 0 .12
-1. 5 +6
+ P/Py = 0.24

D. P/P = 0. 36
.Y

-2.0

+6

-2.5
-100 -200 -300 -400 -500 U1Pa)

FIG. 6.28 DISTR18UTION OF crz ALONG CENTRE LINE, R = 0

 181

or {ksi}
+20 0 -20 -40 -60
0. l

-0.5

-1.0
p = 0.0

-1.5 o P/Py = 0.12

+ P/Py = 0.24
6 P/Py = 0.36

-2.n

-2.s ________........_ _____.~_ _...___ _..J.,,I

+100 0 -100 -200 -300 -400 (MPa)
FIG. 6.29 DISTRIBUTIOM OF or ALO~IG CENTR[ LHIE, R = 0
 182

q_
P/P = 0.12
y P/Py = 0.2'-'-

1.,__--..,...,===--....-P/Py = 0.36

P/Py = 0.24-+-t--t-t--r

P/Py = 0.36

FIG. 6.3() TYPICAL YIELDED ZONES FOR PIMMED COLU~~i'-!,

JJ = 0.0
 183

In Fig. 6.25 the dimensionless plots of P/Py vs op/owp on log

scale are presented. P/Py represents the ratio of applied load P,

to the yield load for coluillll without pin Py, defined by

= (6.19)

where cr-0 is the initial yield stress, op/owp represents the ratio of

the displacement along the centre line for the coluillll with pin op, to

the corresponding displacement of colUillll without pin Owp, defined by

PL (6.20)
=
IlR 2 E
C

where Lis the length from the centre line of the disk, Eis the

Young's modulus. It can be seen that as the length Lis increased, the

ratio of op/owp approaches the 100% curve for L = 00

Fig. 6.26 shows the displacement profiles of the contact surfaces

for three load levels. Contact pressure distributions for these three

load levels are also shown in Fig. 6.27. Similarly, distributions of

crz and crr along the centre line are presented in Figs. 6.28 and 6.29

and typical spreads of plastic zones are illustrated in Fig. 6.30.

The plots given here can be used for any size colUillll with similar

geometric setting as shown in Fig. 6.21.

6.7 CONCLUDING REMARKS

A technique is successfully developed for the analysis of contact

problem considering elastic-plastic deformation behaviour for both

bodies. In this analysis, frictional contact surface can be treated

as well as the cases of perfectly smooth and rough surfaces.

The numerical examples presented in this chapter demonstrate the

accuracy of the elastic solutions and the establishment of upper and

lower bound solutions for the elastic-plastic solution. Experimental

 184

verification was also used for the elastic-plastic deformation of

pinned colunm.

The proposed analysis was found to be effective in redistributing

excess stress due to yielding of material while contact area is

increasing. Sample computation times are to be found in Appendix IV.

 185

Chapter?
SUM'1ARY AND CONCLUSIONS

In this thesis, investigations of the finite element method as a

tool for numerical analysis of continua have been presented. Both

linear and non-linear analyses have been considered. The investigations

include four fields of applications, i.e.

(1) Elastic-plastic ana,lysis of anisotropic materials

(2) Analyses of geotechnical problems
(3) Elastic-plastic analysis of torsion problems
(4) Elastic-plastic ana,lysis of contact problems.
A major emphasis in this study was placed on the use of higher

order isoparametric elements and the initial stress technique to increase

the accuracy and efficiency of the analyses. Both compatible displace-

ment model and the mixed model were used for the investigations.

The following conclusions can be presented as the results of

this study.

Analysis of anisotropic material

The problems of elastic and plastic anisotropy of materials can be

treated by the finite element method. In the present analysis the

isoparametric quadratic quadrilateral was used to solve non-linear

problems by the initial stress technique. Various problems of plane

stress, plane strain and axisymmetric cases were presented. It was

found that the influences of anisotropy could be significant in certain

geometrical configurations and material orientations. In some cases the

influences had weakened the strength of the structure, however in other

cases the strengths were increased. Thus when doubt arises as to the

upper or lower bound solutions have been obtained by the assumption of

isotropy; this kind of anisotropic analysis would be useful. Though

 186

in certain cases experimental verifications would be required for Hill's

anisotropic yield criterion, other suitable yield criteria may also be

adopted.

