Soil Plasticity and the Structured

Cam Clay Model

Dr. Martin D. Liu

School of Civil Engineering
University of New South Wales
Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
Tel.: 2-9385-5474
Fax: 2-9385-6139
e-mail: [email protected]

Soil Plasticity and the Structured

Cam Clay Model
Summary
I: Soil plasticity
II: The Structured Cam Clay model
III: Discussion on further development
within the theoretical framework of
the SCC model

Brief summary of the SCC model

The behaviour of soil found in nature differs
remarkably from that of the same soil in
laboratory reconstituted states.
When solving practical geotechnical engineering
problems, the constitutive models developed for
describing the behaviour of laboratory
reconstituted soil are not good enough.
Influence of soil structure must be considered

Brief summary
A simple predictive model
the Structured Cam Clay (SCC) model
Aim of the model: to provide tool for the
solution of boundary value problems
encountered in geotechnical engineering.
Simple and convenient for engineers

Brief summary
We select Modified Cam Clay (MCC) model as the
base for the new model.
(1) simple and rational, yet describes the
behaviour reconstituted soil with acceptable
accuracy;
(2) widely applied in geo-engineering field.

Brief summary
the SCC model, soil response defined in a 4-D
space:
e, current voids ratio,
(p , q ), current stress state,
stress history, and
soil structure.

Brief summary

Elastic & plastic

regions

Elastic

Voids ratio e

Soil behaviour in the p

- q space divided into
two regions by the yield
surface.

Virgin yielding
Structured soil
e = e* + e

e
e
e*
Reconstituted
soil: e *
p' y,i

Soil behaves purely

elastically for any
stress excursion inside
the yield surface;

p'

Mean effective stress lnp '

M*

Yield surface
p' s

p'

brief summary

virgin yield occurs for

stress state on the
surface and causing it
expansion.

Voids ratio e

Elastic

Virgin yielding
Structured soil
e = e* + e

e
e
e*
Reconstituted
soil: e *
p' y,i

During virgin yielding,

yield surface expands
with the current stress
stays on the surface.

p'

Mean effective stress lnp '

M*

Yield surface
p' s

p'

Brief summary
The compression behaviour of structured soils
is described as
e = e* + e
e*: voids ratio for the same soil in a
reconstituted state
e: additional voids ratio sustained by
soil structure

Brief summary
The compression behaviour of structured
soils is described as
Based on experimental data, Liu and Carter
(1999, 2000) proposed the following equation
for e

p y ,i
+c
e = a

b: destructuring index;

c: the part of e that cannot be eliminated by

the increase of stress level;
a:
ei = a+c.

Brief summary
Some basic assumptions are:
(1) The mechanical properties of a clay in laboratory
reconstituted states are treated as intrinsic, which
can be described adequately by the MCC model.
(2) Elastic properties of soil are independent of soil
structure.
(3) Both hardening and destructurig of soil are
dependent on plastic volumetric deformation.
With the proposed isotropic compression line, the
SCC model is formulated.

Brief summary
The Structured Cam Clay (SCC) model applied to
simulate the behaviour of soil for (1) laboratory
single element tests and (2) boundary value
problems.
(1) Convenient identification of model
parameters and for implementation into
numerical analysis
(2) Successfully captures many important
features of the behaviour of structured soils and
influence of soil structure

Brief summary
(3) Significantly improves the performance of the
Modified Cam Clay Model, represents well the
behaviour of real soil, the soil found in nature
(4) Useful tool for the solution of boundary value
problems encountered in geotechnical practice

Soil Plasticity and the Structured

Cam Clay Model
III: Discussions on further development within the
theoretical framework of the SCC model
1: Modeling soil deformation in the general
stress and strain state
2: Plastic deformation within yield surface
3: Effect of cementation
4: Development of soil structure
5: Post peak strength of soils
6: Anisotropy
7: Questions and discussions welcome!

1: Introduction
In the previous talk,
(1)introduce plasticity theory for constitutive
modelling of soils; Demonstrate how plastic
deformation of soil modelled within the
conventional plasticity theory with special
consideration characteristics of soil.
A distinguished feature of soils: plastic
volumetric deformation dependent
hardening.

