Finite Element Analyses of Stresses and Movements in Embankments During Construction. Kulhawy Duncan

[ ', .· i 1 ..
~ ')
,.
u t£ r'.J ;) . /' ,.t, .,i
CONTRACT REPORT S-69-8
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSES OF STRESSES AND

MOVEMENTS IN EMBANKMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION
v
A Report of an Investigation
by
F. H. Kulhawy
J. M. Duncan
and
H. Bolton Seed
under
Contract No. DACW39-68-C-0078
with
u-. S. Army e-ngineers waterways Experiment Station
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Vicksburg, Mississippi
November 1969
College of Engineering
Office of Research Services
University of California
Berkeley, California
Report No. 'TE-69-4

.UtMY·MRC VICKBI!IUAQ, MISS.
T~IS DOCUMENT ~AS BEEN APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

AND SALE; ITS DISTRIBUTION IS UNLIMITED
FOREWORD
The work described in this report was performed under Contract No.
DACW39-68-C-0078 "Behavior of Zoned Embankments and Embankments on Soft
Foundations" between the U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station
and the University of California. This is the first report on investiga-
tions performed under this contract. The research was sponsored by the
Office, Chief of Engineers, under the Civil Works Investigations Engineer-
ing Studies 525, "Shear Characteristics of Undisturbed Weak Clays."
The general objective of this research, which was begun in June,

1968, is to develop methods for analysis of stresses and movements in
embankments. Work on this project is conducted under the supervision of
Professor J. M. Duncan, Associate Professor of Civil Engineering and
Professor H. Bolton Seed, Professor of Civil Engineering. The project is
administered by the Office of Research Services of the College of
Engineering. The phase of the investigation described in this report was
performed by F. H. Kulhawy, and the report was prepared by F. H. Kulhawy,
J. M. Duncan, and H. Bolton Seed.
The contract was monitored by Mr. D. C. Banks, Chief, Rock Mechanics

Section, Soil and Rock Mechanics Branch, under the general supervision of
Mr. J. P. Sale, Chief, Soils Division. Contracting Officer was COL Levi
A. Brown, Director or tin: U. S. Army- En-gi1re-er Waterways- Experimenr- Statiun~
3
SUMMARY
The objective of this investigation was to develop procedures for

conducting finite element analyses of stresses and movements in embank-
ments during construction. The procedures developed involve incremental
analyses, simulating successive stages during construction of the embank-
ment, and employ nonlinear stress-strain parameters determined from the
results of laboratory tests.
Previous studies of the nonlinear, stress-dependent stress-strain

behavior of soils were extended during this investigation to include
variations of Poisson's ratio values as well as modulus values for use in
incremental analyses" In order to examine the suitability of these pro-
cedures for representing the stress-strain characteristics of a wide
variety of soils under both drained and undrained test conditions, the
procedures were applied to 46 different soils, ranging from cobble sizes
to highly plastic-clays, for which stress-strain information had been
published or was available from other sources. In each case it was found
that the simple procedures developed for representing nonlinear, stress-
dependent soil stress-strain behavior were convenient and provided reason-
ably accurate representations of the actual soil behavior"
A finite element computer program was developed for incremental

analyses of embankment stresses and deformations, incorporating these non-
linear stress-strain characteris-ticsr and this- computer program v,tas- used
to conduct a series 0f analyses of the deformations in Otter Brook Dam
during construction These analyses showed that the vertical diGplace-
ments (settlements) with1n an embankment during construction are affected
very strongly by the value of soil modulus, and the horizontal displace-
ments are affected very strongly by the value of Poisson's ratio. The
vertical and hor1zontal displacements calculated using nonlinear stress-
strain characteristics were in close agreement with those measured during
construction of the dam.
Studies of embankment stability showed that the values of stress cal-

culated by the finite element method may be used to define a factor of
safety with respect to either local overstress or overall stability,
Provided that the factor of safety with regard to overall stability is
defined in a manner consistent with that employed in limit equilibrium
analysis procedures, the value of the factor of safety calculated using
finite element stresses is nearly identical to that calculated using the
best limit equilibr1um procedures of slope stability analysis.
Studies were also conducted to determine the effectiveness of these

finite element analysis procedures for calculating stresses and displace-
ments in zoned dams. Analyses were performed for two hypothetical zoned
dams which had the same cross-section, but which differed with regard to
the stiffness of the core materiaL These analyses showed that the
settlements of embankments are influenced considerably by the stiffness of
the core material, and that the stress conditions are strongly affected by
the relative stiffnesses of the core and shelL
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Foreword 3
Summary 5
List of Figures 11
List of Tables 15
List of Symbols 17
English Letters 17
Greek Letters 19
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 21
CHAPTER 2 FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS PROCEDURES 24

Characteristics of the Finite Element Method 24
Nonlinear Stress-Strain Behavior 25
Incremental Analyses 25
Required Number of Layers 25
CHAPTER 3 NONLINEAR STRESS-DEPENDENT MODULUS RELATIONSHIP 34

Nonlinearity 34
Stress-Dependency 41
Tangent Modulus 43
Modulus Parameters for Drained Conditions 44
Modulus Parameters for Unconsolidated-Undrained Conditions 49
CHAPTER 4 NONLINEAR STRESS-DEPENDENT POISSON'S RATIO

RELATIONSHIP 55
Nonlinearity 57
Stress-Dependency 60
Tangent Poisson's Ratio 60
Poisson's Ratio Parameters for Drained Conditions 62
Poisson's Ratio Parameters for Unconsolidated-Undrained
Conditions 65
7
CHAPTER 5 ANALYSIS OF OTTER BROOK DAM USING NONLINEAR STRESS-
DEPENDENT STRESS-STRAIN PROPERTIES 70
Finite Element Mesh 70
Properties of Otter Brook Dam Fill 70
Comparison of Calculated and Measured Displacements 73
Additional Results of Finite Element Analysis 76
CHAPTER 6 COMPARISON OF VARIOUS FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

PROCEDURES FOR OTTER BROOK DAM 82
Types of Analyses 82
Basis o~ Comparison 82
Comparisons of Displacements 83
Comparison of Stresses 88
Usefulness of Various Types of Analyses 94
CHAPTER 7 EVALUATION OF EMBANKMENT STABILITY USING FINITE

ELEMENT STRESSES 95
Local Failure 95
Overall Stability 100
CHAPTER 8 FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF ZONED EMBANKMENTS 111

Finite Element Mesh 111
Material Properties 111
Modification of Analysis Procedure 116
Results of Analyses 118
CHAPTER 9 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 126

Simulation of Construction Sequence 126
Stress-Strain Behavior of Embankment Materials 126
Analyses of Otter Brook Dam 126
Evaluation of Embankment Stability 127
Analysis of Zoned Embankments 127
Conclusions 128
LITERATURE CITED 129
8
APPENDIX A LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES AND RESULTS 137
Soil Classification 137
Specimen Preparation 137
Specimen Compaction 138
Specimen Storage 138
Unconsolidated-Undrained (UU) Triaxial Shear Test Procedure 138
Equipment Calibration 138
Unconsolidated-Undrained (UU) Triaxial Shear Test Results 141
APPENDIX B DERIVATION OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STRESS LEVEL

AND SHEAR STRESS FACTORS OF SAFETY 145
APPENDIX C COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR THE FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

OF EMBANKMENTS 148
APPENDIX D COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR THE INTERPOLATION OF

FINITE ELEMENT STRESSES AND STRAINS FROM KNOWN
LOCATIONS TO DESIRED LOCATIONS 162
APPENDIX E COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR THE STABILITY ANALYSIS OF

EMBANKMENTS OR SLOPES BASED UPON FINITE ELEMENT
STRESSES 165
9
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig.
No.
1 Maximum Heights of Earth and Rock Dams from 1850 to

Dateo (Modified after Glossop, 1967) 22
2 Solutions for Displacements in an Incrementally Loaded,

Linear Elastic Columno 27
3 Solutions for Displacements of an Infinitesimally

Layered Elastic Column with Stress-Dependent Modulus. 29
4 Selected Displacements in Infinitesimal and Finite

Layer Column Models with Stress Dependent Modulus. 30
5 Correlation of Displacements in Infinitesimal and

Finite Layer Column Models with Stress Dependent
Modulus. 32
6 Hyperbolic Representation of Stress-Strain Curve. 35
7 Transformed Hyperbolic Representation of Stress-Strain

Curve. 36
8 Deviations from Ideal Behavior on Transformed Plots. 38
9 Experimental and Hyperbolic Stress-Strain Curves for a

Poorly-Graded Sand. (Data from Hirschfeld and
Poulos, 1963) 39
10 Experimental and Hyperbolic Stress-Strain Curves for a

Well-Graded Gneiss Rockfill. (Data from Casagrande,
1965) 40
11 Variations of Initial Tangent Modulus with Confining

Pressure. 42
12 Variation of Nonlinear Modulus Parameters with Relative

Density for Sacramento River Sand. 46
13 Variation of Nonlinear Modulus Parameters with Maximum

Particle Size for Soils with Parallel Grain Size Curves.
(Data from Marachi, 1969) 48
14 Strength Parameters for Compacted Pittsburg Sandy Clay

Under Unconsolidated-Undrained Test Conditions. 52
15 Nonlinear Modulus Parameters for Compacted Pittsburg

Sandy Clay Under Unconsolidated-Undrained Test Conditions. 53
11
Fig.
No.
16 Typical Strain Patterns in Soils During Shear. 56
17 Experimental and Hyperbolic Axial Strain-Radial

Strain Curves for a Dense Poorly-Graded Sand.
(Data from Lee, 1965) 58
18 Experimental and Hyperbolic Axial Strain-Radial Strain

Curves for a Dense Poorly-Graded Basalt Rockfill.
(Data from Casagrande, 1965) 59
19 Variations of Initial Tangent Poisson Ratio with

Confining Pressure. 61
20 Variation of Nonlinear Poisson Ratio Parameters with

Relative Density for Sacramento River Sand. 64
21 Variation of Nonlinear Poisson Ratio Parameters with

Maximum Particle Size for Soils with Parallel Grain
Size Curves. (Data from Marachi, 1969) 66
22 Nonlinear Poisson Ratio Parameters for Compacted

Pittsburg Sandy Clay under Unconsolidated-Undrained
Test Conditions. 69
23 Otter Brook Dam. (After Linell and Shea, 1960) 71
24 Finite Element Mesh for Otter Brook Dam. 72
25 Displacements in Otter Brook Dam Using a Nonlinear

Modulus and Poisson Ratio. 75
26 Displacements within Otter Brook Dam Using a Nonlinear

Modulus and Poisson Ratio. 77
27 Principal Stress Contours in Otter Brook Dam Using a

Nonlinear Modulus and Poisson Ratio. 78
28 Contours of Mobilized Strength in Otter Brook Dam Using

a Nonlinear Modulus and Poisson Ratio. 79
29 Elastic Parameters in Otter Brook Dam. 81
30 Measured and Adjusted Displacements of Bridge Pier in

Upstream Face of Otter Brook Dam. 84
31 Combinations of Elastic Constants Required for Various

Analyses to Obtain Correct Bridge Pier Displacements in
Otter Brook Dam. 85
12
Fig.
No.
32 Displacements of Bridge Pier in Upstream Face of

Otter Brook Dam as Determined by Various Methods of
Analysis. 86
33 Displacements of Upstream Face of Otter Brook Dam as

Determined by Various Methods of Analysis. 87
34 Comparisons of Horizontal Displacements in Otter Brook

Dam as Determined by Various Methods of Analysis. 89
35 Comparisons of Vertical Displacements in Otter Brook

36 Comparisons of Major Principal Stresses in Otter Brook

37 Comparisons of Minor Principal Stresses in Otter Brook

38 Comparisons of Maximum Shear Stresses in Otter Brook

39 Contours of Major Principal Stress in Otter Brook Dam

Using a Nonlinear Modulus and Different Poisson Ratios. 96
40 Contours of Major Principal Stress in Otter Brook Dam

Using a Nonlinear Modulus and Different Poisson Ratios. 97
41 Contours of Mobilized Strength in Otter Brook Dam

Using a Nonlinear Modulus and Constant Poisson Ratio. 99
42 Development of Failure Zones in Otter Brook Dam When

Using a Nonlinear Modulus and Constant Poisson Ratio. 101
43 Contours of Mobilized Strength in Otter Brook Dam

Using a Nonlinear Modulus and Poisson Ratio, and Most
Critical Circular Arc, 103
44 Variation of Stresses Along Critical Arc in Otter Brook

Dam. 106
45 Comparison of Different Factors of Safety, 109
46 Comparison of Factors of Safety for Otter Brook Dam

Cross-Section. llO
47 Cross-Section and Finite Element Mesh for Example

Zoned Embankment, ll2
13
Fig.
No.
48 Contours of Tangent Modulus in Example Zoned Embankment. 114