Analyses of geoteahniaal problems

In geotechnical problems, non-homogeneity due to layered deposits,

multi-phase material due to the presence of water in porous soil, and

non-linear stress-strain behaviour due to soil plasticity, are conunonly

encotmtered in practice. The capabilities of the finite element method

to cope with these problems were demonstrated in detail, in the analyses

of the three important soil structures presented in this study, i.e.

(1) Settlement analysis of pile in layered soil

(2) Analysis of aonsolidation problems
(5) Elastia-plastia analysis of shallow foundations.
In these analyses, it was found that the use of isoparametric

element resulted in an increase in overall accuracy of the solutions.

The initial stress technique was particularly effective for the solution

of foundation with rigid footing as incremental applied displacement of

the footing could be used instead of incremental applied load. When the

incremental applied displacement is used, the number of iterations does

not accumulate as high as the case of incremental applied load; thus

fast convergence can be obtained. Also the use of reduced integration

technique (Nayak, 1971) was found to be effective in reducing the

computation time and still maintaining the same level of accuracy.

Analysis of torsion problem

The mixed model with isoparametric shape functions, proposed in

this thesis was found to be suitable for the solution of torsion problem

since the stress condition along the boundary surface could be controlled

by modification of the stress function. No difficulty arose in using

separate formulations for the boundary element and the interior

 187

element in this method. The solution obtained was in good agreement

with the conventional elasticity solution. The method was extended

to the non-linear analysis by the use of initial stress technique.

Again the initial stress techniquewaseffective since fast convergence

could be obtained by the use of incremental applied displacement, in this

case, the angle of twist.

Analysis of contact problem

The finite element method can be used to solve this complex

interface problem. The proposed method based the formulation on the

determination of the flexibility matrix for the combined displacements

and reactions of the contact pairs. For elastic-plastic behaviour, the

initial stress technique was used. The proposed method was found to

be effective since no modifications of the generalized stiffness matrix

were required. Also the nature of the problem facilitated the use of

initial stress technique since the stresses were quickly relieved as

the contact areas were increased. The proposed method can treat the

case of contact with a rigid body as well as a more generalized case of

two elastic-plastic bodies in contact.

Recommendations of future research

Analysis of anisotropic material
The analysis can be extended to incorporate other anisotropic

yield criteria, e.g. Gol'denblat and Kopnov's yield criterion in which--

anisotropy due to the differences of strength in tension and compression

as well as in directions are incorporated (Saada and Ou, 1973). Three

dimensional problems can also be investigated.

Analyses of geotechnical problems

The case of pile with lateral load and pile groups can be investig-

ated. The use of three dimensional analysis may be used although the

economic factor may not facilitate its application for parametric studies.
 188

Other alternative approaches may be looked at, e.g. the use of axi-

symmetric element with laterally applied load.

Pile frictional slips can also be incorporated by the use of slip

line elements (Goodman et al., 1968) or by the use of the technique

proposed in Chapter 6 for contact problems.

The consolidation problems may be extended to incorporate the

unsaturated flow conditions, anisotropy and elastic-plastic deformation

of soil skeletons.

Detailed parametric studies of the foundation problems for

various loading cases and initial stress conditions may be carried out.

Analysis of torsion problem

Other higher order isoparametric elements may be investigated for

the solution of this problem. The problem can be extended to solve

reinforced concrete section in which cracking of concrete can be

simulated by the use of no-tension procedure (Valliappan, 1969). This

problem would be of particular interest, as no attention has been given

in this area by the use of finite element method.

Analysis of aontaat problem

No difficulties are envisaged in incorporating anisotropic

material properties and anisotropic Coulomb's friction. Inclusion of

temperature expansion to this problem is also of practical interest.

Consideration of large deformation and finite strainwouldform

an interesting future research project.

Problems of crack opening and closing can also be tackled by the

proposed technique in Chapter 6.

 189

Appendix I
YIELD CRITERIA

The following yield criteria are commonly encountered in the

theory of plasticity.

T1'esca's yield criterion (1864)

According to this criterion, yielding occurs when the greatest

absolute value of the maximum shear stress reaches cr- . The maximum
0

shear stress is given by

(I.1)

where cr 1 is the maximum principal stress, cr 3 is the minimum principal

stress, Tmax is the maximum shear stress.