1: Introduction
(2) introduce two elasto-plasticity models:
original Cam Clay model and Structured Cam
Clay model.
Models within the framework critical state
soil mechanics
In SCC model, (1) differences between actual
soil found in nature and that in laboratory
reconstituted state illustrated. (2) The
behaviour of natural soil modelled by
considering the influence of soil structure

1: Introduction
The SCC model formulated to be simple as a
practical tool for geotechnical engineers.
Simplifications and idealizations made in
accordance with this requirement. Only
features of first importance for common
engineering problems represented.
Situations where a simple model not
enough, refinement of the model or more
advance models needed

1: Introduction
Situations for examples
(1) more accurate descriptions and detailed
examination of soil behaviour
e.g., features of second importance cannot
be ignored.
(2) more complicated material behaviour
e.g., more complicated stress paths
(3) special circumstances
e.g., anisotropy significant

1: Introduction
Improvement of the SCC model within the
proposed theoretical framework possible
Some of techniques for the improvement
discussed, they are
1: soil behaviour in the general stress and
strain state
2: Plastic deformation within yield surface
3: Effect of cementation
4: Small strain behaviour
5: Anisotropy

2: Soil behaviour in the general stress

and strain state
Work needed to generalize the current 2-D SCC
model, axysymmetical stress and strain
circumstances, to the general stress and strain
tensor state.
Examining soil behaviour in 2-D model, e.g., yield
surface,

q 2 *2 p( ps p) = 0

d
d

p
d
p
v

2
=
2
2
*

2: Soil behaviour in the general stress

and strain state
The key part to find stress and strain
parameters suitable for representing soil
behaviour in the stress and strain tensor
space.
To substitute p, q, v and d.
The concept of a generalized shear stress
ratio proposed as a mapping quantity to
representing the mobilization of the friction
resistance of soil in the general stress state.
Then other stress and strain parameters
formed in step with it.

2.1

A generalized shear stress ratio

A generalized shear stress ratio formulated based

on a critical state strength criterion in the general
stress space
Experimental data: (1) critical states of deformation
exist for a wide range of geomaterials with and
without structure;
(2) mechanical properties of soils at a critical state
of deformation independent of soil structure and
testing stress paths
Some experimental data

2.1

A generalized shear stress ratio

Failure surface of Fuji sand

Detected in the 3-D principle
Stresses (Yamada, 1979)

'

' 1=' 2

plane is used and

defined as

2
3
( 2 3 ), y = (1 p)
x=
2
2
The X & Y coordinates
& conventional triaxial
tests are shown

' 2
' 2=' 3

2.1

A generalized shear stress ratio

'

Fuji sand
Plane

' 1=' 2

Failure surface between

von Mises failure surface
& Matsuoka-Naki surface

' 2
' 2=' 3

2.1

A generalized shear stress ratio

' 1
p'=80 kPa

Grundite clay (Lade et al)

Failure surfaces of
clay at different
stress level

p'=124 kPa
p' =162 kPa

' 1= '2

' 2

2.1

A generalized shear stress ratio

' 1

A rock (Mogi, 1971)

Failure surface
' 1=' 2

' 2

2.1

A generalized shear stress ratio

Strength criteria of geo-materials at critical state

(1)The criterion can be expressed in terms of
the three stress invariants.
Intrinsic material property, dependent of
mineralogy of the material
(2) Critical state surface in principal stress
space is a linear cone, with the apex of the
cone being at the origin of stress space if the
material is cohesionless.
The relative value of the stress no influence
the shape of the surface

2.1

A generalized shear stress ratio

Strength criteria of geo-materials at critical

state in the general stress space determined
by
Its shape in the plane
Shape critical state Strength surface in the
plane varies between von Mises criterion and
Matsuoka-Nakai criterion.

