Refinement of the Hardening Soil model within the small strain range - Publication - MOST Wiedzy


Refinement of the Hardening Soil model within the small strain range


The popularity of the elasto-plastic Hardening Soil (HS) model is based on simple parameter identification from standard testing and empirical formulas. The HS model is implemented in many commercial FE codes designed to analyse geotechnical problems. In its basic version, the stress–strain behaviour within the elastic range is subject to the hypoelastic power law, which assures the barotropy of the elastic stiffness. However, a proper modelling within the small strain range, i.e. strain-induced stiffness degradation and correct reproduction of the hysteretic behaviour, was one of the most important drawbacks in the HS formulation. The first small strain stiffness extension to the HS model was proposed by Benz (Small strain stiffness of soils and its numerical consequences, 2007), and the new model was called Hardening Soil Small (HSS). Despite the simple isotropic formulation, its applicability was proved in various numerical simulations in geotechnics. However, the HSS formulation exhibits a serious fault known in the literature as overshooting, i.e. uncontrolled reset of the loading memory after tiny unloading–reloading cycles. The authors’ main aim was to retain the set of material parameters for the HSS formulation and to propose a new small strain extension to the HS model without overshooting. The new proposal is based on the BRICK model which represents the concept of nested yield surfaces in strain space. The implementation aspects of the new HS-Brick model are described, and its performance is presented in some element tests and selected boundary value problems by comparisons with the HSS formulation.