Therefore the yield criterion can be written in the form of

Eq. (2.1) as

(I.2)

Von Mises' yield criterion (1904)

This yield criterion has been shown to be an excellent approxi-

mation of the behaviour of metal. The criterion is given by

k
F({cr}) = {½[(cr -cr ) 2 + (cr -cr ) 2 + (cr -cr ) 2 1 + 3T 2 + 3T 2 + 3T 2 } 2
x y y z z x ~ xy yz zx

(I.3}

where ax, cry, az, Txy' Tyz' and Tzx represent components of stresses.

Mohr-Coulomb's criterion (1882)

This criterion is suitable for soils, rocks, concrete and other

frictional materials.

The original Coulomb failure law (1773) is given by

< C - a tan~ (I.4)

- n

where Tn is the shearing stress, crn is the normal stress, C is the

 190

cohesion and¢ is the angle of friction.

In three dimensions, the criterion can be derived from the Mohr's

circles as

F({o}) = (01 - 03) + (01 + 03) sin¢ = 2 C cos¢ (I.5)

where o 1 , 02, o 3 are the principal stresses.

Drucker-Pl'ager's criterion (1952)

Drucker-Prager modified Coulomb's law using von Mises' yield

criterion as

F({cr}) (1.6)

J2 = 1
~ (o -o ) 2 + (o -o ) 2 + (o -o ) 2 ] + T 2 + T 2 + T2
6 x y y z z x xy yz zx

(I. 7)

2 sin ¢
where a. = (I.8)
./3 (3-sin ¢)

6C cos¢
k = (I.9)
./3 (3-sin ¢)

For plane strain a. and k are reduced to

tan ¢
a. = 1 (I.IO)
(9+12 tan 2 ¢)Yi

3C
k = !.: (I. 11)
(9+12 tan 2 ¢) 2
 191

Appendix II
ISOPARAMETRIC CONCEPT

The isoparametric concept was introduced by Ergatoudis, Irons

and Zienkiewicz in 1968. According to thls concept the same shape

functions were used for both co-ordinate and displacement variations,

This way the constant strain condition (Melosh, 1963) could be

satisfied even for the case of parabolic and cubic variations.

Additional nodes were introduced on the sides of th~ element to obtain

the higher order variation. On this basis, a family of compatible

quadrilateral elements called isopaPCUnetric quadPiZateraZs were

formulated.

Co-ordinate definition
If a set of local co-ordinates n and~ is defined for each

quadrilaterals (see Fig. II.I) such that

n = 1 on side DC

n = -1 on side AB

= 1 on side BC

= -1 on side DA

Then the shape functions in terms of n and~ can be formed for

the relationship between the Cartisian co-ordinates and the local

co-ordinates given by

(II. 2)
T
= {N} {y}
e

where {xe} and {ye} are the nodal co-ordinate vector, the subscript e

represents the element level, and {N} is the shape function vector.
 192

n = l

...__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.....,._. X

FIG. II.l CO-ORDINATES FOR ISOPARAMETRIC ELEMENT

 193

Isopara.metric shape functions

The same shape function vector in Eq. (II.2) is then employed

to define the variation of displacement component vector {u} in terms

of the nodal values {qe}, thus

(II. 3)

The shape functions in the vector {N} are termed isoparametPic

by the nature of this dual usage.

For ZineaP eZement,{N} can be explicitly given by

N.1 = ¼(1 + ss.)(1

1
+ nn.)
1
(II .4)

wheres- and n. take their respective nodal values.

1 1

Similarly for quadratic eZement

N.1 = ¼(1 + s 0 )CI+ n)

0
- ¼CI - s 2 )CI + n)
0
-¼CI+ s 0 )CI - n 2 )
(II.5)

wheres
0
= ss.1 and n0 = ~n.,
1
s- and n. are the values at the
1 1

corner nodes.

For midside nodes, the shape functions on the sides- = 0 is

1

given by

N.1 = ½CI - s )CI

2 + n)
0
(II .6)

and on the side n. = 0

1

N.
1
= ½(l + s )(1
0
- n2 ) (II. 7)

For other higher order elements, deails are to be found in

Zienkiewicz (1971).

Co-ordinates transfoPmation
As {N} is defined in terms of n ands the partial derivatives of

· {N} with respect ton ands can be directly obtained. However, in many

cases it is required to use partial derivatives of {N} with respect to

the global co-ordinates x and y, e.g. the strain displacement relation.