2.1

A generalized shear stress ratio

Liu and Carter (2003) proposed a general

critical state Strength, allowing the shapes of
the surfaces variable with materials

)]

2
2
2
2

(1 +2 +3)(1 +2 +3) s 1 +2 +3
f2 =
27+9s
123

Liu and Carter criterion

f2 =

(1 +2 +3 )([ 1 +2 +3 )2 s(12 +22 +32 )]

12 3

27+ 9s
Mohr-Coulomb's criterion
Matsuoka-Nakai's criterion (s =1)
Lade's criterion (s =0)
A strength locus (s =-10)
Von Mises's criterion

' 3

' 2

Fig. 1 Critical state strength surfaces in the plane

o
( cs =32 , p' =100 kPa)

2.1

A generalized shear stress ratio

A generalized shear stress ratio formulated

^ =

2 f 2 + f 2 ( f 2 + 27 15s)

f 2 + 27 15s + f 2 ( f 2 + 27 15s)
' 1
' 2=(' 1+' 3)/2

^=2(' 1-' 3)/(' 1+' 3)

2( 1 3 )
^ =
1 + 3
For the stress on the
surface with
( 1 + 3 )
2 =
2

' 3

' 2

2.2 Stress parameters for general tensor

stress state
Based on formulated generalized shear stress ratio
Stress parameters for constitutive modeling for general
stress and strain tensor proposed

1
p = ( 11
+ 22 + 33
)
3

q ^ = p ^

The generalized stress ratio is suitable for

general tensor stress states.

2.3

Generalization of yield surface

2-D models can be extended for general stress states,

for example,
Yield surface

q 2 *2 p( ps p) = 0

Rewritten as

q ^ * p( po p) = 0
2

2.3

Generalization of yield surface

Yield surface

q ^ * p( po p) = 0
2

' 1 = ' 2 = ' 3

' 3

The yield surface in the

Principal stress space

' 2
' 1

(c) Principal stress space

2.3

Generalization of yield surface

Yield surface

q ^ * p( po p) = 0
2

'1

Matsuoka-Nakai's criterion (s=1)

Mohr-Coulomb's criterion
Von Mises's criterion

The yield surface in the

plane
'2

'3

(d) The plane

Liu-Carter's criterion
s=1 (Matsuoka-Nakai)
s=0 (Lade criterion)
s=-10

2.4

Generalization of flow rule

Dilatancy for 2-D

d dp
d

p
v

p e

* 2 2 + 2 1

p s

Generalized dilatancy: by substituting the shear stress

ratio

d
=
d
p
d
p
v

2 ^
* ^ + ^ 1
2

pe

ps

2.4

Generalization of flow rule

Generalized dilatany:

d
=
d
p
d
p
v

2 ^
* ^ + ^ 1
2

pe

ps

Distortional strain increment obtained, not the

increment plastic strain tensor.
Assumption
The deviatoric plastic strain increment tensor for
loading is assumed to be linearly proportional to
the current deviatoric stress tensor

2.4

Generalization of flow rule

Mathematically

(d dv ) = ( ' p' )
p

The incremental plastic strain can be written as

p

(
)
I

6
p
d

d
d p = d vp +
3
2 ( p) ( p)

Unit tensor, stress tensor, inner product of two tensors

The plastic deformation is defined.

3: Effect of cementation
Dr. Suksun Horpibulsuk has carried frontier
research on the behaviour of cemented soil. I
believe that he is more qualified than I to talk to you
about the influence of cementation on the behaviour
of soils and how to model these influence
mathematically. I will not omit this topic here.

4: A conceptual framework for modelling

the mechanical behaviour of structured
soils
Soil behaviour very complicated and loading
circumstances soil is subjected in geotechnical
engineering vary greatly. The mechanisms for
deformation and failure for geo-structures often
controlled by different characteristics of soil
behaviour. Comprehensive review of soil
Behaviour necessary.

4: A conceptual framework for modelling

the mechanical behaviour of structured
soils
This section covers:

Some well known characteristics of soil

behaviour
Quantification of the behaviour
A conceptual framework for modelling

4: Conceptual Framework
Useful:
guidance for mathematical modelling
understand which characteristics of soil
behaviour which are most significant

4.1: Stable region

Experimental data
Cyclic isotropic tests (El-Sohby, 1964)
No. cycles

Mean effective stress kPa

1
2

600

4
11
24

400

103
151

200

0
0

0.001
0.002
Volumetric strain v

0.003

Cyclic isotropic loading of soil (El-Sohby, 1964)

Cyclic isotropic tests

Soil behaviour during
cyclic loading

No. cycles
Mean effective stress kPa

1
2
4

600

(1)Virgin yielding for 1st

cycle;

11
24

400

103
151

(2) stable after six cycles;

200

0
0

0.001
0.002
Volumetric strain v

0.003

Cyclic isotropic loading

(El-Sohby, 1964)

deformation dependent on
type of loading and the
stress state, independent of
N.

