Cumpurers & Srrucrurcv Vol. 63. No. 3, pp.

385-395, 1997
!I 1997 Elsevier Saence Ltd
Pergamon Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
PII: SO0457949(96)00373-2 m45-7949197 Sl7.00 + 0.00

ON IMPLICIT INTEGRATION OF BOUNDING SURFACE

PLASTICITY MODELS
M. T. Manzarit and M. A. Nour
CMEIl Department. The George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052, U.S.A.

(Received I February 1996)

Abstract-The bounding surface plasticity has become one of the most widely used frameworks of
plasticity for modeling constitutive behavior of metals and soils, especially in cyclic loading. Due to special
ingredients of the bounding surface plasticity, application of new integration techniques, generally devised
for classical plasticity models, requires certain modifications. This paper describes the details of such
modifications which are derived directly from the main equations underlying the bounding surface
concept. Specifically the equation of flow rule is modified and a differential equation is derived to represent
the evolution of a key factor, i.e. the ratio between the image stress and the current stress quantities. An
implicit integration method is then used to integrate the full set of rate equations. Numerical simulations
demonstrate the accuracy and efficiency of the proposed integration procedure in an application to a
simple bounc!ing surface version of the modified Cam clay model. 0 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights
reserved.

lNTRODUCTlON efficiency in modeling cyclic behavior. The theory

which was originally developed for metals [2, 31 has
During the last few decades, there has been a
been extended to simulate the stress-strain behavior
continuous and increasing interest in developing
of soils and concrete [4-lo]. The major ingredient of
mathematical models to simulate the stress-strain
the bounding surface plasticity is the notion of a
behavior of materials. This surge of interest is mainly
surface enclosing all possible states in the stress space.
due to improved knowledge of constitutive behavior
The distance between the stress state and its image on
of engineering materials and because of recent
the bounding surface is used to evaluate the plastic
advances in computational techniques and comput-
modulus [ 111.
ing facilities available for solving boundary value
One of the simplest and most widely used versions
problems. Among many boundary value problems
of bounding surface models is the radial mapping
facing engineers, those involved dynamic loading
models [12] which have been used to develop
require a proper understanding of cyclic behavior of
constitutive models for cohesive [4, 7-91 and non-co-
material and an efficient mathematical tool to
hesive soils [5,6, 12, 131. Many of radial mapping
represent such behavior.
models developed for soils have demonstrated great
In recent years, recognition of the destructive
potential in simulating the behavior of soils in
nature of earthquakes on constructed facilities has led
boundary value problems involving cyclic loading.
to extensive research efforts in testing materials in
However, a routine application of these models in
cyclic regime. The knowledge of cyclic behavior of
solving practical problems of structural and geotech-
engineering materials, such as structural steel,
nical engineering is contingent to development and
concrete, and soils is significantly improved due to
implementation of robust and accurate integration
these efforts. On the other hand, the need for
techniques. New integration techniques, recently
modeling cyclic behavior of materials has led to the
proposed in the context of classical plasticity [ 14-161,
development of three major theories in cyclic
cannot be directly applied to bounding surface
plasticity: nonlinear kinematic hardening, multi-
models, because of internal structure of the
surface plasticity [l] and bounding surface plas-
formulation of bounding surface plasticity. The
ticity [2, 31. Numerous models have been developed
objective of this paper is to develop proper
within each framework and have been applied with
modifications which renders bounding surface plas-
variable degree of success in modeling the constitu-
ticity models in a form suitable for application of
tive behavior of metals, concrete, and soils. Among
implicit integration techniques. The proposed
the current theories, bounding surface plasticity has
method is presented through development of
received much attention due to its simplicity and
integration techniques for a simple bounding surface
version of the modified Cam clay model.
Throughout the paper, tensor quantities are
t Author to receive correspondence. denoted by bold-faced characters in direct notation.
386 M. T. Manzari and M. A. NOW

The following conventions will be used in direct The elastic response of the material is characterized
notation: by the generalized Hookes law, i.e.