 194

lease, a chain rule may be used, i.e.

ax ay aN.
1
aN.
1
~ ~ ax ax
= = [J] (II.8)
ax ay aN. aN.
1 1
an an ay ay

f [J] is the Jacobian matrix. The derivatives of x and y with

Ito n ands in [J] can be obtained by partial differentiations

[II.2), thus
X1 Y1
aN1 aN2
X2 Y2
~ ' ~
= (II.9)
aN1 aN2
an ' an"

is obtained, Eq. (II.8) can be easily determined

c3N. aN.
1 1
~ ~
= (II. 10)
aN. aN.
1 1
ay an-
(e only other alteration required to be done is to replace the
'

iof area, dA by

dA = dxdy = det [J] dnds (II .11)

~t[J] is determinant of [J] matrix. For axial synnnetry

I

= 2ITrdrdz = 2Ilr det[J]dnds (II.12)

fe limits of integration are now changed to -1 and +l for all

ls. To find numerically the integral of a function with this

the well-known Gauss-Legendre quadrature formulae may be used,

~ils of which can be found in Zienkiewicz (1971).

 195

Appendix III
COULOMB I S STATIC FRICTIONAL RELATIONSHIP

The reactions tangential to the surface at a pair of contact

points can be given using Coulombts static frictional relationship by

(III.I)

For a slipping pair the< sign is eliminated and the relationship

can be rewritten as

q + ~q = ~ µ IP+ ~Pl (_III. 2)

The+ and - sign in Eq. III.2 are according to the direction of q + ~q.

~q can be expressed in terms of p, ~p and q using Eq. III.2 as

~q = ~µIP+ ~Pl - q (III. 3)

In Eq. (III.3) it is noted that pis always -ve (compressive).

However, ~p may be +ve although p + ~p must be kept -ve. Thus for

the case where l~PI ~ !Pl Eq. (III.3) can be further expressed as

(III.4)

For the case where l~PI > !Pl , the alternative expression must be

used, i.e.

(III.5)
 196

Appendix IV
COMPUTATION TIMES

Sample computation times are given here for the various cases

of the numerical problems solved in this thesis. The following

notations are used

NP = Number of nodal points

NE = Number of elements

NB = Number of boundary points

HB = Half band width of the global stiffness matrix

NG = Number of Gaussian integration points in each

direction

NI = Number of iterations

o = Applied displacement

oy = Applied displacement at first yield

The IBM 360/50 was operating at the University of New South

Wales until 1975 when the new CDC, CYBER 72 was then installed in

place of the IBM. Due to this change over, during the period of this

investigation, the computation times have to be given in time unit

of both installations. It is estimated that the CDC, CYBER 72 runs

at approximately nine to ten times faster than the IBM 360/50.

CHAPTER 3

Orthogonal machining
Isoparametric 8-nodes

NP = 50

NE = 11

NB = 16

NG = 2

HB = 904

Accuracy at 5% of initial residual forces.

 197
Nwnber of iterations per increments

f:,/f:, 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

y

NI 1 6 7 7 8

Computation time by CDC, CYBER 72 is 30 secs.

CHAPTER 4

Consolidation

Isoparametric 8-nodes

NP = 79

NE = 20

NB = 36

NG = 4
HB = 1654

26 time intervals

6 solutions using SOLV routines

20 solutions using RESOLV routines

Computation time by IBM 360/50 is 14 mins.

Shallow foundation (Rigid footing)

Isoparametric 8-nodes

NP = 62

NE = 15

NB = 27

NG = 2

HB = 596

Number of increments = 18

Accuracy 1% of initial residual forces.

Computation time by IBM 360/50 is 16 mins.

 198

Number of iterations per increments

o/o y 1 1.5 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

NI 1 9 10 10 10 10

o/o y 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 10.5

NI 11 11 12 13 13 15

o/o y 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5

NI 15 15 15 15

CHAPTER 5

Triangular section
Isoparametri,c 4-nodes

NP = 50

NE = 35

NB = 18

NG = 2

HB = 352

Number of increments = 17

Accuracy 1% of initial residual forces

Computation time by CDC, CYBER 72 is 110 secs.