49 Contours of Tangent Poisson Ratio in Example Zoned
Embankment. 115
50 Contours of Settlement in Example Zoned Embankment. 117
51 Contours of Horizontal Displacement in Example Zoned

Embankment. 119
52 Contours of Maximum Principal Stress in Example Zoned
Embankment. 120
53 Contours of Vertical Soil Pressure Measured in

Gepatsch Dam (After Schrober, 1967). 121
54 Contours of Minimum Principal Stress in Example Zoned
Embankment. 122
55 Contours of Maximum Shear Stress in Example Zoned
Embankment . 124
56 Contours of Mobilized Strength in Example Zoned
Embankment. 125
57 -Ho±sture-Density -Relationships for Compacted Pittsburg
Sandy Clay. 139
58 UU Triaxial Shear Test Results for Compacted Pittsburg

Sandy Clay, Low Compactive Effort. 142

Sandy Clay, Medium Compactive Effort. 143

Sandy Clay, High Compactive Effort. 144
61 Comparison of Mobilized and Failure States of Stress. 146
14
LIST OF TABLES
Table
No.
1 Classification Data and Stress-Strain Parameters for

Soils Tested Under Drained Conditions. 45
2 Typical Values of Stress-Strain Parameters for Clean

Sands and Gravels. 50

Soils Tested Under Unconsolidated-Undrained Conditions. 51

Soils Tested Under Drained Conditions. 63
5 Average Values of Poisson's Ratio Parameters for Clean

Sands and Gravels Under Drained Conditions. 67
6 Poisson's Ratio Parameters for Soils Tested Under

Unconsolidated-Undrained Conditions. 67
7 Soil Parameter Values for Nonlinear Analyses of Stresses

and Deformations of Otte~ Brook Dam. 74
8 v-alues of Factor of- Sa-rety- Bas-e-d- orr &tress Level for

Otter Brook Dam Cross-Section. 104
9 Values of Factor of Safety Based on Shear Stress

for Otter Brook Dam Cross-Section. 107
10 Unit Weights and Stress-Strain Parameters Employed in

Analyses of Zoned Embankments. 113
15
LIST OF SYMBOLS
English Letters
a reciprocal of initial tangent modulus
A pore water pressure coefficient
b reciprocal of hyperbolic deviator stress at failure
B, B pore water pressure coefficients
c total stress cohesion intercept
c' effective stress cohesion
d rate of change of initial tangent Poisson ratio with strain
D grain diameter
D relative density
r
ei initial void ratio
f initial tangent Poisson's ratio
E elastic modulus
Ei,Et initial tangent modulus, tangent modulus
F rate of change of initial tangent Poisson ratio with confining

pressure
{F} nodal point force matrix
FSL stress level factor of safety
F shear stress factor of safety

'T
G initial tangent Poisson ratio at one atmosphere or shear

modulus
G specific gravity
s
h layer height in one-dimensional column
H column height in one-dimensional column
K modulus factor or bulk modulus
(K] stiffness matrix
17
K coefficient of lateral earth pressure at rest
0
L length
n exponent for stress-dependent modulus
Pa atmospheric pressure
p ratio of major principal stress to overburden pressure
PI plasticity index
Rf failure ratio
S degree of saturation
r
u pore water pressure
{u} nodal point displacement matrix
U uniformity coefficient
w liquid limit
1
wi,w ,w t initial, natural, optimum water content
n ~
Y layer elevation in one-dimensional column
18
LIST OF SYMBOLS
Greek Letters
y,yd,yd total, dry, optimum unit weight

opt
ot,o.,o total, initial, subsequent displacement
1 s
6 change
E ,Ef,E vertical, failure, axial, radial, volumetric strain

y a
E ,E
r v
v Poisson ratio
v.,v
1 t
initial tangent Poisson ratio, tangent Poisson ratio
aX ,a y horizontal, vertical stress
a ,a major, minor principal stress

1 3
(a 1-a 3 )m mobilized deviator stress
(a 1-a 3 )f deviator stress at failure
~,~' total stress, effective stress angle of internal friction
T shear stress on X-Y plane

xy
T maximum shear stress
max
19
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Embankments are among the earliest major structures constructed by

man. Hathaway (1958) has noted that homogeneous earth dams were con-
structed for flood control and irrigation purposes in Egypt as long ago as
2300 B.C., and that by 1100 A.D. dams were built which incorporated many
of the features of modern dams. For example, the Bhojpur Lake dams in
India were constructed with a central earth core and upstream and down-
stream faces of rubble masonry. One of these dams, with a base width of
300 ft and a height of 87 ft, is still in use today. As well as the
advanced concepts of zoning they incorporate, these dams are believed to
be the first with spillways.
Although some early dams had features similar to those of modern

dams, many early dams failed because there was no rational basis for dam
design. Up to about 1850, the design of dams was based primarily upon
empirical procedures and "rule-of-thumb" (Wilson and Squier, 1969).
During the period from 1850 to 1940, the development of new construction
procedures and equipment made possible the construction of higher dams and
dams constructed of new materials such as rockfill and hydraulic fill, but
failures were still quite frequent. In the period since 1940, very
efficient earthmoving and compaction equipment has been developed, and
construction control has been greatly improved. In addition, governmental
agencies now supervise the design and construction of many dams. These
advances in the art of dam design, coupled with advances in procedures for
analysis of seepage and slope stability, have made possible the construc-
tion of dams of increasing size and complexity, as indicated by the char-
acteristics of dams recently built or under construction:
(1) The height of dams is increasing rapidly, as shown in Fig. 1.

Nurek Dam, currently under construction, will reach a height
of 1040 ft (Fox, 1968).
(2) The volume of earthwork for dams is also increasing very rapidly.
The earthwork for Tarbela Dam will involve an estimated
160 million yd 3 (Engineering News-Record, 1968c).
(3) Because of the large number of dams already built (Gruner, 1967,
estimates the world-wide total is 150,000), marginal damsites
are being used which would not have been used previously. For
example, Muddy Run Dam was constructed on a foundation of
weathered mica schist (Wilson and Morano, 1968).
(4) The quality of available construction materials for dams is also

declining due to the necessity for using less desirable sites.
For example, the shell of Brianne Dam was constructed of cleaved
21
HEIGHT, (~
'"'
1000
NAME jHEIGHT,f.. t
TORSIDE, ENGLAND 123

SAN LEANDRO, u.s.A. 155
900 PONTHOOI<, U.S.A. 276
CRANE VALLEY, U.S.A. 145
NECAXA, MEXICO 184
SAN PABLO, U.S.A. 220
BULL CORRAL,U.S.A. 240
800
TIETON, U.S.A. 235
BILDON, AUSTRALIA 260
WINDSOR, (QUABBIN I U.S.A. 295
S. GABRIEL, U.S.A. 377
700 BOUHANIFIA, ALGERIA 325
ANDERSON RANCH, U.S.A. 456
AMBUKLAO, PHILIPPINES 424
TRINITY, U.S.A. 537
GEPATSCH, AUSTRIA :100
600 OROVILLE, U.S.A. 770
NUREK, U.S.S.R. 1040
KEY
ROCK a
ROCK EARTH DAMS
• ·o
500 EARTH DAMS 0
(~
400
300
200
(~
100
z
~ 8 0 0
N ,.,
0 .,.
0
~
0
cD
C7l
cD 2
!! !!! !! !!! !!! !!! !!! !!! C7l
-~g
cro-
I I I I I I I I I zcr
;;; ;: - :J~
~ cD
.... 0 C7l
N in cD z
~ ~ !!!
DATE
!!! !!! !!! !!!
-
C7l 0
u
FIG. I MAXIMUM HEIGHTS OF EARTH AND ROCK DAMS FROM 1850 TO DATE
(MODIFIED AFTER GLOSSOP ,1967)
22
mudstone (Engineering News-Record, 1968a) and the shell of Muddy
Run Dam is comprised of mica schist (Wilson and Morano, 1968).
Because of the increasing height of dams and the declining quality of

embankment and foundation materials at many sites, instrumentation has been
used with increasing frequency in recent years to monitor the behavior of
dams during and after construction. At the present time, almost all major
dams under construction are instrumented to measure surface and internal
movements and pore water pressures. By means of such instrumentation, the
behavior of a dam may be monitored closely during construction, reservoir
filling, steady-state seepage and rapid drawdown. If the instrument
readings indicate unforeseen problems, remedial measures may be undertaken
at an early stage. The cost of instrumentation, which Wilson (1968)
estimates at one-half to one percent of the cost of a dam, is generally
considered to be a worthwhile investment to evaluate performance. Studies
of the results obtained from instrumented embankments have already
revealed a great deal about the behavior of embankments (Casagrande, 1965;
Squier, 1967; Wilson and Squier, 1969).
The results of instrumentation studies would be of even greater value

if procedures were available for calculating embankment stresses and
deformations: Analyses of th1s type would provide information which would
be very helpful in planning instrumentation studies, and would help to
insure that important aspects of the behavior would not go undetected.
The analyses would also be useful for interpreting instrumentation studies.
If the results of the analyses and the measurements were in agreement, the
analyses could be used to derive information for locations where there
were no instruments, and informat1on concerning aspects of the behavior
which were not instrumented. Thus instrumentation studies and analyses of
displacements and stresses in embankments together provide a very
effective combination of techniques for study of embankment behavior. Just
as analytical results are useful for planning and interpreting instrumenta-
tion studies, so instrumentation results are useful for judging the accuracy
of the analyses. The procedures developed for analysis of embankments
during construction, and the use of these procedures for examination of
the behavior of an instrumented embankment, are described in subsequent
chapters of this report.
23
CHAPTER 2
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
A number of procedures have been used for analyses of stresses in

elastic wedges and embankments. These include infinite elastic wedge
analyses (Terzaghi, 1943; Goodman and Brown, 1963; Richards and Schmid,
1968), photoelastic analyses of gelatin models (Brickell, 1962; Richards
and Schmid, 1968), finite difference numerical analyses (Bishop, 1952),
and finite element analyses (Brown and King, 1966; Clough and Woodward,
1967; Finn, 1967). While some interesting and useful results have been
obtained using each of these procedures, the finite element method is the
most generally useful. It may be used for analyses of stresses and dis-
placements in nonhomogeneous as well as homogeneous embankments, and with
suitable techniques, may be used to obtain approximate solutions for
problems involving nonlinear material properties. The important char-
acteristics of the finite element method as applied to analyses of
embankments and procedures for its use are described in subsequent
sections of this chapter.
Characteristics of the Finite Element Method
Since its introduction by Turner et al. (1956) the finite element

method has been shown to be a very powerful procedure for stress analyses
and has been used for many different purposes. A number of excellent
papers have been published on this method (notably Clough, 1960, 1965,
and Wilson, 1963) as well as a recent textbook (Zienkiewicz and Cheung,
196 7) 0
For analysis by the finite element technique, the continuous body is

represented by a set of elements which are connected at their joints or
--no-dal -points. -On -the -bas-i-s -of -an -assumed -va-ri-a-tion -o-f -s-t-rai-n-s -wit-hin
elements together with the stress-strain characteristics of the element
material, the stiffness of each nodal point of each element is computed.
For each nodal point in the system, two equilibrium equations may be
written expressing the nodal point forces in terms of the nodal point
displacements and stiffnesses. These equations are solved to determine
the unknown displacements. With the displacements of all nodal points
known, strains and stresses within each element may be computed.
Analyses of realistic systems commonly requires formulation and solution
of several hundred simultaneous equations, and the technique is only
practicable when formulated for high-speed digital computers.
Various types of elements have been developed; these elements differ

in shape, number of nodal points, and assumed mode of strain variation
within elements. The element used in this study is a quadrilateral
consisting of two linear strain triangles (Felippa, 1966), Within this
element strains are assumed to vary linearly, but to insure compatibility
between elements, the strains on the outside boundaries of the quadri-
lateral are assumed to be constant. Studies by Felippa (1966) have shown
that this element provides a good combination of efficiency and accuracy.
24
The analyses described in this report are plane strain analyses of
transverse embankment sections" It is expected that plane strain analyses
represent a close approximation of the actual strain conditions within
embankments which are long in comparison to their height" Even in the
case of shorter embankments it seems likely that plane strain analyses
will often provide a useful and reasonably accurate approximation,
Nonlinear Stress-Strain Behavior
Nonlinear stress-strain behavior was approximated in the analyses