  • 5


  • 5

    Web of Science

  • 6


Cite as


artykuły w czasopismach
Published in:
Acta Geotechnica no. 15, pages 2031 - 2051,
ISSN: 1861-1125
Publication year:
Bibliographic description:
Cudny M., Truty A.: Refinement of the Hardening Soil model within the small strain range// Acta Geotechnica -Vol. 15, (2020), s.2031-2051
Digital Object Identifier (open in new tab) 10.1007/s11440-020-00945-5
Bibliography: test
  1. Addenbrooke TI, Potts DM, Puzrin AM (1997) The influence of pre-failure soil stiffness on the numerical analysis of tunnel construction. Géotechnique 47(3):693-712 open in new tab
  2. Amorosi A, Rollo F, Houlsby GT (2020) A nonlinear anisotropic hyperelastic formulation for granular materials: comparison with existing models and validation. Acta Geotech 15(1):179-196 open in new tab
  3. Atkinson JH (2000) Non-linear soil stiffness in routine design, 40th Rankine Lecture. Géotechnique 50(5):487-508 open in new tab
  4. Bagbag A, Lehane B, Doherty J (2017) Predictions of footing and pressuremeter response in sand using a hardening soil model. Proc Inst Civ Eng Geotech Eng 170(6):479-492 open in new tab
  5. Benz T (2007) Small-strain stiffness of soils and its numerical consequences. Ph.D. thesis, University of Stuttgart
  6. Benz T, Vermeer P, Schwab R (2009) A small-strain overlay model. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 33:25-44 open in new tab
  7. Brinkgreve RBJ, Kumarswamy S, Swolfs WM, Zampich L, Ragi Manoj N (2019) Plaxis finite element code for soil and rock analyses. Plaxis BV, Bentley Systems, Incorporated, Philadelphia
  8. Burland JB (1989) ''Small is beautiful''-the stiffness of soils at small strains, 9th Laurits Bjerrum Memorial Lecture. Can Geo- tech J 26(4):499-516 open in new tab
  9. Clarke SD, Hird CC (2012) Modelling of viscous effects in natural clays. Can Geotech J 49:129-140 open in new tab
  10. Clayton CRI (2011) Stiffness at small strain: research and prac- tice, 50th Rankine Lecture. Géotechnique 61(1):5-37 open in new tab
  11. Cudny M, Partyka E (2017) Influence of anisotropic stiffness in numerical analyses of tunneling and excavation problems in stiff soils. In: Lee W, Lee J-S, Kim H-K, Kim D-S (eds) Proceedings of the 19th international conference on soil mechanics and geotechnical engineering, vol 2. ISSMGE, Seoul, pp 719-722
  12. de Borst R, Groen AE (1995) Some observations on element performance in isochoric and dilatant plastic flow. Int J Numer Methods Eng 38:2887-2906 open in new tab
  13. Eekelen HAM (1980) Isotropic yield surfaces in three dimensions for use in soil mechanics. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 4:89-101
  14. Ellison KC, Soga K, Simpson B (2012) A strain space soil model with evolving stiffness anisotropy. Géotechnique 62(7):627-641 open in new tab
  15. Gu X, Yang S (2018) Why the OCR may reduce the small strain shear stiffness of granular materials? Acta Geotech 13(6):1467-1472 open in new tab
  16. Hardin BO, Drnevich VP (1972) Shear modulus and damping in soils: design equations and curves. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE 98(SM7):667-692
  17. Hilber HM, Hughes TJR, Taylor RL (1977) Improved numerical dissipation for time integration algorithms in structural dynamics. Earthq Eng Struct Dyn 5:283-292 open in new tab
  18. Hueckel T, Nova R (1979) On paraelastic hysteresis of soils and rocks. Bull Pol Acad Sci 27(1):49-55 open in new tab
  19. Katsigiannis G (2017) Modern geotechnical codes of practice and new design challenges using numerical methods for supported excavations. Ph.D. thesis, University College London open in new tab
  20. Kim S, Finno RJ (2019) Inverse analysis of a supported exca- vation in Chicago. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE. https://doi. org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002120 open in new tab
  21. Knittel L, Wichtmann T, Niemunis A, Huber G, Espino E, Tri- antafyllidis T (2020) Pure elastic stiffness of sand represented by response envelopes derived from cyclic triaxial tests with local strain measurements. Acta Geotech. s11440-019-00893-9 open in new tab
  22. Ladesma A, Alonso E (2017) Protecting sensitive constructions from tunnelling: the case of world heritage buildings in barce- lona. Géotechnique 67(10):914-925 open in new tab
  23. Länsivaara T, Nordal S (1998) A soil model for the overcon- solidated region of clays. In: Cividini A (ed) Application of numerical methods to geotechnical problems, proceedings of the fourth european conference on numerical methods in geotechni- cal engineering, NUMGE98. Springer, Udine, pp 347-356 open in new tab
  24. Larsson R, Runesson K (1996) Implicit integration and consistent linearization for yield criteria of the Mohr-Coulomb type. Mech Cohesive-Frict Mater 1(4):367-383 open in new tab
  25. Lehane BM, Simpson B (2000) Modelling glacial till under tri- axial conditions using a BRICK soil model. Can Geotech J 37(5):1078-1088 open in new tab
  26. Lings ML, Pennington DS, Nash DFT (2000) Anisotropic stiff- ness parameters and their measurement in a stiff natural clay. Géotechnique 50(2):109-125 open in new tab
  27. Mašín D, Rott J (2014) Small strain stiffness anisotropy of natural sedimentary clays: review and a model. Acta Geotech 9(2):299-312 open in new tab
  28. Masing G (1926) Eigenspannungen und Verfestigung beim Messing. In: Proceedings of 2nd international congress of applied mechanics, Zurich, pp 332-335 open in new tab
  29. Mróz Z (1967) On the description of anisotropic workhardening. J Mech Phys Solids 15:163-175 open in new tab
  30. Niemunis A, Cudny M (1998) On hyperelasticity for clays. Comput Geotech 23:221-236 open in new tab
  31. Niemunis A, Cudny M (2018) Discussion on ''Dynamic soil- structure interaction: a three-dimensional numerical approach and its application to the Lotung case study''. Poor performance of the HSS model. Comput Geotech 98:243-245 open in new tab
  32. Niemunis A, Prada-Sarmiento LF, Grandas-Tavera CE (2011) Extended paraelasticity and its application to a boundary value problem. Acta Geotech 6:81-92 open in new tab
  33. Paternesi A, Schweiger H, Scarpelli G (2017) Numerical analyses of stability and deformation behavior of reinforced and unrein- forced tunnel faces. Comput Geotech 88:256-266 open in new tab
  34. Ramberg W, Osgood WR (1943) Description of stress-strain curve by three parameters. Technical Note 902, National Advi- sory Committee for Aeronautics, Washington, DC open in new tab
  35. Rowe P (1962) The stress-dilatancy relation for static equilibrium of an assembly of particles in contact. Proc R Soc Lond 269:500-527 open in new tab
  36. Schanz T, Vermeer PA, Bonnier PG (1999) The Hardening Soil model: formulation and verification. In: Beyond 2000 in com- putational geotechnics-10 years of plaxis. Rotterdam, Balkema, pp 1-16 open in new tab
  37. Simo JC, Rifai S (1990) A class of mixed assumed strain methods and the method of incompatible modes. Int J Numer Methods Eng 29:1595-1638 open in new tab
  38. Simpson B (1992) Retaining structures: displacement and design, 32nd Rankine Lecture. Géotechnique 42(4):541-576 open in new tab
  39. Simpson B, O'Riordan NJ, Croft DD (1979) A computer model for the analysis of ground movements in London clay. Géotechnique 29(2):149-175 open in new tab
  40. Simpson B, Atkinson JH, Jovičić V (1996) The influence of anisotropy on calculations of ground settlements above tunnels. In: Mair RJ, Taylor RN (eds) Geotechnical aspects of under- ground construction in soft ground. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 591-594 open in new tab
  41. Vermeer PA, Schwab R, Benz T (2006) Two elastoplastic models for small and large strains and their use in engineering practise. In: Wu W, Yu HS (eds) Modern trends in geomechanics. Springer proceedings in physics, vol 106. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 159-174 open in new tab
  42. Viggiani GMB, Atkinson JH (1995) Stiffness of fine grained soils at very small strains. Géotechnique 45(2):249-265 open in new tab
  43. Yeow H-C, Coop MR (2017) The constitutive modelling of London clay. Proc Inst Civ Eng Geotech Eng 170(1):3-15 open in new tab
  44. ZACE Services Ltd, Software Engineering, Lausanne, Switzer- land, ZSOIL â . User manual ZSoil.PC v2020. Soil, Rock and Structural Mechanics in dry or partially saturated media (1985-2020)
  45. Acta Geotechnica open in new tab
  46. Zytynski M, Randolph MF, Nova R, Wroth CP (1978) On modelling the unloading-reloading behaviour of soils, Short communications. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 2:87-94 open in new tab
Verified by:
Gdańsk University of Technology

seen 72 times

Recommended for you

Meta Tags