 199

Number of iterations per increments

o/o y 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0

NI 1 5 6 6 7 6

o/oy 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2

NI 7 7 7 7 7 6

0/0 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2

y

NI 7 7 7 7 7

CHAPTER 6

Pinned coZwrrn (Re= 1.5)

Isoparametric 4-nodes

NP = 175

NE = 133

NB = 31

HB = 3917

Number of increments = 4

Accuracy 10% of initial residual forces

LOAD (kN) 111 222 333 444

NI 8 10 12 20

Computation time by CDC, CYBER 72 is 350 secs.

 200

REFERENCES

Argyris, J.H. (1960),

Energy Theorems in Structural Analysis, Butterworth, London.

Biot, M.A. (1941),

"General Theory of Three Dimensional Consolidation", Journal of
Applied Physics, Vol. 12, pp. 155-164.

Biot, M.A. (1955),

"Theory of Elasticity and Consolidation of a Porous Anisotropic
Solid", Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 26, pp. 182-185.

Boonlualohr, P., Valliappan, S. and Lee, I.K. (1974),

"Elastic-Plastic Analysis of Shallow Foundations", Proc. Int. Conf.
on Finite Element Methods in Eng., University of New South Wales,
Australia, pp. 479-492.

Boonlualohr, P. and Valliappan, S. (1976),

"Elasto-plastic Torsion of Anisotropic Bars", Journal of the
Engineering Mechanics Division, ASCE, Vol. 102, No. EM6, pp. 995-1008.

Brebbia, G.A. and Connor, J.J. (1973),

Fundamentals of Finite Element Techniques, Butterworths, London.

Butterfield, R. and Banerjee, P.K. (1971),

"The Elastic Analysis of Compressible Piles and Pile Groups",
Geotechnique, Vol. 21, pp. 43-60.

Button, S.J. (1953),

"The Bearing Capacity of Footings on a Two Layer Cohesive Subsoil",
Proc. Third Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., Zurich, Vol. 1,
pp. 332-335.

Chan, S.H. and Tuba, I.S. (1971),

"A Finite Element Method for Contact Problems of Solid Bodies",
Int. J. Mech. Sci., Vol. 13, pp. 615-639.

Christian, J.T. and Boehmer, J.W. (1970),

"Plane Strain Consolidation by Finite Elements", J. of the Soil Mech.
and Folllld. Division, ASCE, Vol. 96, No. 4, pp. 1435-1457.

Chough, R.W. (1960),

"The Finite Element in Plane Stress Analysis", Proc. 2nd ASCE Conf.
on Electronic Computation, Pittsburg, PA.

Davis, E.H. and Booker, J. (1971),

"The Bearing Capacity of Strip Footings from the Standpoint of
Plasticity Theory", Proc. First Aust.-New Zealand Conf. Geomechanics,
Vol. 1.

Desai, C.S. and Reese, L.C. (1970),

"Analysis of Circular Footings on Layered Soils", J. of Soil Mech.
and Found. Eng. Division, ASCE, Vol. 96, No. SM4, pp. 1289-1310.
 201

Desai, C.S. and Abel, J.P. (1972),

Introduction to the Finite Element Method, Van Nostrand, New York.

Drucker, D.C. and Prager, W. (1952),

"Soil Mechanics and Plastic Analysis of Limit Design",
Quarterly of Applied Maths, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 157-165.

Ergatoudis, J., Irons, B.M. and Zienkiewicz, O.C. (1968),

"Curved Isoparametric Quadrilateral Elements in Finite Element
Analysis", Int. J. Solids and Structures, Vol. 4, pp. 31-42.

Feld, J. (1957),
"Foundations of Structures", General Report, Proc. Fourth Int.
Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., London, Vol. 3.
Francavilla, A. and Zienkiewicz, O.C. (1975),
"A Note on Numerical Computation of Elastic Contact Problems",
Int. J. Nurn. Meth. Engg., Vol. 9, pp. 913-924.

Gallagher, R.H. (1975),

Finite Element Analysis, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.

Gallagher, R.H., Padlog, J. and Bijlard, P.P. (1962),

"Stress Analysis in Heated Complex Shapes", J. American Rocket Soc.,
Vol. 32, pp. 700-702.

Gibson, R.E., Schiffman, R.L. and Pu, S.L. (1970),

"Plane Strain and Axially Symmetric Consolidation of a Clay Layer
on a Smooth Impervious Base", Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and
Applied Mathematics, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 505-520.