described in this report by assigning modulus values to each element
consistent with the values of stress in .that element. The analyses are
performed using a step-by-step or incremental analysis procedure in
which various successive stages in the construction of the embankment are
simulated in the analysis. During each step or increment the relation-
ship between stress and strain for each element is assumed to be linear;
nonlinear stress-strain behavior is approximated in the analyses by
appropriate changes in the values of modulus and Poisson's ratio during
succes~ive stages of the analyses. The procedures developed for deter-
mining the stress-strain parameters required for use in these analyses are
described in subsequent chapters of this report.
Incremental Analyses
Brown and Goodman (1963) have shown on a theoretical basis, that for
precisely accurate analyses of embankments, it 1s necessary to simulate
the placement of successive layers of embankment materiaL Clough and
Woodward (1966) have examined the usefulness of both incremental finite
element analyses (in which the placement of successive layers was simu-
lated) and simpler gravity turn-on finite element analyses (in which the
gravity body fo:rces were applied to the entire structure at one time).
Their studies indicate that while gravity turn-on analyses may provide
reasonable stress distributions for homogeneous embankments, they predict
displacement patterns which err~ bas-±c-crlly- d±ff~rem:- from- thuse- ea-iculat~-d
by means of incremental analyses and measured in real embankments, The
vertical displacements calculated by gravity turn-on analyses are largest
at the top, decreasing to zero at the bottom in the case where the
foundation displacement is zero, For the same case, the displacements
calculated by incremental analyses are largest near midheight and smaller
at both the top and the bottom, This latter type of variation corresponds
to the results of measurements made on real embankments. It is thus
readily apparent that if finite element analyses are to be employed to
calculate embankment displacements, the analyses should be performed
using incremental analysis procedures which closely simulate the actual
sequence of construction operations.
Required Number of Layers
Construction of an embankment may frequently involve placement of a

large number of layers, each of which is only a foot or so in thickness.
Although it is desirable from ,:he point of view of accuracy to simulate
25
the actual construction sequence as closely as possible, and, therefore,
to use a large number of increments in the analyses, considerations of
computer storage and computer costs impose practical limitations on the
number of layers which may be used in analyses" It is therefore
necessary to investigate the relationship between accuracy of results and
the number of increments employed in the analyses. As evidenced by
comparisons of the results of gravity turn-on and incremental analyses,
the values of stress calculated for embankments are not strongly affected
by the number of increments employed in the analyses. The calculated
displacements, however, are affected appreciably by the number of
increments and may therefore be used to establish criteria for the number
of increments required for accurate results.
Studies by Clough and Woodward (1966) showed that for a homogeneous

embankment of linear elastic material, the vertical displacements calcu-
lated using 14 layers of equal thickness were essentially the same as
those calculated using 7 layers. In these analyses, the modulus value of
each layer was assumed to be very small when the layer was placed, The
procedure employed for assigning small modulus values to newly placed
elements (multiplying the modulus values of these elements by a "modulus
reduction factor" with a value much less than unity and then multiplying
the calculated displacements at the top of the new layer by the same small
number) had the effect of eliminating that portion of the displacement at
the top of the new layer which resulted from compression of previously
placed layers. Although the modulus reduction factor was employed to
reduce the magnitude of shear stresses between the new layer and previous-
ly placed material, its use and the resulting elimination of part of the
initial displacements has the effect of improving the accuracy of calcu-
lated displacements as compared to values calculated in analyses employ-
ing a large number of thin layers.
Calculated values of vertical displacement in a progressively built-

up column of linear elastic material constrained to deform in the vertical
-dtrec-tion only are shown in -Fig. 2. The di-spl-ac-ement£ in this figure are
plotted in dimensionless form, in which 8 is the vertical displacement,
E is Young's modulus, y is unit weight, H is the total height, and F is
a function of Poisson's ratio, v, given by the expression v
(l+V)(l-2V) (1)
(1-V)
The displacements on the left include the initial displacements at the

top of each new layer due to its own weight. It may be noted that the
displacements vary considerably depending on the number of layers
employed in the calculation, and that as many as 40 layers would be
required for displacements closely approximating those corresponding to
an infinite number of layers of infinitesimal thickness" The displace-
ments on the right were calculated using a modulus reduction factor, and
the portions of the initial displacement due to compression of previously
placed material have thus been eliminated. It may be noted that the
displacements are not so strongly influenced by the number of layers
26
1.0 1.0
...... ......,
3 ' Layers
0.8
' 0.8
~ \
I
.....~ I
:z:
Cl I
w 0.6 I 0.6
:z: Infinitesimal I Infinitesimal
I
(/)
(/)
Layers I
w
..J
z 0.4 0.4
0
(/)
N
....., z
w
:E
0 0.2 0.2
0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
DIMENS,IONLESS VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT ~8

Fv yH
a) TOTAL DISPLACEMENTS b) DISPLACEMENTS MODI FlED BY
MODULUS REDUCTION FACTOR
FIG. 2 SOLUTIONS FOR DISPLACEMENTS IN AN INCREMENTALLY LDADED, LINEAR ELASTIC COLUMN

employed, and that those calculated using 8 layers are very close to
those corresponding to layers of infinitesimal thicknesso These conclu-
sions are the same as those derived from the finite element study of
embankment deformations conducted by Clough and Woodward (1966), indicat-
ing that the one-dimensional displacements within a column may provide a
means of studying the number of layers required for accurate values of
displacement. Clough and Duncan (1969) have performed a number of
analyses of this type to establish criteria for the number of layers
required to simulate excavation as well as fill placement.
These studies have shown that the choice of the reference position
for displacements is an important consideration in the required number of
layers. If the reference position of the top of each layer is taken as
that immediately after placement, the displacements calculated using any
finite number of layers is the same as that calculated using infinitesimal
layers. This choice of reference position is equally logical for analyti-
cal studies and instrumentation studies, and has therefore been adopted
for the analyses conducted during the course of this investigation.
Studies were also conducted to calculate displacements in progres-

sively built-up columns in which the modulus value of the material varied
with confining pressure according to the equation
E Kp (2)
a
in which E is Young's modulus, o is the minor principal stress, K is a

3
modulus number and n an exponent representing the rate of variation of E
with o • The term p , denoting atmospheric pressure, is introduced so
3
that K is a pure numSer. For a material with modulus related to confining
pressure as indicated by equation (2), vertical displacements have been
calculated for various values of the exponent no The results of these
ca] culations _are _shown -in -Ei&· _3_, where -the -displacements -ar-e plott~u in
a dimensionless form in which 8 is the vertical displacement, K is the
modulus number, n is the exponent, and K0 is the coefficient of earth
pressure at rest. It may be noted that the magnitude of the dimensionless
displacement increases with increasing values of the exponent n, but that
the maximum value always occurs at midheight regardless of the value of
n.
The displacements shown in Fig. 3 were all computed assuming that the
material was placed in layers of infinitesimal thickness. If the material
was placed in layers of finite thickness, there are several possibilities
with regard to the value of o 3 to be used for evaluation of the soil
modulus E: One possibility is to use the value of o 3 for each layer before
the new layer is added. A second possibility is to use the values of o
3
after the new layer is added, and a third possibility is to use the
average of these two values. These procedures have been termed "past
stresses," "present stresses," and "average stresses" solutions. Each of
these three procedures leads to different results, as shown in Fig. 4,
28
1.0
E • Kp ( _!!! )"
0
Po
0.8
,..~
1-
l:
(!) 0.6
w
l:
en
en
w
...J
z 0.4
2
en
z
w
:E
0 2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
8KK n •-n
DIMENSIONLESS VERT! CAL DISPLACEMENT 0 Po
FvY' 1-n Hz-n
FIG. 3 SOLUTIONS FOR DISPLACEMENTS OF AN INFINITESIMALLY LAYERED

ELASTIC COLUMN WITH STRESS DEPENDENT MODULUS
29
1.0 1.0 1.0
0.8 n •0.5 0.8 0.8 n • 0.5
0.6 0.6 0.6
~ 0.4 0.4 0.4

>-
~
:::r: 0.2 Infinitesimal 0.2 0.2
(!)
&&I
~ 0 0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
en
en
_,
&&I 1.0 1.0 1.0
z
w 0
0 en 0.8 OB 0.8
z
&&I
:::E 0.6 0.6 0.6
0
0.4 0.4 5 0!4
02 02 0.2
0 0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
8KK n •-n
DIMENSIONLESS VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT F y•~n ~ 2 .n
..
•PAST STREss• SOLUTION • AVERAGE STREss• SOLUTION •PRESENT STREss• SOLUTION
FIG. 4 SELECTED DISPLACEMENTS IN INFINITESIMAL AND FINITE LAYER COLUMN MODELS WITH STRESS DEPENDENT MODULUS
where dimensionless displacements are shown for two values of the exponent
n. Values for n = 0.5 are shown on the top row and values for n = 1.1 are
shown on the bottom. The displacements calculated using "past stresses"
with any finite number of layers are larger than those corresponding to
infinitesimal layers, and those calculated using "present stresses" are
smaller, for both values of n. The values of displacement corresponding
to "average stresses" are also smaller than the infinitesimal layer
solution, but are more accurate than the "present stresses" soluti::>n,
To perform finite element analyses of fill placement, it is necessary

to select a calculation procedure and to determine the number of layers
required for accurate evaluation of displacements, Solutions using
either "average stresses" or "present stresses" require twice as much time
for analysis of a single increment: as a solution using "past stresses":
One analysis must be performed, using estimated modulus values, for the
purpose of calculating the stresses at the end of the increment. Then the
increment must be analyzed again using the appropriate modulus values.
Because "average stress" and "present stress" solutions require the same
amount of time per increment, and the "average stress" solution is always
more accurate, there is no reason for using the "present stress" solution.
The remaining two procedures differ in two ways, First, the "average
stress" procedure requires t:w1.ce as much t1me per increment as the "past
stress" procedure, as expla1.ned previously. Second, the "average stress"
procedure is some\vhat more ac~urate than the "past stress" procedure,
Thus it is conceivable that either .'Jf these procedures might provide the
best: combination of accuracy and efficiency. Data are presented in
Fig .. 5 which may be used to de termi_ne which of these two procedures is
better for a given value of n and required degree of accuracy. For
example, with a value of n = 0,5, Fig. 5 shows that d1.splacements within
5% of the correct values could be obtained using the "average stress"
analysis procedure and 5 1.ncrements, whereas the same accuracy could only
be achieved using a "past stress" solution if 18 increments were used.
Even though each increment requires twice as long for analysis using
"average stresses," this procedure is still more efficient because fewer
than half as many layers are required. Inspection of Fig, 5 shows that
the "average stress" procedure is a more efficient method of simulating
fill placement for almost all conditions.
Studies of the nonlinear stress-strain behavior of soils described in

the following chapter show that modulus values for soil is affected by
the stress level, or percentage of strength mobilized, as well as by
confining pressure. Whereas the tangent modulus increases with
increasing confining pressure, it decreases with increasing stress level.
Because both confining pressure and stress level generally increase during
embankment construction, it: would be expected that the tangent modulus
values would be more nearly constant than assumed in the previously
described studies of one-dimensional deformations, which neglected the
effects of stress level, Therefore it seems likely that the actual
numerical accuracies for embankment displacements will be at least as
great as indicated by Fig. 5. Even though the curves of Fig. 5 are
31
1.4
J n • 1.1
<(
!I!
w ;n 1.3
.... ....laJ 0.9
z ~ Str e11 • Solution
1&. 1&.
.a z
0.7
0
. 10 1.2
~
0::
....z
0.5
---- --
w 1.1
0.3 ---------
::!:
w -- ---
-----
------------
0
_.
ct
Q.
en 1.1
0 (Infinitesimal) ------
0 0.3
_.
ct
0.5
0.7 --------
.0::-...
0
0.9 0.9
w • Average Streas" Solution
>
!.!
0.8 L - . - - - L - - - - " - - - - - . L . - - - - . 1 . . - - - - . . L . . - - - - - - 1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
NUMBER OF LAYERS
FIG. 5 CORRELATION OF DISPLACEMENTS IN INFINITESIMAL AND FINITE LAYER