a . b = a,,blk tiil = E&, = E&t, - iE) (10)

a : b = trace(a b) = a,b,, where E is the tensor of elastic moduli, expressed as

aQb = a,,bk,
&I = @a,+ G(cXd,r+ Si&) (11)
where the summation convention is implied over
repeated indices. A superposed dot denotes the rate,
and the symbol ) ) implies the 2-norm of a tensor, i.e. in which K and G are, respectively, bulk and shear
modulus. Equation (10) can be written in a form
]a( = [a : a]*. relating the components of the elastic rate of
deformation to the components of stress increment,
The following invariants of the Cauchy (effective) namely
stress tensor, u, and rate of deformation tensor, c, are
used in the formulation of the model: i; = C,&, (12)

I
p = goi/ where
(1)

tv = E;, (2)
CSkl= & - & &Sk, + & (&6,, + &6,,). (13)
( >
Deviatoric parts of stress and strain tensors are
defined as
The elastic shear and bulk moduli are, in general,
functions of the current state of effective stresses and
s, = ug -ph. II (3) other parameters characterizing the current state of
the material such as void ratio. Therefore, the
eii = tii - &,.S, (4) response expressed by eqns (10) or (12) is of
hypo-elastic nature, unless the dependence on stress
where 6, denotes the identity tensor of rank 2, i.e. the
is such as to guarantee the existence of a potential, i.e.
Kronecker delta. Subsequently the following invari-
of hyper-elasticity type. Specific forms of the function
ants are introduced:
representing the elastic moduli may vary among
different models.
J = [f(s : s)y = [ftr(s)y (5) The plastic part of the rate of deformation tensor
is defined as
q=,,hJ (6)
t; = (li)R, (14)

where /i is the plastic multiplier indicating the

t, = [f(e : e)] (8)
where r] is the shear stress ratio. Note that effective
stresses are taken to be positive in compression.
BASIC EQUATIONS
Assuming a small transformation (deformation
and rotation) during a generic increment of loading,
we use the additive decomposition of strain increment
into an elastic and a plastic part. In the absence of
rate-dependent behavior, the strain rates can
equivalently be used instead of strain increments, i.e.
4 = i; + i$ (9)
where iU, ii, is denote the strain rate tensor, its elastic
and plastic parts, respectively.
magnitude of the plastic strain rate and R is a
symmetric second-order tensor denoting the direction
of plastic strain rate in the stress space. The plastic
multiplier, A is sometimes called the loading index or
the plastic loading function. The symbol () stands for
the Macauley bracket, i.e. (A) = /i if A > 0 and
(LI) = 0 if /i < 0. The loading index, /i, is expressed
by the following equation:
(15)
where KP is the actual plastic modulus associated with
bii and & is a plastic modulus on the bounding
surface associated with bti [8]. The bii is a suitably
defined image of the current stress point (in the stress
space) on the bounding surface such that the normal
to the bounding surface at this image stress point has
the same direction as the normal to the loading
 Integration of bounding surface plasticity models
surface (a homologous counterpart of the bounding
surface passing through the current stress state) at the
current stress point. Most bounding surface models
use a radial mapping rule [7, 8, 1I] as defined by the
following relation [ 111:
& .= B(a!j - /Q) + /&j (16)
where /? > 1 and pLilis a back stress which defines the
projection center o:r center of homology between the
loading surface and the bounding surface.
The tensor L in eqn (15) indicates the loading
direction. Combining eqns (lo), (14) and (15), we can
write eqn (15) as:
(17)
where
.$ = LOEuk,Rk,. (18)
Now by substituting eqns (14) and (17) in eqn (lo),
we find the general stress-strain relationship as:
& = D&n, (19)
where
D&-=+E4t)@(E~L) (20)
B As mentioned before, shear and bulk modulus are
is the so-called continuum Jacobian operator. B in
the above equation is defined as:
B = Kp + Bo (21)
and h(/i) is the Heavside step function defined as zero
when A = 0. The inverse counterpart of eqn (19) can
be found by substituting (15) in (9). Thus
tii = (D-)&, (22)
where D- is expressed as
(23)
The continuum Jacobian operator defines the
relationship between the rate of stress and strain
tensors. It gives the exact Jacobian for such
relationships, if the load step remains infinitesimal.
For a finite load step, however, the continuum
Jacobian is not uniquely defined and should be
approximately estimated based on the values of
external (stress quantities) and internal variables of
the model at a specific incident during the load step.
Such a crude estimation has been found to deteriorate
the convergence rate of a global solution strategy
used in a finite elernent analysis and to reduce the
381
efficiency of the analysis [ 171. Use of the consistent
tangent operator which offers a Jacobian consistent
with the global solution strategy has been proved to
alleviate this problem [ 15-171.
The consistent tangent operator and new inte-
gration techniques [ 14, 181 have been successfully
applied to classical plasticity models [15-l 7, 19, 201.
An implicit integration method and derivation of
the consistent tangent operator for a simple
bounding surface model is discussed in the following
sections.
DESCRIPTION OF A SIMPLE BOUNDING
SURFACE MODEL
For the sake of simplicity, a simple bounding
surface version of the modified Cam clay is chosen to
describe the method. Details of the model are given
in the following subsections.
Elastic strains
Decomposing the volumetric and deviatoric parts
of the strain tensor, we find (eqns 10 and 11):
@= K(i:) = K(i,, - ig) (24)
Sii= 2G(C;) = 2G(P,, - P;). (25)
functions of the current state of effective stresses and
some index parameters identifying the current state of
the sand such as void ratio. In accordance with
critical state models, the following relationships are
used:
(26)
(27)
v in the above equations is the current specific
volume. For simplicity, v will be fixed at its value at
the beginning of the increment. Its change can be
calculated as: d/v = -i,, . Note that eqn (26) implies
the use of a constant Poissons ratio, p.
Bounding surface
The bounding surface is defined as
F(d, po) = 3&j - ;M*fq& - p) = 0 (28)
where 5 is the image deviatoric stress tensor, pa
denotes the size of the bounding surface (Fig. 1) and
M is a material parameter.
388 M. T. Manzari and M. A. Nour