Goodman, R.E., Taylor, R.L. and Brekke, T. (1968),

"A Model for the Mechanics of Jointed Rock", J. Soil Mech. and Found.
Div., ASCE, Vol. 94, pp. 637-659.

Hardy, C., Baronet, C.N. and Tordion, G.V. (1971),

"The Elasto-Plastic Indentation of a Half-Space by a Rigid Sphere",
Int. J. Nurn. Meth. Engg., Vol. 3, pp. 451-462.

Herakovich, C.T. and Hodge, P.G., Jr. (1969),

"Elastic-Plastic Torsion of Hollow Bars by Quadratic Programming",
Int. J. of Mechanical Sciences, Vol. 11, Jan., pp. 53-63.

Hertz, H. (1896),
Miscellaneous Papers, McMillan, London.

Hill, R. (1950),
The Mathematical Theory of Plasticity, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Hodge, P.G. and White, G.N. (1950),

"A Quantitative Comparison of Flow and Deformation Theories of
Plasticity", J. Appl. Mech., Vol. 17, pp. 180-184.

Hofmeister, L.D., Greenbaum, G.A. and Evensen, D.A. (1971),

"Large Strain Elasto-plastic Finite Element Analysis", AIAA J.,
Vol. 9, pp. 1248-1254.
 202

Hu, L.W. (1956),

"Studies on Plastic Flow of Anisotropic Metals",
J. Appl. Mech., Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 444-450.

Huebner, K.H. (1975),

The Finite Element Method for Engineers, John Wiley &Sons, New York.

Hwang, C.T., Morgenstern, N.R. and Murray, D.W. (1971),

"On Solutions of Plane Strain Consolidation Problems by Finite
Element Methods", Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 8, No. 1,
pp. 109-118.
Lambe, T.W. and Whitman, R.V. (1969),
Soil Mechanics, Wiley.

Lee, I.K. (1968),

Soil Mechanics - Selected Topics, Butterworths, London.

Lee, I.K. (1973),

Soil Mechanics - New Horizons, Butterworths, London.

Lee, I.K. and Valliappan, S. (1973),

"Application of Finite Element Method in Geotechnical Engineering
Linear and Non-Linear Analyses", in Short Course on Fundamentals
and Applications of Finite Element Techniques, The University of
New South Wales.

Lee, I.K. and Valliappan, S. (1974),

"Analysis of Soil Settlement" in Soil Mechanics - New Horizons,
Butterworths, U.K.

Lemcke, B.M. (1974),

"The Elasto-plastic Analysis of Shallow Footings", M. Eng. Sc.,
Report, University of N.S.W.

Marca!, P.V. and King, I.P. (1967),

"Elastic-plastic Analysis of Two Dimensional Stress Systems by
the Finite Element Method", Int. J. Mech. Sci., Vol. 9, pp. 143-155.

Martin, H.C. and Carey, G.F. (1973),

Introduction to Finite Element Analysis, McGraw Hill, New York.

Melosh, R.I. (1963),

"Basic for Derivation of Matrices for the Direct Stiffness Method",
AIAA J., Vol. 1, No. 7, pp. 1631-1637.

Meyerhof, G.G. (1951),

"The Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Foundations", Geotechnique, Vol. 2,
No. 4, pp. 301-332.

Milovic, D.M. (1965),

"Comparison between the Calculated and Experimental Values of the
Structures", Proc. Fourth Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., London,
Vol. 1.
 203

Nayak, G.C. (1971),

"Plasticity and Large Defonnation Problems by the Finite Element
Method", Ph.D. Thesis, University of Wales, Swansea.

Nayak, G.C. and Zienkiewicz, O.C. (1972),

"Note on the Alpha-Constant Stiffness Method for the Analysis of
Non-Linear Problems", Int. J. Num. Meth. Engg., Vol. 4, pp. 579-597.

Nayak, G.C. and Zienkiewicz, O.C. (1972),

"Elasto-Plastic Stress Analysis - A Generalization for Various
Constitutive Relations Including Strain Softening", Int. J. Num. Meth.
Engg., Vol. 5, pp. 113-135.

Noor, A.K. and Anderson, C.M. (1975),

"Mixed Isoparametric Elements for Saint-Venant Torsion", Computer
Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, Vol. 6, pp. 195-218.