COLUMN MODELS WITH STRESS DEPENDENT MODULUS
32
based on a somewhat simplified representation of the variables governing
the accuracy of calculated vertical displacements in fills, these curves
provide a simple and useful means for determining the number of layers
required for embankment analyses.
33
CHAPTER 3
NONLINEAR STRESS-DEPENDENT MODULUS RELATIONSHIP
The stress-strain behavior of any type of soil depends on a number of

factors including density, water content, structure, drainage conditions,
duration of loading, stress history, confining pressure, and shear SLress.
In many cases it may be possible to take account of these factors by
selecting soil specimens and testing conditions which simulate the corres-
ponding field conditions. Even when the soil specimens and test conditions
are carefully selected to duplicate field conditions, it is commonly found
that soil behavior over a wide range of stresses is nonlinear and dependent
upon the magnitude of the confining pressure employed in the tests.
The studies described in this chapter were conducted to examine the

range of applicability of a simple method of representing the complex
stress-strain characteristics of soils developed by Duncan and Chang (1970),
and to determine the values of the parameters employed in this relationship
for various types of soils and drainage conditions.
Nonlinearity
A simple method for representing nonlinear stress-strain curves for

soil has been proposed by Kondner and his co-workers (Kondner, 1963;
Kondner and Zelasko, 1963a, 1963b; and Kondner and Horner, 1965), In their
method, a nonlinear stress-strain curve is represented by a hyperbola of
the form
t.
a
(crl - 0 -3) = a-+ -bt:: (3)
a
in which (o - o ) is the principal stress difference, E is axial str~~'
3
and a and b 1 are parameters whose values are determined empirically. As
shown in Fig. 6, these parameters are the reciprocals of the initial slope
(initial tangent modulus) and the asymptote to the stress-strain curve.
For purposes of determining the values of the parameters a and b it

is convenient to transform equation (3) into the following linear form
(4)
As shown in Fig. 7, when the relationship is represented in this trans-

formed manner, the parameters a and b are respectively the intercept and
the slope of the straight line"
34
Asymptote
------~------------------
-.:
I
b-
--
C/)
C/)
w
0::
1-
C/) ( Oj - o-3 )
u It
= 1..
b
w a:
VI 0
..,:...
<t
>
w D'3 = Constant
0
AXIAL STRAIN, E
0
FIG. 6 HYPBERBOLIC REPRESENTATION OF STRESS-STRAIN CURVE

0
-b..,
~ I
b-
--·
(/)
(/)
z w
<t a:
a: .....
..... (/)
(/)
a:
w 0
_J
"' <t <t .....
X -
<t >
w
0
a= _L
E·I
AXIAL STRAIN, c0
FIG. 7 TRANSFORMED HYPERBOLIC REPRESENTATION OF STRESS- STRAIN CURVE

The value of the asymptotic stress difference, (o - 03) , is always
1 1
somewhat larger than the compressive strength or stress diffe¥e~ce at
failure, (o - o )f. These two values may be related as follows
1 3
(5)
in which Rf is a correlation factor called the "failure ratio," which

always has a value less than unity. The value of Rf, which is determined
empirically by comparing the values of (o 1 - o 3 )f and (o 1 - o3)ult' is a
measure of how nearly the shape of the stress-strain curve may be approxi-
mated by a hyperbola. Values of Rf equal to unity correspond to stress-
strain curves of precisely hyperbolic shape, and smaller values to stress-
strain curves of other shapes. Values of Rf for a variety of different
soils have been found to range from 0.5 to 1,0 and to be essentially
independent of confining pressure.
The stress-strain curves for most soils are not precisely hyperbolic
in shape, and when stress-strain data are plotted in the transformed
manner shown in Fig. 7, the data do not describe a straight line. Two
types of deviations from ideal behavior are shown in Fig. 8, If the
initial portion of the stress-strain curve is linear, the data will describe
a nonlinear variation of the type shown on the left, Alternatively, if
the initial portion of the stress-strain curve is more sharply curved than
a hyperbola, the transformed data will deviate from a straight line as
shown on the right in Fig. 8. Because the data do not describe a linear
variation in either case, it would be possible to approximate the actual
variations with many different straight lines, To reduce the degree of
subjectivity involved in this aspect of the test interpretations, a study
has been made to evaluate various procedures for fitting a straight line
to transformed data. This study has shown that a consistently good match
with the actual stress-strain curve may be achieved if the hyperbola is
chosen so that it coincides with the stress-strain curve at three points:
the origin, and the points where 70% and 95% of the strength are mobilized.
This may be accomplished by choosing the straight line in the transformed
representation so that it coincides with the actual data at the 70% and
95% points as shown in Fig. 8.
The curves shown in Figs. 9 and 10 demonstrate the usefulness of this

simple hyperbolic representation for two soils. Stress-strain curves for
a series of drained triaxial tests on poorly graded glacial outwash sand
with a relative density of 80% (Hirschfeld and Poulos, 1963) are shown in
Fig. 9, together with hyperbolic representations of these same curves.
The average value of the failure ratio for this soil is very low (0.55)
indicating that the actual stress-strain curves are not close to hyperbolic
in shape; the hyperbolic curves, which are shown as dotted lines in Fig. 9,
would coPtinue to much greater values of stress difference than the actual
compressive strength, (o 1 - OJ)f. As shown in Fig. 9, the hyperbolic
representation is not employed for values of stress difference exceeding
the compressive strength. At larger strains the curves are represented by
nearly horizontal straight lines. (Because of numerical difficulties it
is not possible to simulate a reduction in stress difference beyond the
37
- -
b"'
wa I '>
.
'ii
~ b"
~-
.-
b- .J w
••.
-
Cl)
en ... (I)
z en z 1&.1
I&J a:
...ena: ...
Cl)
... ...
c( a: c(
a: ~ Cl)
en
(I)
a:
...
0
,.._
A ... .J 0
a:
...
t~
.J 0 '>
c( c(
c( .J c(
)(
> / ..••... )(
<I( >
-
c(
I&J 1&.1
Q / a
/ Cl)
/ ~
It)
~
en 0,.._
--------------'-
AXIAL STRAIN. £ AXIAL STRAIN. £
0 0
a) LINEAR INITIAL PORTION OF CURVE b) VERY CURVED INITIAL PORTION OF CURVE
FIG. 8 DEVIATIONS FROM IDEAL BEHAVIOR ON TRANSFORMED PLOTS

125 HYPERBOLIC 0.0125
EXPERIMENTAL
100
.: en
en-
w'.....
b- a:•
... :E
en· . . . 15 en ~0.0075
en• a:c:»
t&J:E
a:u
........
enc:»
...olll:
c[
-
:ill: >
a:- 50 l&J
0.0050
w
\0
...
0
c[
Q
.....
z
> ~
a:
l&J
Q ...
en
25 ..J 0.0025
c[
X
c[
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
AXIAL STRAIN, € (%) AXIAL STRAIN, € (%)

0 a
FIG. 9 EXPERIMENTAL AND HYPERBOLIC STRESS-STRAIN CURVES FOR A POORLY GRADED SAND
(Data From Hirschfeld And Poulos,l963)
60 r-------r-----~~----~-------, 0.012
- - - HYPE BOLIC
- EXPERIMENTAL
- bI "'
b-
so 'w 0
0.010
rn·
U)
a: _ 0.008
l&J
....
en_
U)N
- en•
a:"' -
1&12;
a:u .,_u
o2:
.... '30 ct '0.006
U)C) -0
::.c >::.C
a:- w-
0
.... 0
.......
ct 20 z 0.004
> ct
LLI
0 ....a:
U)
10 ...J 0.002.
ct
X
ct
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
AXIAL STRAIN, € (%) AXIAL STRAIN, £ 0 (%)

0
FIG. 10 EX PERl MENTAL AND HYPERBOLIC STRESS -STRAIN CURVES FOR WELL- GRADED GNEISS ROCK FILL
(Data From Casaqrande. 1965)
peak in incremental finite element analyses of the type described in this
report.) It may be noted that the hyperbolae and straight lines provide a
reasonable representation of the stress-strain curves for this sand even
though the failure ratio is very low,
Similar comparisons for drained triaxial tests on the shell of Mica

Dam, a well-graded gneiss rockfill, are shown in Fig. 10. The four stress-
strain curves shown are for tests on specimens compacted to 95% relative
density. The value of Rf for this material is 0.74, and it may be noted
that the stress-strain curves are represented very closely by hyperbolae
and straight lines.
These examples show that hyperbolae of the form suggested by Kondner

and his associates provide a simple and accurate means of representing
stress-strain curves for soils. Studies of the stress-strain characteris-
tics of 47 soils described in subsequent sections have demonstrated the
suitability of this representation for a wide variety of soils.
Stress-Dependency
The stress-strain characteristics of soils commonly depend on

confining pressure. As shown in Figs, 9 and 10, the steepness of the
initial portion of the stress-strain curves and the strength values both
increase with increasing magnitude of the confining pressure employed in
the tests. The influence of confining pressure on the stress-strain
characteristics may be incorporated in the stress-strain relationship by
relating the values of the initial tangent modulus and soil strength with
confining pressure,
The variation of initial tangent modulus with confining pressure may

be expressed very conveniently in the following form, which was suggested
by Janbu (1963}:
a n
Ei = Kp a (~) (6)
Pa
in which Ei is the initial tangent modulus, cr 3 is the minor principal
stress, Pa is atmospheric pressure expressed in the same units as Ei and
cr3, K is a modulus number, and n is the exponent determining the rate of
variation of Ei with cr 3 ; both K and n are pure numbers. Values of the
parameters K and n may be determined readily from the results of a series
of tests by plotting the values of Ei against cr 3 on log-log scales and
fitting a straight line to the data, as shown in Fig. 11. The data shown
in Fig. 11 represent tests on clay, sand, and gravel which were conducted
under unconsolidated-undrained, consolidated-undrained, and drained test
conditions. In each case the variation of initial tangent modulus with
confining pressure may be represented to a reasonable degree of accuracy
by a straight line on the log-log plot.
The relationship between compressive strength and confining pressure

may be expressed in terms of the Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion as follows:
41
A- OTTAWA SAND (LEE, 1965)
B- CLAYEY SANOY GRAVEL- OROVILLE DAM CORE (OWR, 1969)
C • DRAMMEN CLAY ( BJERRUM AND SIMONS, 1960)
D - GLACIAL OUTWASH SAND (HIRSCHFELD AND POULOS, 1963)
E - CLAYEY SAND - OTTER BROOK DAM ( LINELL AND SHEA, 1960)
G:'
(/)
~ 10,000 ~-----------------------4~~--------------------~
-
W·
n • 0.76
( UU TESTS)
K • 270
n•0.50
_(CD T_EST SJ
100 ~----~~--L-~--L-~~~~----~----L--L~~~-L~
I !0 100
CONFINING PRESSURE, cr OR a- ' ( TSF)

3 3
FIG. II VARIATIONS OF INITIAL TANGENT MODULUS WITH CONFINING PRESSURE
42
2c cos~+ 2o sin~
3 (7)
(ol- 0 3)f = 1- sin~
in which c and ~ are the Mohr-Coulomb strength parameters,
Equations (6) and (7), in combination with the previously described

hyperbolic relationship, provide a means for relating stress to strain by
means of the 5 parameters, K, n, c, ~' and Rf. Use of this relationship
in nonlinear finite element stress analyses is discussed in the following
section.
Tangent Modulus
The nonlinear, stress-dependent stress-strain relationship discussed

previously may be used very conveniently in incremental stress analyses,
because it is possible to determine from this relationship the value of
tangent modulus corresponding to any point on the stress-strain curve, If
the value of o 3 is assumed to be constant, the tangent modulus may be
expressed in the form:
E
t
= (8)
Performing the indicated differentiation on equation (3) and substituting

the parameters discussed previously, the tangent modulus may be expressed
as
1
E E.1 __________
= ___________
(9)
t
r_!_ +
[ Ei
Ri~
(01 - OJ)r j.
l 2
Although this expression for the tangent modulus value could be

employed in incremental stress analyses, it has one significant short-
coming: The value of tangent modulus, Et, is related to the strain,
which has a completely arbitrary reference state. Because the reference
state for strain is arbitrary, and because stresses may be calculated more
accurately than strains in many soil mechanics problems, it seems logical
to eliminate strain and express the tangent modulus in terms of stress
difference. The resulting equation for tangent modulus is
(10)
This equation may be employed in either effective or total stress finite

element stress analyses. For effective stress analyses drained test
conditions, with 03' constant throughout, are used to determine values of
the required parameters. For total stress analyses unconsolidated-undrained
43
tests, with o 3 constant throughout, are used to determine the parameter
values.
The usefulness of equation (10) results from its simplicity with regard
to two factors:
(1) Because the tangent modulus is expressed in terms of stresses

only, and not strains, it may be employed for analyses of
problems involving arbitrary initial stress conditions without
any complications.
(2) The parameters involved in this relationship may be determined

readily from the results of laboratory tests. The amount of
effort required to determine values of the parameters K, n, and
Rf is not much greater than that required to determine values of
c and ¢.
In order to study the applicability of this stress-strain relationship

to various types of soils and rockfills, and to determine values of the
required parameters for these materials, a review of published stress-
strain information has been made. The results of this review are
summarized in the following sections.
Modulus Parameters for Drained Conditions
Classification data for the 36 soils included in the study of drained

stress-strain characteristics are listed in Table 1. Except for the last
soil listed (Cannonsville silt) which was undisturbed, all of these soils
were compacted before testing by either vibratory or impact methods; the
initial void ratios, dry unit weights, and relative densities before
testing are given in the table. The values of <f>' for these granular soils
were determined for each test by assuming that the Mohr envelope passed
through the origin (c' = 0). It may be noted that the values of <f>' deter-
mined in this way decrease with increasing confining pressure. The range
of confining pressures and the corresponding range in friction angles are
shown in the table together with the values of K, n, and Rf determined from
the test results. The values of K, n, and Rf shown in Table 1 are the
average values of these parameters over the range of pressures employed in
the tests.
Examination of these data shows some general relationships among the