Loading surface Hardening law

The loading surface is of the same shape as the An isotropic hardening law is used to characterize
bounding surface (Fig. 1). The formal expression of the evolution of the bounding surface with the change
the loading surface is given as of void ratio [21,22]:

F(a, PI) = s,s, - ;M2,0(p,-P) = 0 (29)

where sYis the current deviatoric stress tensor and pl

denotes the size of the loading surface (Fig. 1). Plastic modulus
In accordance with the original concept of the
FIow rule
bounding surface plasticity [2, 31 a distance (distance
Equation (14) describes the general form of the between the current stress state and its image on
flow rule. Specific forms could be used to define the bounding surface) dependent function is utilized to
R tensor. Here an associated flow rule is used with R characterize the plastic modulus. Dafalias [ 111gener-
and L coinciding. The normality condition requires: alized his original proposition for uniaxial loading [2]
and suggested the following form for the plastic
L.=R.=~=?E+!!Fg. (30)
modulus
0
0 au, as, ap v
4,s
Decomposing R to deviatoric R and spherical parts & = & + h(dtidq) (35)
G(d$)m - d,,]n,>
RI, we have
where Kp and &. are, respectively, the plastic modulus
R = R + RI (31) for the yield surface and the bounding surface, di,
represents the vector connecting the current stress
where 1 is the identity tensor of rank 2. Similarly for point to its conjugate on the bounding surface, (d,,),.
L, is the initial d, when a new loading starts, n, is the unit
vector normal to the loading surface at the current
aF stress point and h is a scalar function depending on
L, = Y$-&= L; + L&. (32)
the length of the do. In the present model, the 3-D
term in eqn (35) is ignored for simplicity. The &. can
Considering eqn (28) for the bounding surface, we be obtained by imposing the consistency condition on
have: the bounding surface which gives:

L; = 2Q; L = ;M2(j - p,,). (33) 8M4v

KP = 9tn _ Kj PO@- h)D. (36)

St CSL
The function h is considered to be of the following
form:

(37)

where /l is the ratio between pO and pl and Ho is a

k-4 model constant.

Mapping rule
(b)
In the current model, the projection center is
assumed to coincide with the origin of the stress
space. Therefore pc = 0 in eqn (16), i.e.