Oden, J.T. (1969),

"Finite Element Applications in Nonlinear Structural Analysis",
Proc. Symp. on Application of Finite Element Methods in Civil
Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Tennessee.

Ohte, S. (1973),
"Finite Element Analysis of Elastic Contact Problems", Japan Society
of Mechanical Engineers Bulletin, Vol. 16, pp. 797-804.

Okubo, H. (1952),
Trans. Japan Soc. Mech. Engineers (In Japanese), Vol. 18, No. 65,
p. 58 (See also Ohte, S., 1973).

Pian, T.H.H. and Tong, P. (1969),

"Basic Finite Element Methods for Solid Continua", Int. J. Num.
Methods in Engg., Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 3-28.

Pian, T.H.H., Tong, P., Luk, C.H. and Spilker, R.L. (1974),
"Elastic-Plastic Analysis by Assumed Stress Hybrid Model", Int. Conf.
on Finite Element Methods in Eng., University of N.S.W., Australia,
pp. 419-434.

Poulos, H.G. and Davis, E.S. (1968),

"The Settlement Behaviour of Single Axially Loaded Incompressible
Piles and Piers", Geotechnique, Vol. 18, pp. 351-371.

Poulos, H.G. (1972),

"Settlement Analysis of Single Piles" in Postgraduate Course on
Analysis and Design of Pile Foundations, University of Sydney.

Poulos, H.G. (1974),

"Theoretical Analysis of Pile Behaviour", in Soil Mechanics - New
Horizons (Ed. I.K. Lee) Butterworths, U.K.

Polshin, D.E. and Tokan, R.A. (1957),

"Maximum Allowable Differential Settlement of the Structures",
Proc. Fourth Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., London, Vol. 1.

Prager, W. (1955),
"Probleme der Plastizitatstheorie", Birkhauser, Basel. (See also
Ziegler, 1969).
 204

Saada, A.S. and Ou, C.D. (1973),

"Strain-Stress Relations and Failure of Anisotropic Clays", J. of
the Soil Mechs. and Found. Div., ASCE, December, SM12, pp. 1091-1109.

Sandhu, R.S. and Wilson, E.L. (1969),

"Finite Element Analysis of Seepage in Elastic Media", J. of the Engg.
Mech. Div., ASCE, Vol. 95, No. 3, pp. 641-652.

Schiffman, R.L., Chen, A.T. and Jordan, J.C. (1969),

"An Analysis of Consolidation Theories", Journal of the Soil Mech.
and Found. Division, ASCE, Vol. 95, No. 1, pp. 285-312.

Scholes, A. and Strover, E.M. (1971),

"The Piecewise-Linear Analysis of Two Connecting Structures Including
the Effect of Clearance at the Connections", Int. J. Num. Meth.
Engg., Vol. 3, pp. 45-51.

Shaw, F.S. (1944),

"The Torsion of Solid and Hollow Prisms in the Elastic and Plastic
Range by Relaxation Methods", Report ACA-ll, Australian Council
for Aeronautics, Melbourne, Australia, pp. 1-28.

Siva Reddy, A. and Srinivasan, R.J. (1967),

"Bearing Capacity of Footings on Layered Clays", J. Soil Mech. Found.
Engg., Div., ASCE, Vol. 93, No. SM2, pp. 83-99.

Skempton, A.W. (1951),

"The Bearing Capacity of Clays", Building Research Congress, Vol. 1,
pp. 180-189 .

Sokolovski, V.V. (1956),

Static of Soil Media, Butterworth, U.K.

Stout, R.B. and Hodge, P.G., Jr. (1970),

"Elastic-Plastic Torsion of Hollow Cylinders", Int. J. of Mech.
Sciences, Vol. 12, pp. 91-108.

Strange, G. and Fix, G. (1973),

"An Analysis of the Finite Element Method", Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

Terzaghi, K. (1943),
Theoretical Soil Mechanics, Wiley, New York.

Tsuta, T. and Yamaji, S. (1973),

"Finite Element Analysis of Contact Problem", Theory and Practice
in Finite Element Structural Analysis, University of Tokyo Press,
pp. 177-194.

Tsytovich, N.A. (1963),

Mechanics of Soils, 4th Ed., Gosstroiizdat, Moscow.