classification characteristics, relative densities, and stress-strain
parameters:
(1) The value of the modulus number K increases roughly in proportion

to relative density. Variations of Ei with 03 for Sacramento River Sand
(SP-4) at four relative densities are shown in Fig. 12. The linear inter-
pretations of these data shown in the figure correspond to the same value
of the exponent (n = 0.54) for all relative densities, and values of K
which are roughly proportional to relative density. It may be noted that
these linear interpretations match the plotted points closely except for
44
Table 1. Classification Data and Stre$s-Strain Parameters for Soils Tested Under Drained Conditions.
Soil
N.-er
SoU Deacriptioa Reference
060
Grain Size
°30
<->
°10
Dry Unit
Weight
(1b/ft')
Initial
Void
Ratio
Relative
Density
.....
Stress
(T/ft 1 )
Muaber
of
Teats
•
(degrees) .,
Cobble c-u Sante Fe Andesite R.ockf111 Harsal (1963) 130 120 110 70.2 1.06 Loose <1 40 340 0.21 0.90
Cobb !a C-lh Sante Fe Andedte R.oc.k£111 Harsal (1963) 130 120 110 77,0 0.88 Dense <1 47 400 0.20 0.84
Cobble C-2 Granitic: Cneiu l.ockfill {Mica o- Shell) Casagrap.de (1965); Marui. et al (1965) 133 124 53 101.0 0.62 79% 5-26 34-29 65 0.61 0.52
GW Gll-1 Coaalo.erate R.ockfill (Netzahualcoyote D• Shell) H.arul. et al (1965); GUiboa and Senau1ni (1967) 47.0 7.5 0.9 118.9 0.39 70% 1-26 10 49-37 440 0.45 0.54
GW Gll-2 Craaitic Gneiss lockfill (Mica Da Shell) Casagralflde (1965); H.araal. et al (1965) 84 26.0 6.0 123.7 0.32 95% 5-26 37-32 372 0.35 0.74
GW Gil-) Quartzite Rocltfill (Furnu Da• Shell) Casagra:pde (1965) <10 4-37 45-39 755 0. 35 0.80-0.95
GW Gll-4 Quartzite llockfill (Furnas Da• Transition) Caugrapde (1965) <25 4-37 50-42 1210 0.39 0. 73
GW Gll-5 Quutdte Rocltf111 (Furnas o - Tranaitioo.) Casagrapde (1965) <10 .C.-37 45-39 875 0.50 0.58
GW CW-6 Pinzandaran Gravel Marsal ,et al (1965) 21.0 2. 7 0.25 132.1 0.34 65% 1-26 53-39 715 0.50 0.61
GW Gll-7 Diorite Rockflll (El Infiernillo Da Shell) Hars&l ,et al (1965) 93 42.0 17.0 105.7 0.56 50% 1-26 46-34 290 0.30 0.70
GW Gll-8 Silicified Conglo.!!rate Rod:fill (El lnfiernillo Du Shell) Marsal tH a1 (1965) 64 20.0 4.5 106.9 0.55 1-26 46-37 320 0.38 0.64
GW GW-9 Silicified Conglo.rate Roc.kfill (El lnfiernillo Da• Shell) Ma.rsal ,et al (1965) 64 20.0 4.5 114.1 0.45 2-26 46-36 335 0.41 0.62
GW CW-10 Ar&illite locltfill (Pyr&ldd D-. Shell) Karachi ( 1969) 17.8 7.4 2.7 1U.2 0.46 ~toot 2-47 47-36 &50 0.25 0.68
GW CW-11 Arailllte Rockfill (PyraiRid Dn Shell) Karachi (1969) 53 23.1 8.0 113.0 0.45 ~toot 2-47 47-36 650 0.25 0.68
GW Gll-12 Crushed Olivine B&~~&lt Harachi (1969) 17.8 7.4 2. 7 125.1 0.43 ~toot 2-47 48-37 1115 0.12 0. 70
GW Q.l-13 Crushed Olivine Basalt Karachi (1969) 53 23.1 7.6 125.0 0.43 -100% 2-47 48-36 1115 o.u o. 70
GW GW-14 Gravel (Mev Doa Pedro Daa Shell) Bechtel (1969) 19.0 1.6 0.13 U3.l 0.39 ~tOO% 9-47 40-35 665 0.28 0.77
CP CP-1 Quartzite Rockfill (f'urn. . Da• Shell) Casagra nde (1965) 19.0 16.0 12.0 4-37 42-34 950 0.11 0.88
1
CP GP-2 Sandy Gravel (Mica o.. Shell) Caaa.grande (1965)

1
22.0 1.2 0.23 50% 7-33 39-37 520 0.37 0. 76
CP GP-3 Budt Rockfill Casagra nde (1965); Karsal (1967) 19.0 3.6 1.0 133.8 0.30 95% 5-26 46-39 640 0.26 0.65
1
CP CP-4a Coatreras Andeaite Gravel Marsal (1963) 75 65 44.0 88.1 0.68 Loose <1 42 730 0.53 0.91
CP CP-40 Coatreru Andeaite Gravel Marsa1 (1963) 75 65 44.0 96.1 0.54 Dense <1 47 975 0.50 0.88
CP CP-5 ~bibolite Gravel (Oroville Da. Shell) Hall an d Gordon (1963) 25.0 13.0 5.1 144.0 0.21 100% 9-40 43-37 1730 0.33 0.89
1
CP GP-6 Silty Sandy Gravel (Oroville Daa Transition) Hall an,d Gordon (1963) 18.0 4.8 0.4 148.0 0.16 100% 9~40 45-39 1850 0.29 0.69
CP CP-7 .A.phibolite Gravel (Oroville Daa Shell) Harachi (1969) 13.2 4.6 0. 36 152.0 0.20 ~100% 2-47 49-40 3780 0.19 o. 76
CP CP-8 ~hiboll te Gravel (Oroville Daa Shell) Karachi (1969) 39.6 14.2 1.1 149.3 0.22 -100% 2-47 47-38 3780 0.19 o. 76
cc GC-1 Clayey Crave 1 (New Hogan Daa Core) Bird 0,961) 12.0 0.6 113.0 1-4 18 95 0.98 0.75-1.0
S\1 SW-1 Araillite lock£111 (Pyraaid Daa Shell) Marachi (1969) 4.1 1.8 0.6 111.6 0.46 ~100% 2-47 50-30 650 0.25 0.68
sv S\1-2 Crushed Olivine Basalt !iarachi (1969) 4.1 1.8 0.6 U5.4 0.43 ~1oot 2-47 52-39 lllS 0. U 0. 70
SP SP-1a texcoco Sand Haru.1 (1%3) 2.4 1.8 1.2 90.3 0. 74 Loose <1 37 375 0.67 0.98
SP SP-lh Tezcoco Sand Haraal (1963) 2.4 1.8 1.2 99.4 0.58 Dense <1 45 1075 0.56 0.87
SP SP-2 OttMta Sand Lee (19 &5) 0. 73 0.68 0.64 111.0 0.49 100% 1-41 39-28 2490 0.58 0.91
1
SP SP-J Glacial Outllaah Sand Hirschf.eld and Poulos (1963) 0.83 o. 40 0.14 112.3 0.50 80% 1-41 44-37 270 0.50 0.55
SP SP-4& Sacra~~~~ento River Sand Lee (19 &5) 0.22 0.17 0.15 89.5 0.87 38% 1-41 34-27 345 0.54 0.85
1
SP SP-QI SacraD!'Dto liver Sand Lee (1965) 0.22 0.17 0.15 94.0 0. 78 60% 1-41 37-28 545 0.54 0.86
I
SP SP-4c Sacra.nto River Sand Lee (19155) 0.22 0.17 0.15 97.8 1. 71 78% 1-41 39-27 780 0.54 0.85
I
SP SP-4d Sacra.ento R.iver Sand Lee (191&5) 0.22 0.17 0.15 103.9 0.61 100% 1-41 41-26 1210 0.54 0.87
I
SP SP-ja Ha• i.iver Sand Bishop {1966) 0.25 0.17 0.10 0.82 Loose 7-71 34-30 370 0.46 O.Bl
SP SP-5b B•• River Sand Bishop (1966) 0.25 0.17 0.10 0.64 Dense 7-71 38-31 1440 0.!15 0.88
SP SP-6 -Uiphibolite Sand (Oroville D&• Shell) Harachi (1969) 3.1 1.1 0.09 146.5 0.23 ~100% 2-47 51-41 3780 0.19 0. 76
SM-SC SM-SC-1& Silty Clayey Sand (Mica Da• Core. Dry) Casagra1 r1de (19&5); Insley and !::Iillis (1965) o. 34 0.03 0.002 4-35 33-35 1195 0.18 0.81
1
SM-SC SM-SC-lh Silty Clayey Sand (Mica Daa Core. Std. AASHO Opt.) CasagraJr1de (1965); Insley and Hillis (19&5) 0.34 0.03 0.002 4-35 33-35 525 0.50 0. 71
SM-SC SM-SC-1c Silty Clayey Sand (Hica o . . Core. Wet) Casagra1'r1de (1965); Insley and Hillis (1965) o. 34 0.03 0.002 4-35 3).-35 150 0.84 0.62
1 240 0.54 0. 78
CL CL-1 Silty Clay (Arkabutla Daa. Std. AASHO Opt.) Cas.agramde. et al (1963) 0.023 0.005 0.0008 110.0 0.49 2-8 36
I
ML ML-1 CannOMville Silt (Undisturbed) Hirschfdd and Poulos (1963) 0.033 0.018 0.005 108.0 0.57 1-40 10 44-30 350 0.57 0.60
10,000
II..
...
t/)
....,
w
6
t/)
:::>
..J
:::> 0 0
0
0
:::l:
...z 1000
w
(.!)
z
...
c{
..J Sacramento River Sand (S P-4)

c{
... Curve
a
ei Dr<"4)
0.87
K n
38
Rf
345 0.54 0.85
z
b 0.78 60 545 0.54 0.86
c 0.71 78 780 0.54 0.85
--d -o~ai t00 I i2iO -o.-54 -<la7
100 I (Data From Lee, 1965)

I I I 1
10 50
,
EFFECTIVE CONFINING PRESSURE, u (TSF)
3
FIG. 12 VARIATION OF NONLINEAR MODULUS PARAMETERS WITH

RELATIVE DENSITY FOR SACRAMENTO RIVER SAND
46
tests on loose specimens at confining pressures higher than about 10 tons
per sq ft.
(2) Soils which consist of particles of similar shape and mineral

composition, and which have parallel grain size curves, also have similar
stress-strain characteristics, Marachi (1969) showed that if the grain
size distribution of a soil is "modelled"--that is, if the soil is sieved
and the various sizes are recombined to form a finer soil with a parallel
gradation curve--the value of ¢' is virtually independent of particle size,
The classification data and stress-strain parameters for the soils Marachi
tested are shown in Table 1, and the variations of initial tangent modulus
with confining pressure for his tests are shown in Fig. 13, In each of
the three cases illustrated in Fig. 13, the variations of Ei with 03 for
tests on specimens with various maximum particle sizes have been
represented by a single straight line, corresponding to a single value of
K and a single value of n. Although somewhat different values of K and n
might be more representative of tests on one particular size, the lines
shown represent reasonable interpretations of the data. Therefore it may
be concluded that by modelling grain size distributions it is possible to
form soils which have similar stress-strain characteristics as well as
similar strength characteristics. The type of modelling investigated by
Marachi may thus be employed to determine stress-strain and strength
characteristics for soils containing gravel or cobble sizes, wi~hout
testing large-size specimens.
(3) The values of the exponent n vary over a fairly wide range even
for soils of the same classification, but characteristic values may be
established for sands and gravels. Inspection of the values of n listed
in Table 1 shows that the values of n for GW and GP soils range from 0.11
to 0.53, and the values for SW and SP soils range from 0.12 to 0,67, The
average value of n for the gravelly soils is slightly less than one-third
(0.32) and the average value for the sandy soils is slightly less than
one-half (0.46).
(4) The average value of the failure ratio, Rf, is smaller for well-
graded soils than for poorly graded soils. The average value of Rf for GW
and SW soils is 0.69, while the average value of Rf for GP and SP soils is
0.82.
(5) Soils with high values of modulus number (K) tend to have low
values of the exponent (n), and vice versa. This fact, and the fact that
the modulus number K increases with increasing relative density, are both
reflected in the fact that the ratio Kn/Dr is nearly constant for similar
soils. Examination of the data in Table 1 shows that most of the well-
graded soils are characterized by values of Kn/Dr ranging from 120 to 180,
while most of the poorly graded soils are characterized by values of Kn/Dr
ranging from 500 to 750.
(6) Based on these observations, it is possible to infer typical

values of the stress-strain parameters for clean sands and gravels. For
these materials at 100% relative density, representative values are given
47
10,000
OROVILLE DAM SHELL