(5, = ficrij. (38)

IMPLICIT INTEGRATION OF THE MODEL

The integration scheme for the model follows the

Fig. 1. (a) Schematic view of bounding and loading surfaces method proposed in Ref. [14] and is an extension of
in q:p space; (b) typical normal compression and critical the integration procedure used for the modified Cam
state lines in commession olane. clay in Ref. [ 171.It involves an elastic predictor phase
 Integration of bounding surface plasticity models 389

and a plastic corrector phase. At the beginning of

each load increment, an approximate updated
stress/strain is talc-ulated by assuming a fully elastic
response. The estimated state is then corrected to n+ p. = p. exp [&+Af:] (43e)
satisfy the discretized forms of the rate equations of
plasticity. The details of the method are described in
this section.

Elastic predictor Here we note that calculations of plastic strains

Assuming a fully elastic response
of each time step, we have
n+ AEPW
, =: n + Ae@ = n+ 1A,-(O,= 0
rl
involves the use of the image states instead of the
at the beginning
current states. The consistency condition also applies
to the bounding surface which involves the image
states. Therefore it is necessary to use the mapping
(39)
rule (38), i.e.

Note that the left superscript denotes the current time .+p=n+Ipn+p
(44a)
increment.
Thus, we can write eqns (24) and (25) as +I-So = n+ n+ Is
B I1 (Mb)

where + j? = n+ par + p,. The parameter /I can be

n+p(0)=peXP

( >
;n+A,, (40) calculated by substituting
(44) in eqn (430. This gives
+ p and n+ $ from eqns

ZMzn+l
n + f$) =: *s, + 2 n + G(O) + Ae,
(41) +B =
3 PO
(45)
+ sijn + J, + Q/f2 n+ y

where:
As it can be seen from eqn (45), + p itself depends
on the current state of stresses, i.e. + p and n+ sii and
cannot be estimated before these quantities are
2 n + 'G(O) = g: n + IgO'
K determined. This means that + fi should be treated
as an independent unknown. This increases the
number of unknowns to ! 5 (5 As,, Ap, 5 AeVr AC,., A,
po, b), while eqn (43) offers 14 equations. One
,,p[exp[:+ AE.) - 11 additional equation is necessary to complete the set
of eqn (43). Such an equation can be obtained by
=- (42)
K n+ AC,, considering the essential assumption of the bounding
surface plasticity, defined in eqn (15). Details of the
Plastic corrector derivation of this equation is given in the following
section.
Using the updated states, we can estimate the
plastic strains and correct the estimated updated D$erential equation goveming /I
states in the elastic predictor phase. This is achieved
A differential equation for p is derived by
by simultaneous satisfaction of the flow rule,
substituting eqns (32) and (33) in eqn (15). Equation
hardening law, and consistency condition, as implied
(15) is written as:
by the following equations:

n+ p = p exp z ( + Aa _ +Ac;)
1 W-4 Note that:

+I& = n+/ip,fZ(+/j _ ;+lpo) (43b) L& = (L,; + LG,)(Si, + ps~) = L& + 3L$ Wa)

and similarly:
2G +AQ -+A@
+I$ = s, + -N)
KJ +AE, -n+A$)
L&j = L& + 3Lj. (474

Using eqn (38), we have:

x
(
exp :: (~+Ac~ -~+Ac:)
[ 11 - 1 (43c)
&j=&, p=&L (48)
390 M. T. Manzari and M. A. Nom

Substituting (48) in (47b), we have: (58)

L,,A, = L;(ps, + Bs,) + 3L(PP + BP). (49)

2fis,& + ;M2(2flp - po)6p - ;M2pSpo
Substituting eqns (33), (49) and (47a) in eqn (46), we
+ (s,si/ + :Mzpy/!l = 0 (59)
find:

1 1

( i
___
28 B - $ [Sk + {M2pPI + 2/I&.&s, + $Pp2] &PO
PO B fl_ 2 w. (60)
( ->P

-$Pp,,@~ + flp) + 2;P M*po$ = 0. (50) Introducing the following notations

From eqn (29) we have: z, = pov/(l - Ic)

z, = siis, + 2/3M2p2
s,s,, + $M2p2 = $Mpo p (51)
B
z2 = 2/3M2p
or in the differential form
z3 = 2/3MV$p - PO)
s,Sij + fM2plj = f $ (dopp + p&p - pi,,@). (52)
zq = 213M=A