Turner, M.J., Clough, R.W., Martin, H.C. and Topp, L.J. (1956),
"Stiffness and Deflection Analysis of Complex Structures", J. Aero.
Science, Vol. 23, pp. 805-823.
 205

Valliappan, S. (1969),
"Non-Linear Stress Analysis of Two Dimensional Problems with Special
Reference to Rock and Soil Mechanics", Ph.D. Thesis, University of
Wales, Swansea.

Valliappan, S. (1972),
"Elasto-Plastic Analysis of Anisotropic Work-Hardening Materials",
Arch. Mech. Stos., Vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 465-481.

Valliappan, S. and Boonlualohr, P. (1974),

"Anisotropic Plasticity Analysis of Work-Hardening Materials",
Proc. of 1st Australian Con£. on Eng. Materials, University of New
South Wales, Sydney, pp. 701-719.

Valliappan, S., Lee, I.K. and Boonlualohr, P. (1974),

"Settlement Analysis of Piles in Layered Soil", 7th Con£. of
Australian Road Research Board, Paper No. A.31, pp. 144-153.

Valliappan, S., Lee, I.K. and Boonlualohr, P. (1974-a),

"Finite Element Analysis of Consolidation Problem", Proc. of Int. Symp.
on Finite Element Method in Flow Problem, Oden, J.T. et al. (eds),
UAH Press, Swansea, U.K. , pp. 741-755.

Valliappan, S., Boonlualohr, P. and Lee, I.K. (1976),

"Non-Linear Analysis for Anisotropic Materials", Int. J. Num. Meth.
Engg., Vol. 10, pp. 597-606.

Valliappan, S. and Pulmano, V. (1974),

"Torsion of Nonhomogeneous Anisotropic Bars", J. of the Structural Div.,
ASCE, Vol. 100, No. STl, pp. 286-295.

Whang, B. (1969),
"Elasto-Plastic Orthotropic Plates and Shells", Proc. Symp. on
Application of Finite Element Methods in Civil Engineering, Vanderbilt
University, Tennessee.

Whiteman, J.R. (1975),

A Bibliography for Finite Elements, Academic Press, London.

Wilson, E.A. and Parson, B. (1970),

"A Method for Determining the Surface Contact Stresses Resulting
from Interference Fits", Trans. ASME, J. of Eng. for Industry, pp.
209-218.

Yamada, Y., Kawai, T. and Yoshimura, N. (1968),

"Analysis of the Elastic-Plastic Problems by the Matrix Displacement
Method", Proc. 2nd Con£. Matrix Methods in Structural Mechanics,
Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio, AFFDL-TP-68-150.

Yamada, Y., Yoshimura, N. and Sakurai, T. (1968),

"Stress Strain Matrix and its Applications for the Solution of
Elastic-Plastic Problems by the Finite Element Method", Int. J.
Mech. Sci., Vol. 10, pp. 343-354.

Yamada, Y. (1969),
"Recent Japanese Developments in Matrix Displacement Method for
Elastic-Plastic Problems", Proc. Japan-U.S. Seminar on Matrix Methods
of Structural Analysis and Design, Tokyo, Alabama University Press.
 206

Yamada, Y. (_1971),
"Recent Developments in Matrix Displacement Method of Elastic-Plastic
Problems", Recent Advances in Matrix Methods of Structural Analysis
and Design, University of Alabama Press.

Yamada, Y., Nakagiri, S. and Takatsuka, K. (1972),

"Elastic-Plastic Analysis of Saint Venant Torsion Problems by a Hybrid
Stress Model", Int. Journal for Num. Methods in Engg., Vol. 5, No, 2,
pp. 193-207.

Youdale, G.P. (1973),

"The Behaviour of Piles in Layered Soils", M. Eng, Sc., Project,
University of New South Wales.

Ziegler, H. (1969),
"A Modification of Prager's Hardening Rule", Quart. Applied Math.,
Vol. 17, pp. 55-65.

Zienkiewicz, O.C. (1971),

The Finite Element Method in Engineering Science, McGraw-Hill,
London.

Zienkiewicz, O.C., Valliappan, S. and King, I.P. (1969),

"Elasto-Plastic Solutions of Engineering Problems; Initial Stress
Finite Element Approach", Int. J. Num. Meth. Engg., Vol. 1, pp. 75-100.