0 6" MAX. SIZE (GP-8) (Amphibolite Gravel)
0 2" MAX.SIZE(GP-71 AVG. e.•I 0.22
-
LL.
en
1000
A 0.47• MAX. SIZE (SP-6) o, • 100 "·
.........
en
. 10,000
0 6• MAX. SIZE (GW-131 Crushed Basalt
:> 0 2" MAX. SIZE (GW-121
_J
A 0.47" MAX. SIZE (SW-21 AVG. e 1•0.43
~
0 D,•IOO%
0
:E
.....
z A
LLI
C)
K • 1115 n • 0.12
z
~
..J 1000
cr
...
-z 15000
6" MAX. SIZE (GW·I3)
0 2• MAX. SIZE (GW-10)
A 0.47• MAX. SIZE (SW-1)
1000
!500
10 100
I
EFFECTIVE CONFINING PRESSURE, o- 3 (TSF)
FIG. 13 VARIATION OF NONLINEAR MODULUS PARAMETERS WITH MAXIMUM

PARTICLE SIZE FOR SOILS WITH PARALLEL GRAIN SIZE CURVES
(Data From Marachi ,1969)
48
in Table 2. It may be noted that most of the SP soils listed in Table 1
are uniform, whereas most of the GP soils are not uniform, but are poorly
graded because the curvature requirement is not satisfied. This difference
in grain size distribution, which is not reflected in the Unified classifi-
cations of these soils, is probably responsible for the difference in the
typical values of ¢' for GP and SP soils; the poorly graded sands, being
in general uniformly graded soils, are characterized by smaller values of
¢' than the poorly graded gravels,
These general relationships among the classifications of these soils,
their relative densities, and the values of their stress-strain parameters
may provide a useful context for interpreting the results of tests on other
soils, and the typical values of the parameters may be useful for studies
of a preliminary nature, However, in view of the wide variation in the
values of the stress-strain parameters for soils of the same classification
and having the same relative density, it may be concluded that values of
these parameters for use in accurate analyses should be determined by
conduct~ng tests on suitably selected and prepared soil specimens.
Modulus Parameters for Unconsolidated-Undrained Conditions
Classification data for the eleven soils included in the study of

stress-strain behavior under unconsolidated-undrained test conditions are
listed in Table 3. All of these soils contain some silt or clay, and all
were compacted before testing by impact or kneading compaction procedures.
The permeabilities of these soils are sufficiently low so that they would
be suitable for use as core material in zoned dams or for homogeneous dams,
and it would be expected that only a limited amount of drainage of these
soils would occur during construction, It would therefore be expected
that the behavior of these soils during construction would be most suitably
studied using unconsolidated-undrained test conditions,
Previous studies of the strength and stress-strain characteristics of

compacted cohesive soils [Seed, Mitchell, and Chan (1960); Seed and Chan
(1961)] have shown that their behavior depends on compacted dry density,
compaction water content, and method of compaction. However, the soils
for which information was available in the literature (the first ten soils
in Table 3) were each tested at only one condition of water content and
density. In order to examine the relationship between compaction density
and water content and the values of the stress-strain parameters c, ¢, K,
n, and Rf, a number of unconsolidated-undrained triaxial tests were
conducted on specimens of Pittsburg sandy clay which were prepared by
kneading compaction to a range of water content and density conditions,
The compaction and triaxial test procedures employed are described in
Appendix A. The results of these tests are shown in the form of contours
of c, ¢, K, and n in Figs. 14 and 15. The values of Rf for these tests
ranged from 0.91 to 0.96.
On the basis of the results shown in Figs. 14 and 15, it is possible

to make a number of conclusions regarding variations of the parameter
49
Table 2. Typical Values of Stress-Strain Parameters
for Clean Sands and Gravels.
4>' (degrees)
Soil Group K n R
f
Low 0 High 03
3
GW 47 35 500 0.3 0.7
GP 46 38 1800 0.3 0.8
sw 50 35 300 0.5 0.7
SP 40 30 1200 0.5 0.8
50
Table 3. Classification Data and Stress-Strain Parameters for Soils Tested Under
Unconsolidated-Undrained Conditions.
Grain Size C=l Cof!Pactioa

Un1U<r:d
Syste•
Group
Soil
Nuat.er
Soil Description Reference
060 030 010
Uqo.ad
Limit
Plasticity
Index Energy
1
yd . . x w
op<
Dry t:nit
'Weight
(lb/ft')
Water
Content
(%)
Stress
R~ge
(Tfft 1 )
NUIIIber
of
Tests
c
(T/ft 2 )
•
(~greu)
.,
(ft-lb/h ) (lb/ft J) (%)
- ------
GC GC-2 Clayey Sandy Gravel (Oroville Daa Core) Department of \olater Resources (1969) 9.0 0.12 0.005 30 16 20,000 138.6 8.1 ~139 8-1 )-4) 1.32 25.1 341 0. 76 0.88
SK SH-1 Gravelly Silty Sand (Ball Hountain DUI) L1ndl and Shu (1960) 0.85 0.074 0.05 N.P. N.P. Std. MSHO 122.9 10.0 -124 9.4 1-4 0.20 39.) l8S 0.69 0.44
Silr:y Clayey Sand (l:lopkinton oa .. ) Linell and Sh.,a (1960) 0.22 0.014 0.001 21 Std. AA.SHO 129.2 ,_, -ut 8.8 l-b 1.15 38.0 270 0.59 0.86
Vl sc SC-1 Clayey Sand (Ot.te-rbrook D.i.IJI) Linell and Shea (1960) 0. 30 0.017 0.001 27 11 Std. AASHO 126.0 11.3 -126 12.1 1-4 1.08 14.0 40 0.48 0.68
1-'
sc SC-2 Clayey Sand (Thoaaston Da•} Linell and Shea (1900) O.loO 0.028 0.003 29 lZ Std. AASHO 123.3 12.0 -122 12.0 1-4 0.90 17.0 30 0.9lo 0.61
sc SC-3 Clayey Sand (New Don Pedro D.a111 Core) Bechtel (1969) O.Slo 0.020 0.005 27 11 20,000 125.8 9.8 -123 9.5 5-lo3 ,_80 20.3 4520 -0.12 0.82
sc SC-lo Clayey Sand (U lnfiernillo Dati! Core) Marui and de Arellano (1965) 0.04 0.003 -40 -20 Std. AASH.O -106 -20 ~106 20.3 1-10 0.40 0.5 85 0.35 0.93
CL CL-1 Silty Clay (Arkabutla Di!llll) Casag<ande et al (1963) 0.023 0.010 0.0008 30 Std. AASHO IIO.O 18.0 -108 19.0 1-llo 1-80 17.0 85 0.21 0. 73
CL CL-4& Silty Clay (Canyon Dam) Casagrande et al {1963) 0,002
CL CL-4b Silty Clay (Canyon D.lm) Cas.111gnnde et a1 (1963)

0.019
0.019 0.002
"
40
25
25
Std. AASHO
Std. AASHO
108.0
108.0
19.0
19.0
-110
-uo
18.7
18.7
l-14
l-14
2.10
2.10
3.0
3.0
205
175
0.42
0.41
0.92
0.90
Values vary with density and
CL CL-5 Pittsburg Sandy Clay Thh study 0.040 0.003 35 16 Mod. AASHO ll8.9 u.s Sever•l Seven.! 1-6 27
water content; See fias. 14,1.5.
0.91-0.96
-- - · - - - - - --~- ·-- -- . -----

125
C (TSF)
120
115
110
105
-u..
u 100
.....
Q.
6 12 18 24
>-
1-
en
z
l&.l
0
,...
a:. 125
c
; (OEGEES)
120
115
110
105
15
100
6 12 ial 24
WATER CONTENT (%)
FIG. 14 STRENGTH PARAMETERS FOR COMPACTED PITTSBURG SANOY CLAY

UNDER UNCONSOLIDATED- UNDRAINED TEST CONDITIONS
52
125
120
115
110
105
LA..
u 100
->-
Cl.
1-
6 12 18 24
C/)
z
LIJ
0
>- 125
0:
0
120
115
110
105
I
•0.5
100
6 12 18 24
WATER CONTENT (%)
FIG. 15 NONLINEAR MODULUS PAR A METERS FOR COMPACTED PITTSBURG SANDY CLAY
UNDER UNCONSOLIDATED· UNDRAINED TEST CONDITIONS
53
values with variations in compaction conditions for Pittsburg sandy clay:
(1) The values of cohesion intercept increase with increasing dry

density, and are largest for water contents near optimum.
(2) The values of ~ increase with decreasing water content, and are
largest for specimens compacted at very low water contents with high
compactive effort.
(3) The values of K increase with decreasing water content, and are
largest for specimens compacted at very low water contents with high
compactive effort.
(4) The values of n increase with increasing water content, from

negative values at very low water contents, through zero at water cont~nts
close to optimum, to values greater than zero at water contents wet of
optimum. Ultimately, as shown in Fig. 15, it would be expected that n
would decrease back towards zero at very high water contents approaching
complete saturation. The negative values of n are indicative of the fact
that specimens compacted at very low water contents are quite brittle at
low pressures and less brittle at high pressures; the initial portions of
the stress-strain curves are actually steeper at low pressures than at high
pressures. It may be noted that the New Don Pedro Dam core material
(SC-3 in Table 3) is also characterized by negative values of n.
The results of these tests on Pittsburg sandy clay show that the shear
strength and stress-strain behavior of compacted cohesive soils under
unconsolidated-undrained test conditions may vary widely depending on
compaction density and water content. It would seem to be important there-
fore that the density and water content of specimens tested to determine
values of the strength and stress-strain parameters for embankment materials
should duplicate as nearly as possible the conaitions of aensity and water
content used in the actual embankment. Previous studies have shown that
the method of compaction may also have an important influence on the
behavior of compacted soils (Seed, Mitchell and Chan, 1960), and the
influence of this factor should also be considered.
54
CHAPTER 4
NONLINEAR STRESS-DEPENDENT POISSON'S RATIO RELATIONSHIP
More than a single stress-strain coefficient is required to relate

stress and strain under two-dimensional and three-dimensional loading
conditions. In the finite element analyses conducted during this investi-
gation, strain increments were related to stress increments by means of
the generalized Hooke's law for isotropic materials, which contains two
independent parameters. These parameters may be either Young's modulus
and Poisson's ratio, or deformation modulus and bulk modulus (Clough and
Woodward, 1967); either of these sets of parameters may be defined in
terms of the other. For purposes of representing the nonlinear, stress-
dependent behavior of soils determined in laboratory tests, it has been
,
found to be convenient to express the results in terms of Young's modulus
and Poisson's ratio. For purposes of analyzing stresses and displacements
in embankments by the finite element method, particularly after failure,
it has been found to be desirable to express the relationship between
stress increments and strain increments in terms of deformation modulus
and bulk modulus.
In a manner consistent with the definition of tangent modulus

discussed in the previous chapter, the tangent Poisson's ratio may be
defined as the rate of variation of radial strain with axial strain under
conditions of axial compression without radial restraint:
dE
r
=- d£
(11)
a
in which vt is the tangent Poisson's ratio, Er is radial strain and Ea

is axial strain. Although radial deformations of triaxial test specimens
are not frequently measured, the average value of radial strain may be
expressed in terms of the volumetric strain as follows
(E - E )
v a
E (12)
r 2
in which Ev is volumetric strain. Typical variations of volumetric and

radial strains with axial strain are shown in Fig. 16. It may be noted
that the value of tangent Poisson's ratio (slope of the curves shown in
the lower part of Fig. 16) depends on both the confining pressure and stress
difference or axial strain. An empirical relationship which incorporates
these aspects of the behavior of soils is described in subsequent sections
of this chapter.
55
Increasing
~ Confining
"'. z
Q
z \Pressure
ct
~
_.
It: 0
1-
en z
0 Q
en
0:: en
1- L&J Axial Strain, £ 0
L&J It:
:E 0.
_.
;::) :E
0
g 0
a) VOLUMETRIC STRAIN VS. AXIAL STRAIN
."'
z
.
ct
It:
l-
en
...1
I Increasing
Confining
. \Preuure
ct
0
ct
It:
AXIAL STRAIN, f:a
b) RADIAL STRAIN VS. AXIAL STRAIN
FIG. 16 TYPICAL STRAIN PATTERNS IN SOILS DURING SHEAR
56
Nonlinearity
Nonlinear relationships between axial and radial strains, like those

shown in the lower part of Fig. 16, may be approximated by an empirical
hyperbolic equation of the form
E:
E:
a
=- -r -
f + dE
(13)
r
in which f and d are parameters whose values are determined empirically.