(3) Transition from virgin

yielding to stable
behaviour for N = 2 ~5.

Cyclic tests on soils

Similar trends observed
(a) for cyclic tests with =constant;
(b) for cyclic shearing tests if < s.
s, a given shear stress ratio.
A new region of soil deformation suggested:
The stable region, usually covering the
elastic region.

The stable region

In the region, soil deformation, independent
of the number of cycles. No further
accumulation in permanent deformation.
Deformation not elastic, hysteresis seen.
The region greater than elastic region.
Important for designs such as pavements,
offshore foundations.
N for traffic infinitive

4.2: Subyielding inside the yield surface

and associated destructuring
Pure elastic deformation within the yield surface
assumption.
Seen from the original

made.
Unloading & reloading not the
same, not completely
recoverable
not exact elastic =
actual plastic

Voids ratio e

data, material idealization

2.5
2.3

C
B

2.1

1.9
10

100

1000

Mean effective stress p' (kPa)

4.2: Subyielding inside the yield surface

and associated destructuring
Plastic deformation occurs
for loading inside yield
surface.
Concept of subyielding
introduced.
Destructuring, associated
with plastic deformation,
occurs in subyielding.

importance
(a) Loading with large stress
reversals
For loading, virgin yielding
Unloading, at start, elastic
As reversal

specific volume (1+e)

4.2: Subyielding inside the yield surface

and associated destructuring

, plastic occurs.

At large reversal, plastic defm.

is much greater than virgin
yielding.

1.83
1.78
1.73

Unloading
Initial stress
Loading

1.68
1.63
10

100

1000

Mean effective stress p ' (kPa)

The behaviour of Beaucaire clay

under isotropic loading and
unloading tests (Costanzo et al,
2006)

(b) Liquefaction,
The feature of plastic deform.
similar to the isotropic
unloading. Huge plastic
deformation occurs as the
stress goes to zero.
If subyielding not considered,
no liquefaction

specific volume (1+e)

4.2: Subyielding inside the yield surface

and associated destructuring
1.83
1.78
1.73

Unloading
Initial
stress
Loading

1.68
1.63
10

100

1000

Mean effective stress p ' (kPa)

4.2: Subyielding inside the yield surface

and associated destructuring
(c) Structure performance under cyclic
loading
excavation, earthquake, wave, traffic loading
(d) For particularly structures, allowed
deformation or non-uniform deformation
small, accurate prediction of soil
deformation needed.
An important one, non-uniform settlement of
building caused by tunnelling in
metropolitan cities.

4.3: Development of soil structure with

time
Soil forms and develops
structure with time.
Usually positive effect.
The peak strength
increases;

V o id s ratio e

2.3

2
3

structured
reconstitute

2.15

2
100

1000

Mean effective stress p' (kPa)

The stiffness increases.

Example: an enlargement of the yield stress
after a few months

4.3: Development of soil structure with

time
Drained sheared test
on a sand
The stiffness
increases
significantly

4.4: Different soil structures due to the

soil formation processes
Undrained test
Vaid et al (1995)
The same a sand with
different methods of
sample preparation
Basically the same
voids ratio

4.4: Different soil structures due to the

soil formation processes

Ishihara (1993) Toyoura sand: moisture

placement

4.4: Different soil structures due to the

soil formation processes

Ishihara (1993) Toyoura sand: dry deposition

placement

4.5: Post peak strength of soils

Three strengths for soils
(a) peak strength
(b) critical state strength
(c) residual strength
The shear strength of a soil that can be
mobilised on a polished sliding surface, after it
has been formed through the soil due to the
alignment of its platy particles.