Substituting eqn (52) in (50), we find 1 1

-__
z5=po B p-5
i-L
I I
B i i
B-5 =f. (53)
KP O
and combining eqns (54) (55) (58) and (60) we find:

Equation (53) complete the set of eqn (43) which I

should be solved simultaneously to obtain the 6tP = - (z&l + 2BzJp) (61)
Z6
updated states at the end of each time increment.
Details of the algorithm for implicit integration of the
present model is given in Appendix A. Derivation of
the consistent tangent operator which can be used in
finite element calculations is given in the next section.

Consistent tangent operator where

The consistent tangent operator is defined as:
Z6= 1 + zz,(l - 2p/z5)
aAp
-- aAp

J=
aA6
&,
[ aAc -1
aAe,
dAs,
aAe,,
.

In order to evaluate the consistent tangent operator,

Combining eqns (56H58) and (60) and using eqns
(61) and (62) yields that following expression for 6~.

we write eqns (43) and (53) in differential form, i.e. as, = 2G{6e, - 4/3zz~As,K/(z,z~z~)~e

Sp = K(& - 6(P). (54) - [2ZZ,As~(llzMz5z6)

ckp=;M2{(2flp - po)sA + 2/?Abp + pA@ - ASpo} + 2~.si,]~A}/(l + 4GgA). (63)

(55)
Using eqns (61), (62), eqns (58) and (60) yield the
6s, = 2G(6eii - 6et) (56) following expressions for 6p. and S/I.

6et= WA&, + /3su6A + AS&~) (57) spa = 42BKalz7ck + z,/z,dA]/z6 (W

 Integration of bounding surface plasticity models 391

where

A = z,K/z, - 16GKzz~A~*s~s,,/(~~z~z,)/

l N=5
-- N&l (1 + 4GBA) - 222224~K/(2~2,)(1 - z,/(zzzJ
- N=320
B = 4GB/(l + 4GfiA)
0
PM'@ C = 4GPsij[2& - 2zz,As,( l/z,)/(z5zJ]/( 1

(a)
+ 4GaA) + z:K/(zsz,)

+ zmt1 - z,/(2*z5)1(1/27)/26.

Using eqns (62), (63) and (66), we finally find all the
350 components of the consistent tangent operator:
OCR=4

kri:
Ml
250 aapia& = K[ i - Z3/Z6(A/c)]/Z7

0 N=5
aI50 -- N=a aspladek, = - K[Z,/Z@k,/c)]/Z,
100 ...... N&,
- N=320
50 ass,/a66 = 2G{ -2zz,nK(2~s,)/(z~z,z,)
32000 OCR=8
0 OS 0.1 0.15 0.1
- [Qzz&)( l/z,)/(z55)
&I
(b) + 2Bs,l(A/C)}/(l + 4GpA)

a&,/%ekl = 2G{S.& f skd&?ZZ3~( 1/Z7)/(Z5Z6)

- VIWC)J/(l+ 4GPA).

For the modified Cam clay model (B = 1 and

zs = a~), the aforementioned equation reduces to
those obtained in Ref. [18], i.e.
l Nd
-- N=20
...... N&, A = z, K/z, - 2zzzzqK/(zhz,)
- N--320

0 O.OS 0.1
B = 4G/(l + 4GA)
0.15 0.2
El
C = 8Gsiisii/( 1 + 4GA) + z:K/(zgz,)
Cc)

Fig. 2. Numerical simulations of undrained compression + Zz*Z,[1/Z,)]/z6

tests for two different OCRs using different numbers of
strain increments (IV).