If equation (13) is rewritten as
E:
......!:.
E
= f + dE r (14)
a
it may be noted that the parameter f is the value of the ratio Er/Ea at
zero strain. Thus the parameter f is equal to the value of tangent
Poisson's ratio at zero strain, which herein is called the initial
Poisson's ratio, v .• The parameter dis the slope of the line represented
1
by equation (14).
A study of the stress-strain behavior of a variety of types of soil

conducted during the course of this investigation has shown that the
volume change characteristics of most soils may be represented to a
reasonable degree of accuracy by the empirical relationship expressed by
equations (13) and (14). Data derived from tests on a very dense, poorly
graded sand (SP-4d) are shown in Fig. 17. It may be noted that the same
data plotted in the transformed manner on the right in Fig. 17 do not
describe linear relationships,- and similar deviations from linearity- are
typical of many other soils as well. Therefore, as in the case of the
stress-strain curves, it has been found to be desirable to reduce the
degree of subjectivity involved in fitting a straight line to such data by
selecting the two points on the curve corresponding to 70% and 95% strength
mobilized for purposes of defining a representative straight line. The
relationship between the hyperbolic variations corresponding to the linear
relationships shown on the right in Fig. 17 and the actual data are shown
on the left in Fig. 17, where it may be seen that the empirical hyperbolic
representations (the dashed lines) correspond quite closely with the actual
variations (the solid lines). A similar comparison, for a dense poorly-
graded basalt rockfill, is shown in Fig. 18: Although the transformed
data deviate appreciably from linearity at small strains, matching the data
with straight lines at the 70% and 95% points results in a close corres-
pondence between the hyperbolic representations and the test data, as shown
on the left in Fig. 18.
The values of tangent Poisson's ratio, represented by the co-tangents

of the curves shown on the left in Figs. 17 and 18, increase with in-
creasing strain and decreasing confining pressure. The dense sand, for
which data are shown in Fig. 17, is dilatant at low confining pressures
and the values of initial Poisson's ratio for this material range fTom
57
20 1.00
-:o
----HYPERBOLIC
EXPERIMENTAL
..,"'
~
z
-•...: 15 tTj • 40.1 KG/Ctl
"
<f
ex:
1-
0.75
(/)
fuo
z
. ..J
<f
<f 10 X 0.50
ex: <f
1- ......
(/)
..J
z
<f <f
1.11
X
a:
co 1- 0.25
<f 5 (/)
..J
•
<f
0
<f
ex:
0 0
0 2 3 4 5 0 2 "3 4 5
RADIAL STRAIN, £, ,.,., RADIAL STRAIN, €r (%)
FIG. 17 EXPERIMENTAL AND HYPERBOLIC AXIAL STRAIN- RADIAL STRAIN CURVES FOR A DENSE POORLY-GRADED SAND
(Data From Lee, 1965)
20 0.5
...,o
HYPERBOLIC
..,.........
EXPERIMENTAL
0.4
~
15
z
Ci
0 a::
'u 1- 0.3
(/)
z ~
ct 10 ct
a:: X
1- ct
(/)
.......
0.2
~
ct z
Ci
""'
\0 X
< 5 a::
1-
(/)
0.1
~
<
5
<
a::
0 0
0 2 3 4 5 0 2 3 4 5
RADIAL STRAIN, Er ( %) RADIAL STRAIN, e, (,.J
FIG. 18 EXPERIMENTAL AND HYPBERBOLIC AXIAL STRAIN-RADIAL STRAIN CURVES FOR A DENSE POORLY-GRADED BASALT ROCKFILL
~DATA FROM CASAGRANDE .1965)
0.7 at a confining pressure of 1 kg/cm 2 to about 0.2 at a confining
pressure of 40 kg/cm 2 • The values for the dense basalt rockfill range
from about 0.27 at 5 kg/cm 2 to 0.15 at 25 kg/cm 2 • Although the empirical
hyperbolic relationship may be used for any values of Poisson's ratio,
finite element stress analyses of the type described in this report may
only be performed for materials having values of Poisson's ratio less than
one-half. Therefore, if the value of Poisson's ratio determined from
laboratory test results is greater than or equal to one-half, it is
necessary to assign a value slightly less than one-half for purposes of
analysis.
Stress-Dependency
As shown by Fig. 16, the variations of radial strain with axial

strain for soils depend on the value of confining pressure as well as the
value of strain. For many soils the value of vi (Poisson's ratio at zero
strain) has been found to decrease with increasing pressure, the variation
of vi being approximately linear with logarithm of confining pressure, as
shown in Fig. 19 for six cohesionless soils, The variations shown in
Fig. 19 may be represented by equations of the form
a
v.1 = G - F log (_l) (15)
Pa
in which G is the value of vi at a confining pressure of one atmosphere,

a 3 is the minor principal stress or confining pressure, Pa is atmospheric
pressure expressed in the same units as 03, and F is a parameter whose
value is determined empirically and which represents the rate of decrease
of v. with increasing confining pressure.
·1
Tangent Poisson's Ratio
The relationships expressing nonlinearity and stress-dependency may

be used to define a value of tangent Poisson's for any state of stress.
According to equation (11), which defines the tangent Poisson's ratio
dE
1 a
-=
v dE
(16)
t r
By performing the indicated differentiation on equation (13), the tangent

Poisson's ratio may be expressed as
f
Vt = (1 - dE ) 2 (17)
a
As shown previously, the parameter f is equal to v., the value of tangent

Poisson's ratio at zero strain, which is related t6 confining pressure• as
shown by equation (15). Substituting equation (15) into equation (17)
results in the following expression.
60
0.6
'} CT3
i • G - F I og { p )
a A- OTTAWA SAND (LEE, 1965)
B- GLACIAL OUTWASH SAND (HIRSCHFELD AND POULOS, 1963
>-
0
. C -GRANITIC GNEISS ROCKFILL (CASAGRANDE,1965)
0- QUARTZITE ROCK FILL (CASAGRANDE, 1965)
~
0.6
~ E- SANDY GRAVEL (CASAGRANDE,I965)
a: F- GRANITIC GNEISS ROCKFILL ( CASAGRANDE,I965)
z
0
(/)
(/)
0
Q.. 0.4
~
z
LIJ
C)
z
~
~ ~
..... _, 0.2
~
0.0 ...___ _.._____,_ _.__......_..................._._.___ __..__......___.___.__.__L..-L..._,

I 10 100 10 100
I.
EFFECTIV:E CONFINING PRESSURE, 0'3 (TSF)
FIG. 19 VARIATIONS OF INITIAL TANGENT POISSON RATIO WITH CONFINING PRESSURE

G- F log (o /pa)
3
\)
2
(18)
t ( 1 - dE )
a
The axial strain may be eliminated from equation (18) by expressing this
strain in terms of the stresses and stress-strain parameters, using
equation (3), as follows:
(19)
When this equation is substituted into equation (18), the tangent Poisson's
ratio may be expressed as
G - F log (O/pa)
\)
t = (20)
~2
l- 03 n [
Kp (-)
a Pa
1
d(o 1 - o 3)
_ Rf(o 1 - o 3 )(1- sin¢1
2c cos¢+ 2o sin¢
3
This expression contains eight parameters: The five modulus parameters K,

n, c, ¢, and Rf; and three additional parameters G, F, and d. The values
of all of these parameters may be determined from the results of a series
of triaxial or plane strain compression tests with volume change measure-
ments. Studies conducted to determine values of these parameters for
-various soils under drained test conditions and unconsolidated-undrained
test conditions are described in the following sections.
Poisson's Ratio Parameters for Drained Conditions
Classification data and stress-strain parameters for 35 soils tested

under drained conditions are summarized in Table 4; this table contains
data for the same soils as Table 1 in the previous chapter. For all of
these soils except CL-1, for which volume change data were not available,
values of the Poisson's ratio parameters G, F, and d have been calculated
and are listed in the last three columns of the table.
Examination of these data shows some general relationships among the

classification characteristics, relative densities, and Poisson's ratio
parameters:
(1) The value of the Poisson's ratio parameter G increases with