4.5: Post peak strength of soils

For residual strength
(1) enough platy particle to form polished failure
surface
(2) large deformation to form polished surface
Critical state strength for most clay: 20
Residual strength: as low as 6
Landslides can be controlled by residual
strength, especial slide along pre-existing failure
surface

(2) c > 50%, no influence

CS Strength > R strength
both constant

Influence in three regions

(1) c < 20%, no influence
CS Strength = R strength
constant

Friction angle ( )

Critical state strength and residual

strength dependent on clay faction c
34

residual state

28

critical state

22
16
10

(2) 20%< c < 50%, no influence

CS Strength > R strength
both decreases with c

4
0

20

40

60

80

Clay fraction (%)

100

4.6 Influence of soil anisotropy

The greatest challenges to academia and
engineering in engineering
Some influences demonstrated and discussed
Isotropy and anisotropy
A material is defined as isotropy if it
possesses no preferred direction; and the
orientation in space of a sphere of an isotropic
material can not be detected experimentally.
Otherwise, the material is anisotropy

Anisotropy
Isotropy and anisotropy
A material is defined as isotropy if it
possesses no preferred direction; and the
orientation in space of a sphere of an isotropic
material can not be detected experimentally.
Otherwise, the material is anisotropy

Anisotropy
Cross anisotropy
Formulation and property
Most geo-materials found in site cross
anisotropic
arising from the depositional history of natural
soil

Anisotropy: test data

Isotropic compression tests
on sand

1= 2= 3=p
1=2=3
v/ a=3
Virgin compression
n=37.5%
isotropy
Anisotropy increases
with n.

Anisotropy: test data

Isotropic compression tests

1= 2= 3=p
v/ a=3
Unloading
The same
v/ a=3
Elastic & isotropic for
this sand

Anisotropy: test data

Undrained effective
stress paths

Anisotropy: test data

Undrained effective
stress paths
Indicating rotation of
the yield surface

Anisotropy: test data

Yield surface identified for some

natural clays: rotated toward ko line

Anisotropy: test data

Anisotropy linked to effect of
the principal stress rotation
The same as cutting samples
from different directions &
testing them in the same way
If soil isotropic, response the
same;
If soil anisotropic, response
dependent on angle

ground
1

1
1

rotation angle
=0
45

90

Rotation of the principal stresses

Hollow cylinder
test
Toyoura sand
different directions
of the principal
stresses
Behaviour of soil
dependent on
angle : direction
of principal stress
anisotropic

Anisotropy: test data

Peak strength
direction of the
principal stresses
For most sand,
minimum peak
strength at
=20~30

Anisotropy: test data

Effect of rotation of
principal stresses
In tests, 11, 12, 22,
21 vary in such as
way that magnitudes
of the two principal
stresses 1 and 2
do not change but
the directions of 1
and 2 changes
continuously from 0
to 360 to 720, and
on.

2 2 12

11 2 1

Effect of rotation of principal stresses

E2=11-22
E4=12
In rotation of
the principal
stresses:
(1) plastic
deformation
(2) permanent
strain increases

Conceptual Framework
Four regions of

different behaviour

Elastic region
Virgin yielding
Sub-yielding
Stable behaviour

Yield surface
Current stress
Sub-yielding

Pure elastic

p'

5 Surfaces in Stress Space

Structural yield

surface
Equivalent yield
surface
Loading surface
Elastic surface
Stable surface

Mf

Structural
yield surface

Loading surf.

Elastic surf.

p'
Stable surface
Equivalent yield surface

Types of Behaviour
Behaviour

Condition

Elastic

Stress state inside the elastic

surface, pe

Elastic Response
Mf

Structural
yield surface

Loading surf.

Elastic surf.

p'
Stable surface

Equivalent yield surface

Types of Behaviour
Behaviour

Condition

Elastic

Stress state inside the elastic

surface, pe

Virgin yielding pc = ps and dpc > 0

Virgin Yielding
Mf

Structural
yield surface

Loading surf.

Elastic surf.

p'
Stable surface
Equivalent yield surface

Types of Behaviour
Behaviour

Condition

Elastic

Stress state inside the elastic

surface, pe

Virgin yielding pc = ps and dpc > 0

Subyielding
Stress state inside ps and out side
pe and pn

Sub-Yielding
Mf

Structural
yield surface

Loading surf.

Elastic surf.

p'
Stable surface
Equivalent yield surface

Types of Behaviour
Behaviour

Condition

Elastic

Stress state inside the elastic

surface, pe

Virgin yielding pc = ps and dpc > 0

Subyielding
Stress state inside ps and out side
pe and pn
Subyielding
Stress state inside pn and out side
pe during the first few cycles

Sub-Yielding (1st few cycles)

Mf

Structural
yield surface

Loading surf.