's
8s = &JO/ZS= z[2~:Kz.,/z& '",

it\
H=20
+ z,/zdA]/(z~z~). (65)
100 - - Actual
...... ,mye
50- \
0 I I I I
Substituting eqns (62)-(65) in eqn (59), we find: 0 100 200300400500600
P (kPa)
6A

__ A& + Bsubeij
__

(66) Fig. 3. Computed paths of the actual and image stress states
c in undrained compression tests for two different OCRs.
392 M. T. Manzari and M. A. Nour

(a) aap/adc = K[I - z,~z6(~~~)yz,

a&j& = -4Gs,(A/C)/(l + 4GA)

;i 200
2 I.50 ass,/aih,= 26((&,6!,
- 2~,~~,)(B/c)}/(i
+ 4GA).
=I00
Validation studies
SO
0 In order to demonstrate the accuracy and
0 SO IO0 I50 200 2.x) 300 efficiency of the proposed implicit integration
P Wo) scheme, a number of simulations are reported in this
section. These numerical simulations correspond to
triaxial undrained monotonic and cyclic tests on
(b) heavily and lightly over consolidated clays (with
OCR = 4, 8).
CMM:
H=lO.W)
The following parameters were used in all
simulations:
300
2so K = 0.034
;i 200
g 150
1 = 0.17
=I00
so
G/K = 0.46155
OV
I I I 1
0 0.05 0. I 0.1s 0.2
El M= 1.1

vg = 2.12.

Figures 2 and 3 show the results of numerical

simulations of undrained monotonic compression
CMM:
tests on a clay with OCR = 4 and OCR = 8. The
soil parameter H was set to 20 and number of
strain increments to reach a 20% axial strain was
varied from 5 to 320. Figures 2(a-c), respectively,
show the effective stress path, the variation of
deviatoric stress, q vs axial strain and the variation
of stress ratio, q, vs axial strain. The simulations
I I I I using small and large strain increments, practically
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.1s 0.2 coincide. This clearly shows the efficiency of the
El integration scheme.
The pronounced peaks of stress ratio curves are
due to high OCR values. Figure 3 shows the path of
(d) the actual and image stress states in q:p space. This
figure is especially interesting in the way it shows the
CMM; convergence of the current and image states at final
critical stress ratio.
In order to demonstrate the performance of the
bounding surface model, keeping a constant strain
increment (IV = 320), the soil parameter H was varied
from 5 to 10,000. As shown in Fig. 4, the larger
H, the smaller would be the difference between the
I I i I I
bounding surface model and the modified Cam
0
I J
0 so IO0 IS0 200 250 300
clay. A large value of H practically simulates the
p (kPa) response of the modified Cam clay model. Figure 4
clearly shows the efficiency of the bounding surface
Fig. 4. Effect of the variation of the parameter H on the model to alleviate the unrealistic response of the
response of the bounding surface model. modified Cam clay which produces a large peak in
 Integration of bounding surface plasticity models 393

*-_ Strain inc. = ,002 5. Bardet, J. P., A bounding surface model for sands.
\I
Journal of Engineering Mechanics Division, Proceedings
OCR=2 - Strain inc. = .OOOS
250 of /he ASCE 112(1 I), 1198-1217 (1986).
200 6. Crouch, R. S., Wolf, J. P., Dafalias, Y. F., Unified
150 Critical State Bounding Surface Plasticity Model for
100
2 Soil. Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division,
4 500 ASCE 12O(l I), 2251-2270 (1994).
CT -50 7. Dafalias, Y. F. and Herrmann, L. R., A bounding
-100 surface soil plasticity model. International Symposium
-1.50
-200 on Soils under Cyclic and Transient Loading, Swansea,
Vol. I, pp. 335-345 (1980).
22s 275 325 8. Dafalias, Y. F. and Herrmann, L. R., Bounding surface
p (kPaf formulation of soil plasticity. In Soil Mechanics-Cyclic
and Transient Loads, Chap. 10, eds G. N. Pande and
0. C. Zienkiewicz. Wiley, New York, pp. 253-282
(1982).
9. Dafalias, Y. F. and Herrmann, L. R., Bounding surface
plasticity 11: application to isotropic cohesive soils.
..... Strain inc. = .002 Journal of the Engineering Mechanics Division, ASCE
(b) 112(12), 1263-1291 (1986).
- Strain inc. = .0005
2.50 IO. Wang, Z. L., Dafalias, Y. F. and Shen, C. K., Bounding
200 surface hypo-plasticity model for sand. Journal of
150 Engineer& Mechanics Division, Proceedings of the
100
-z 50 ASCE 116(5), 983-1001 (1990).
% 0 II. Dafalias, Y. F., Bounding surface plasticity 1:
m -50 mathematical foundation and hypo-plasticity. Journal
-100 of the Enaineerina Mechanics Division. ASCE. 112(9) . ,
-1 so
566987 fi986). -
-200
-2.50 12. Hashiguchi, K. and Ueno, M., Elasto-plastic constitu-
tive laws for granular materials, preprints of speciality
-0.02 4).(II 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 session 9-constitutive equations for soils. Ninth
El International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foun-
dation Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, pp. 73-82 (1977).
Fig. 5. Numerical simulation of a cyclic undrained test 13. Hashiguchi, K., Constitutive equations of granular
using two different strain increments. media with anisotropic hardening. Proceedings of Third
International Conference on Numerical Method in
q :cI curve. The modified Cam clay is also. deficient in Geomechanics, Aachen, p. 345 (1979).
cyclic loading. 1Jpon one cycle of loading and 14. Ortiz, M. and Simo, J. C., An analysis of a new class
of integration algorithms for elastoplastic constitutive
unloading, a closed loop will be developed. The
relations. international Journal of Numerical Meihods in
bounding surface.. however, gives the realistic trend, Engineering 23, 353-366 (1986).
that is the shift of the stress path to the left in q:p 15. Simo, J. C. and Taylor, R. L. Consistent tangent
space (Fig. 5). operators for rate-independent elastoplasticity. Compu-
Figure 5 shows the cyclic response of a lightly tational Methods of Applied Mechanical Engineering 48,
101-118 (1985).
overconsolidated clay simulated by using the
16. Simo, J. C. and Meschke, G., A new class of algorithms
bounding surface model. As it can be seen, a for classical plasticity extended to finite strains.
reasonably large strain increment (0.002) practically Application to geomaterials. Computational Mechanics
simulates the same response as obtained by using a 11, 253-278 (1993).
17. Hashash, Y. M. A. and Whittle, A. J., Integration of the
small strain increment (0.0005). These simulations
modified Cam-clay model in nonlinear finite element
also show the accuracy of the proposed integration analysis. Computers and Geotechnics 14, 59-83 (1992).
scheme in cyclic regime. 18. Ortiz, M. and Popov, E. P., Accuracy and stability of
integration algorithms for elastoplastic constitutive
Acknowledgement--M. T. Manzari acknowledges the relations. Iniernational Journal of Numerical Methods in
support provided b:y The George Washington University Engineering 21, 1561-1576 (1985).
Facilitating Fund and the Loughran Foundation. 19. Borja, R. 1. and Lee, S. R., Cam-clay plasticity. Part 11:
implicit integration of elastc+plastic constitutive re-
lations based on a nonlinear elastic predictor.
REFERENCES
Computational Methods of Applied Mechanical Engin-
Mroz, Z., On the description of anisotropic hardening. eering 20, 225-240 (1990).
Journal of Mechanics and Physics of Solids 15, 63-175 20. Borja, R. I., Cam-clay plasticity. Part 1: implicit
(1967). integration of elasto-plastic constitutive relations.
Dafalias, Y. F. and Popov, E. P., A mode1 of Computational Methods of Applied Mechanical Engin-
nonlinearly hardening materials for cyclic loading. Acta eering 78, 49-72 (1991).
Mechanica 21, 173-192 (1975). 21. Roscoe, K. H., Schofield, A. N., and Thurairajah, A.,
Krieg, R. D., A practical two surface plasticity theory. Yielding of clays in states wetter than critical.
Journal of Applied Mechanics. Transactions of the Geotechnique 13(3), 21 l-240 (1963).
ASME 42, 641-646 (1975). 22. Roscoe, K. H. and Burland, J. B., On the generalized
Anadarajah, A. .%nd Dafalias, Y. F., Bounding surface stress-strain behavior of wet clay. In Engineering
plasticity, Ill: application to anisotropic cohesive clays. Plasticitv. eds J. Hevman and F. A. Leckie. Cambridge
Journal of Engineering Mechanics, AXE 112(2), Univers& Press, dambridge, England, pp. 53tic9
1292-1318 (1986). (1968).