Elastic surf.
A

p'
Stable surface
Equivalent yield surface

Types of Behaviour
Behaviour

Condition

Elastic

Stress state inside the elastic

surface, pe

Virgin yielding pc = ps and dpc > 0

Subyielding
Stress state inside ps and out side
pe and pn
Subyielding
Stress state inside pn and out side
pe during the first few cycles
Stable
Stress state inside pn and out side
pe (after about 5 cycles)

Stable Response (cycling)

Mf

Structural
yield surface

Loading surf.

Elastic surf.

p'
Stable surface
Equivalent yield surface

Types of Behaviour
Loading Type

Condition

First loading

pc = pcmax and dpc > 0

pcmax is the maximum loading surface the

soil has ever experienced.

Types of Behaviour
Loading Type

Condition

First loading

pc = pcmax and dpc > 0

Reloading

pc < pcmax and dpc > 0

pcmax is the maximum loading surface the

soil has ever experienced.

Types of Behaviour
Loading Type

Condition

First loading

pc = pcmax and dpc > 0

Reloading

pc < pcmax and dpc > 0

Unloading

pc < pcmax and dpc < 0

pcmax is the maximum loading surface the

soil has ever experienced.

Hardening & Destructuring

Assumed to depend on the plastic
volumetric deformation

Consequences
Magnitude of plastic volumetric

deformation of natural soil is dependent

on change in size of yield surface,
irrespective of stress path

Structural yield surface is dependent on

current soil structure, current voids
ratio, and current stress state

Changes in Structure
Destructuring
caused by stress changes
monotonic and irrecoverable

Development of structure
all other effects such as ageing,
leaching, change of chemical
components of the pore fluid, and
weathering

B
A

Destructuring

C
E

Sub-yielding: AB

p' o,B

p' y,i

p' o,F

(a) Behaviour of structured soil in

space

p' c
e - p' c

Mf
F

p' y,i

E
C
A

B
p' c,B

p'

p' c,
C

p' c,F

(b) Variation of surfaces during loading

Destructuring

A
C
E

p' o,B

p' y,i

p' o,F

(a) Behaviour of structured soil in

space

p' c
e - p' c

Mf
F

p' y,i

E
C
A

B
p' c,B

p'

p' c,
C

p' c,F

(b) Variation of surfaces during loading

Sub-yielding: AB
Virgin yielding: BC

Destructuring

A
C
E

p' o,B

p' y,i

p' o,F

(a) Behaviour of structured soil in

space

p' c
e - p' c

Mf
F

p' y,i

E
C
A

B
p' c,B

p'

p' c,
C

p' c,F

(b) Variation of surfaces during loading

Sub-yielding: AB
Virgin yielding: BC
Unload. & reload.: CDE

Development of Structure
Many factors affect development of
structure: e.g., ageing effect on the size of
the structural yield surface (Mesri and
Shahien, 1997)

t
py,i = po
t
p

po size of equivalent yield surface

tp time needed for primary compression
t
time measured from end of primary
compression
material constant.

Soil Strength
Final state under shearing is either
the critical state of deformation or
the residual state of deformation

Clay fraction < 20%

critical state strength

Clay fraction > 20%

continuous strength reduction after critical state
requires description

Strength Reduction
Strength after the critical state depends on
particle orientation
Mf=M*cs-(M*cs-M*r)o
f
*cs
*r
o

maximum shearing resistance

critical state strength
residual strength
degree of particle orientation
(linked with the plastic work of shear
deformation along potential sliding surface)

Summary
7 Major points
1.
2.
3.

Equivalent yield surface, structural

yield surface and the loading surface
Elastic surface
Stable surface

Summary
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Equivalent yield surface, structural

yield surface and the loading surface
Elastic surface
Stable surface
Flow rule
Hardening and destructuring
Stable deformation
Transition to the residual state of
deformation

Conclusions
Conceptual framework - describing
mechanical behaviour of structured soils
Stress-strain behaviour divided into four
regions in stress space, i.e.,
an elastic region, a stable deformation
region, a sub-yielding region and a virgin
yielding region
Influence of structure on mechanical
behaviour discussed

Thank you very

much!