CAS6313-B
394 M. T. Manzati and M. A. Now

APPENDIX A

Algorithm for implicit integration for the bounding surface

mod$ed Cam clay model

(1) Initialize:

I+ A@ = 0, I+ Aef = 0, n + p = p,,, +/I = 0,

fi = PO/(3+ s,, + s,,j2M/p + p),

kp = polp(2fi- po/p)/(po/p(2~- po/p)

+ 4If#qp - 1)).

(2) Elastic prediction and yield conditions

+Is,, = s+ 2G/Kp(n+Ae,/+Ac)

x {exp(vo/h- +AC) - l}

If + AC-PO use + Is,, = s,, + 2G/Rpvo/~ + Ae,,

+ a = 8, I+ kp = kp.

If only elastic strain then go to (7) final stresses (converged

solution)

Plastic corrector using a local (fiill) Newton scheme:

#+1/j
, 8, +kp}.

(3) Calculate the residuals vector R

+ p - p exp(v&c( + At - + At))
(I+A@ _ 0,667 + ,jM2(2 + /j + lp _ + lpO)

+s,, - s,, - 2G/Kp(+Ae - +Ae;)/(+Ac -

+Ae&){exp(ve/Q+A~ - Act) - I}
If ( + AC - + Ae;)+O use + Is,, - s,, - ZG/Kpvo/
u(+Ae,--+Ae&)
+Ae&-2+ln+Ip+Is,,

+ PO- POexp(vo/(l - K) + A.?)

+l n+l +s,_0.66~M*+Ip(+Ipo_n+~n+p)
B Sll

b + 1 kp +p$po/(~ - +kp -b +po/po)

+ kp _ + pui+lp(2 + fi _ + IpOl+lp)/{n+ lpo/

+p(2+~-+Ipol+p)+4H+/q+~- I)}

If IRI less than tolerance then go to (7) final stresses

(converged solution).

(4) Calculate the consistent iangent moduli T = aR/BU:

 Integration of bounding surface plasticity models 395

where (5) Solve for TSU = -R:

hi,= I if(i:=j)
0 otherwise
S+A, P+Ip,S+kp}.
+K = WI/K exp(v&(+Ac - I+Ae&))
(6) Updated the solution vector U
+G = (G/K)a(exp(v&(+A6 -+AeJ)) - I}/
(+lAC---+IAeP)I ~+lp=+Ip+6+lp, +IAL=+&~+~+I&

If (+A6 - + Act l-*0 use n+ G = (G/K)@v~/K +S,,=+s,+6n+s,,, +Ae; =+Aeg + b+Ae;

aR,/a+ A@= -pov~/(l - K)exp(v,/(A - K) + A@) +I/f=+In+s+I,l
+po= +po + P+po,
aR,p +PO=
+/$=+fi+S+Ip, .+lkp=+kp+6+kp,
(?y_k _j$@ O)(/j+k I ,)+fi+,k cl 0/n 0
(B - + kp - j? + poipi#
Go to step (3)
aR,jan +lkp =
Final stresses (converged solution):
n _+!k _n +I @no n n+l On ,,)+n ilk n+l Ox D
(/3- + kp - B + polpo) p = P, A@= n+&P

aR,jan+lp= -~x:~-~+~po~+~p~2~+~~-~+~po~+~p~y)~x q = +Isy , Ae$= n+ Ae$

aR,/8+po = -(X;?-+~ol+p(2+~B -+pol+p)Z)/X
PO= PO, nn = +A
aR,/p+lg = _(2~+pol+p-+pol+p(2+~-+po/
/3=+/?, kp=+kp
+p)(:! + PO/+p + SH+/.I - 4H))/X

~~~+lp,~+p(~+~-+poi+lp) where
+4H+/?(+p - 1)
kp = 2
y= -~i~+po~+p2+~+p,2/+lpl P

~=2+bi+P-2+pol+lp2. t = cr.