increasing relative density. Variations of initial tangent Poisson's ratio
with 03 for Sacramento River Sand (SP-4) at four relative densities are
shown in Fig. 20. The values of G corresponding to the linear interpreta-
tions shown in this figure increase from 0,47 at a relative density of 38%
62
Table 4. Classification Data and Stress-Strain Parameters for Soils Tested Under Drained Conditions.
<->
Unifhd
Syate•
Cro~
Soil
~~~u
Soil Ducriptioa Referll'nce
D60
Craia She
D)O 010
Dry lla1t
VeiiJht
(lb/ft '>
ldtial
Void
Ratio
ldativoe
Density
$
(dearees) .,
Cobble C-Ia S&nte Fe Andeaiu iodtfill Marui (1963) llO uo 1.06 40 340 0.21 0.90 0.2S 0.25 6.4
Cobblt! C-lb Sante Fe Aade:aite Rockfill uo
1l0 70.2 Loose
"
<1 400 0.20 0.84 0.2) 0.27 7.3
Cobb a C-2 Granitic Codn J.ockfill (Mica n.. Shell)
Hand (1%1)
C..u.arande (1965); K.rn~. et al (1965)
llO
U4
1l0 77.0
101.0
0.88
0.62 19% 5-26 "
14-29 65 0.61 0.52 0.12 0.04 3.4
1ll
"
cw
cw
cw
CW-1
CW-2
cw->
Conalo.:rate I.DCk.fUl
Cunit.ic Coeiaa l.ockfill (Kica
(lletzllh~lcoyote
Quartdte J.ockfill (Fum.u Daa Shell)

o-
o. . Sbell)
Shell)
Maual, et al (1965); C~oa and lena. . ini (1967)
Ca..u&r&n~ (1965);
Cauararuie {1965)
Maua~, et al (1965) .
47.0
<10
7.5
26.0
0.9
6.0
118.9
123.7
0.)9
0.)2
rot
95t
1-26
... ,
S-26
10 49-31
37-32
45-39
440
372
755
0.45
0.35
o. 35
0.54
0.74
0,80-0.95
0.37
0.28
o. 35
0.16
0.10
0.09
4.0
3.8
t..8
cw GW-4 Qual'tdte l.oclr.Ull (Fumu Da. Tran.it.ioa.) c... grande
cw cw-5 Quartdte lockf111 (Furnas Da. Transitioa)
(1965)
c-a&rande (1965) '"
<10
4-37
4-37
S0-42
45-39
1210
875
0.39
0.50
0.73
c. 58
0.23
0.27
0.11
o. u
16.8
16.)
cw CW-6 Pinz.&D.diltAD Crawl Manal et al (1965) 2.7 0.)4 65t 1-26 ,,..,. 715 0.50 0.61 0.50 0.21 7.2
.,
21.0 0.25 132.1
cw
cw
cw
CW-7
CW-8
GW-9
Diorite. Rockfill (El lnfiernillo o - Shell)
Silicified Coaal~ute loc:kfill (El Infiernillo 0.. Shdl)
SUieified Con&lc.erate Rocltf111 (El hlfiemillo 0.. Sbdl)
Marsal et al (1965)
Kanal et al (1965)
X.nal et al (1965)
..
64
42.0
20.0
20.0
17.0
4.5
4.5
105.7
106.9
114.1
0.>6
0.55
0.45
50t 1-26
1-26
2-26
46-34
46-17
46-)6
290
320
335
0. )0
0. 38
o • .u
0.10
0.64
0.62
O.ll
0.3)
0.25
0.23
0.18
0.12
4,,
4.2
5.1
cw Ql-10 Araillite iocltfill (Pynaid D.o Shell) M.nchi (1%9) 11.8 7.4 2.7 112.2 0.46 -lOOt 2-47 47-)6 650 0.25 0.68 0.29 0.12 4.6
cw GW-ll A.raill1tc l.odtfill (Pyraaid ea. Shell) Marachi (1969) 8.0 0.45 -lOOt 2-47 47-36 O.H 0.68 0.29 0.12 4.6
Cll cw-u Cru.hed Olivi~W l&.salt Marachi (1969) "
17.8
23.1
7.4 2.7
113.0
125.1 0.43 -lOOt 2-47 43-37
650
1115 0.12 0.70 0.30 0.1) 5.5
Ql GV-13 Cna~hecl Olivine !&salt Karachi (1969) 53 23.1 7.6 125.0 0.43 -lOOt 2-41 41-36 1115 0.12 0.70 0.30 0.13 5.5
Ql GW-14 Cuvd (New DoD Pedro n.. Shell) Bechtel (1969) 19.0 1.6 O.ll U3.1 o." -100% 9-47 40-lS 665 0.28 0.77 0.38 0.14 2.6
CP GP-1 Qu.artdte l.ockfill (Furnas o- Shell) Cuaarande (1965) 19.0 16.0 12.0 ..., 42-34 950 o.u 0.88 0.30 0.14 3.1
CP CP-2 Sandy Crawl (Mica 0.. Shell) Cuaarande (1965) 22.0 1.2 0.23 50t 7-ll 39-37 520 0.17 o. 76 0.30 0.08 2.5
GP GP-3 la&&lt ioc:kfill c-aarande (1965); Manal (1%7) 19.0 3.6 1.0 133.8 o. )0 95t S-26 46-39 640 0.26 0.65 0.32 O.ll 6.0
f:' Coatrer. . Andesite Crawl Hanal (1963) 1S <1
" 7.]0 0.51 0.91 0.28 0.20 12.2
CP-4& 65 44.0 88.1 0.68 Lo~·
CP
CP
CP
CP-~
CP-S
CP-6
Coatrer- Andesite Cr&W!1
Uphibolite Crawl (Oroville 0.. Shell)
Silty Sandy Crave! (Oroville 0.. tu.nsition)
Hand (1963)
Hall &Dd Cordon (1963)
Ball and Cord01:1 (1963)
75
n.o
18.0
65
13.0
4.8
44.0
5.1
0.4
96.1
1u.o
141.0
0.54
0.2.1
0.16
-··
lOOt
100t
<1
9-40
9-40
"
4)-37
45-39
975
17JO
11SO
o.so
0.3]
0.29
0.18
0.89
0.69
0.18
0.47
0.54
0.18
0.09
0.16
15.5
1.9
2.6
GP CP-7 . . ibolite Gravel (Oroville D- Shell) Karachi (1969) 1).2 4.6 0.36 1.52.0 0.20 -100% 2-47 49-40 )7&0 0.19 0.76 0.63 0.19 16.8
CP CP-8 Allph1bol1te Cn'Wl (Oroville Daa Sb.tll) Karachi (1969) 39.6 14.2 1.1 149.) 0.22 -lOOt 2-47 47-38 3710 0.19 0.76 0.43 0.19 14.8
CC cc-1 Clayey Crawl (Nev Boaan D- Core) Bird (1961) 12.0 0.6 113.0 1-4 18 95 0.98 0.75-1.0 0.29 0.22 4. 7
sw sw-1 Araillitc lockf111 (Pyraa1d o- Shell) Karachi (1969) 4.1 1.8 0.6 111.6 0.46 2-47 50-lO 650 0.25 0.68 0.29 0.12 6.6
SV Sw-2 Cru~Md OUvioe !ualt Karachi (1969) 4.1 1.8 0.6 125.4 0.4) 2-41 52-39 1115 0.12 0.10 0. 30 O.ll ,. 5
SP SP-1.& TeKCoco Sand Marsd (1%3)
"
2.4 1.8 1.2 90.) 0.74 <1 )75 0.67 0.98 0.28 0.25 7.1
SP SP-lb Texcoco Sand Mana! (196 3) 2.4 1.8 1.2 99.4 0.58 <1 4S 1015 0.56 0.17 0.60 0.32 6.)
SP SP-2 Ot~a Sand Lee {1965) 0. 73 0.68 0.64 111.0 0.49 lOOt 1-.U )9-28 2490 0.58 0.91 0.11 0.15 4.3
SP SP-3 Cladal Outwash Saad Hirschfeld and Poulos (1 1 ~3)
1 o.n o.4o 0.14 112.1 0.50 80t 1-41 44-37 270 O.SO 0.55 O.H 0.19 2.5
SP SP-4& Sacra-ato R.i'Wr Sand Lee (1965) 0.22 0.17 O.lS 89.5 0.87 l8% 1-41 34-27 145 o.56 o.l5 o.n 0.22 2.0
SP SP-4b SacraaHtto l.iver Sand Lee (1965) 0.22 0.17 O.lS 94.0 o. 78 60% 1-41 H-28 545 o.56 o.86 o.~s 0.26 2.1
SP SP-4c. Sacraaento J.iv.r Sand LH (1965) 0.22 0.17 0.15 97.8 1.71 78% 1-41 39-27 710 0.54 0.85 0.68 0.)0 1.9
SP SP-4d Sacr. .ftto li"'r Saad Lee (1965) 0.22 0.17 0.15 103.9 0.61 100% 1-41 41-16 1210 0.54 0.87 0.76 0.10 1.6
SP
SP
SP-5a
SP-5b
IIA• l.iwr Saud
H• l.her Sand
lbhop (1966)
lhhop (1966)
0.25 0.17 0.10 0.82 ....... 7-71 l4-l0 )70 0.46 0.81 o.u 0.15 1.4
0.25 0.17 0.10 0.64 7-71 lt-ll 1440 0.45 0.88 0.58 0.20 3.4
SP SP-6 Upbibolita Sand (Oroville Da• Shell) Karachi (1969) ).1 1.1 0.09 146.5 0.2) -100% 2-47 51-41 )780 0.19 0.76 0.43 0.19 14.8
51'1-SC SM-SC-la SUty Clayey Sand (Mica Da• Con, Dry) c.. aar-ande (1965) i Inllle~r and Hillh (1965) 0.34 O.OJ 0.002 4-15 3l-35 ll95 0.111 0.81 0.)7 0.12 5.3
C..aarande (1965); Insle~ r •ad Hillis {1965)
SM-SC SH-SC-lb Silty Clayey Sand (Mica D- tore, Std. AASMO Opt.) 1
0.34 0.03 0.002 4-)5 3l-35 525 0.50 0.71 0.38 0.12 5.)
SK-SC SK-SC-lc Silty Clayey Sand (M1ca o- Core, Vet) Ca•aarande (1965); Insle~ r and Hillis {1%5)
1
0.34 0.03 0.002 4-35 33-35 ISO 0.14 0.62 0.39 0.12 5.3
CL CL-1 Silty Clay (Arkabutla o-. Std . .V.SHO Ope.) C..a&rande, et al (1963)1 0.02) 0.005 0.0008 110.0 0.49 2-8 l6 240 0.54 0.78
ML ML-1 Carmcmsvilll! Silt (Undhtu.rbed) Hirschfeld and Poul05 (1 1J6J) 0.033 0.018 0.005 108.0 0.57 1-40 10 44-)() 350 0.57 0.60 0.49 0.17 ~-1
1
?
0
. SACRAMENTO
RIVER SAND
1-
< 0.6
a::
z
0
(I)
(I)
0
Q,
0.4
1-
z
w
(!)
z
<
1-
..J 0.2
-
<
1-
z
(Data
0
10 100
I
EFFECTIVE CONFINING PRESSURE, 0"3 ( TSF)
Curve Dr G F d
ei
j_%}
a 0.87 38 0.47 0.22 2.00
b 0.78 GO 0.55 0.26 2.07
c 0.71 78 0.68 0.30 1.92
d 0.61 100 0.74 0.30 2.50
FIG. 20 VARIATION OF NONLINEAR POISSON RATIO PARAMETERS WITH

RELATIVE DENSITY FOR SACRAMENTO RIVER SAND
64
to 0.74 at a relative density of 100%. The values of the parameters F and
d listed in Fig. 20 also increase slightly with relative density.
(2) Soils which consist of particles of similar shape and mineral

composition, and which have parallel grain size curves, also have similar
volume change characteristics as indicated by the values of the parameters
G, F, and d. The variations of vi with o 3 for several soils tested by
Marachi (1969) are shown in Fig. 2lo The results for tests on specimens
with various maximum particle sizes have been represented by a single
straight line in each of the three cases shown in Fig, 21. Although some-
what different values of G, F, and d might be more representative of tests
on one particular size, the lines shown represent reasonable interpreta-
tions of the data. Therefore it may be concluded that by modelling grain
size curves it is possible to form soils which have similar volume change
characteristics.
(3) Average values of the parameters G, F, and d for the sands and
gravels are given in Table 5. It may be noted that the values shown in
Table 5 for well-graded sands are based on data for only two soils. It
may also be noted that most of the SP soils listed in Table 5 are uniform,
whereas most of the GP soils are nor uniform.
In view of the wide variations in the values of the stress-strain

parameters for soils of the same classification and having the same
relative density, ic may be concluded that values of these parameters for
use in accurate analyses should desirably be determined by conducting
tests on suitably selected and prepared soil specimens.
Poisson's Ratio Parameters for Unconsolidated-Undrained Conditions
A review of published strength test results did not provide any

information concerning volume changes during unconsolidated-undrained
tests on partly saturated soil specimens. Volume changes are seldom
measured in this type of test because of experimental difficulties,
requiring measurement of changes in the volume of fluid contained in the
pressure chamber, and because volume change data are not often used for
purposes of design or analysis. The only data available at the time of
this study were those from tests on the New Don Pedro Dam core material
(Bechtel Corporation, 1969) and the Oroville Dam core material (Department
of Water Resources, 1969). The values of the Poisson's ratio parameters
determined in these tests are given in Table 6, and supplementary infor-
mation concerning these soils is given in Table 3. As indicated in
Table 3, both materials were compacted at water contents quite close to
optimum, but the values of the Poisson's ratio parameters are quite
different for these two materials, The value of G is 0,60 for the
New Don Pedro Dam core, indicating that the material dilates at low
confining pressures. The value of F for the Oroville Dam core material is
negative, indicating that the value of Poisson's ratio for this material
increases with increasing confining pressure in the range of pressures
encompassed by the tests, presumably as a result of increased saturation
at higher confining pressures.
65
0.5
OROVILLE DAM SHELL

(AMPHIBOLITE GRAVEL)
AVG. ei • 0.22
Dr • 100%
0.3
?·- ~
0.1
0
;:::: 0.4
<t
a: CRUSHED BASALT
z AVG. e i • 0.43
0
f/) D, •100%
f/)
0
0... 0.2
1-
z
w
(!) 06" MAX. SIZE (GW-13)
z 0 2" MAX. SIZE (GW-12)
<t
1- t:::r. 0.47"MAX. SIZE (SW-2)
..J 0
<t
-z
1-
0.4
-PV-RAMW {lAM Sfi£LL
(ARGILLITE ROCKFILL)
AVG. ei •0.46
Dr. 100%
0.2
0
10 100
I
EFFECTIVE CONFINING PRESSURE, o-3 (TSF)
FIG. 21 VARIATION OF NONLINEAR POISSON RATIO PARAMETERS WITH

MAXIMUM PARTICLE SIZE FOR SOILS WITH PARALLEL GRAIN
SIZE CURVES
(Do to From Morochi, 1969)
66
Table 5. Average Values of Poisson's Ratio Parameters for
Clean Sands and Gravels under Drained Conditions.
Soil Group G F d
GW 0. 32 0.14 6.4
GP 0. 38 0.15 8.0
sw 0.30 0.13 5.0
SP 0.54 0.23 4.3
Table 6. Poisson's Ratio Parameters for Soils Tested

under Unconsolidated-Undrained Conditions.
Soil
Soil G F d
Number
New Don Pedro Dam Core SC-3 0.60 0.27 2.4
Oroville Dam Core GC-2 0.30 -0.05 3.8
67
Because so few data were available concerning the volume change
behavior of partly saturated soils under unconsolidated-undrained test
conditions, a comprehensive series of U-U triaxial tests were conducted
on compacted specimens of Pittsburg sandy clay (CL-5). Tests were
conducted on 1.4 in dia, specimens prepared using kneading compaction
procedures to a variety of different density and water content conditions;
the details of this test program are described in Appendix A. The results
of the tests were used to calculate values of the Poisson's ratio parameters
G, F, and d as indicated previously, and contours showing the variations
of the values of these parameters with compaction density and water content
are shown in Fig. 22.
The values of all three parameters may be seen to vary quite widely
with initial density and water content: The value of G decreases from
about 0.55 at low water content and high compactive effort to about 0.35
at higher water content and lower compactive effort. For a saturated
condition, G would be expected to be equal to one-half, as shown in Fig. 22.
The value of the parameter F, which reflects the rate of decrease of
Poisson's ratio with increasing confining pressure, decreases from about
0,3 at low water contents to negative values at high water content. It
seems reasonable that the value of F would be equal to zero for completely
saturated specimens, because the value of Poisson's ratio would be equal
to one-half for all values of confining pressure, The value of the para-
meter d decreases from about 2,0 at low values of degree of satu~ation to
zero for complete saturation,
As in the case of the strength and modulus parameters discussed in

the previous chapter, these tests on Pittsburg sandy clay show that the ..
values of Poisson's ratio for compacted cohesive soils may vary widely
___d_epending _on _Ccompaction density and water content. Accordingly, it is
desirable that the density and water content of specimens tested to deter-
mine volume change characteristics of embankment materials for analytical
studies of behavior should duplicate as nearly as possible the density and
water content used in the actual embankment.
68
125
120
115
110
105
100
6 12 18 24
125
lL.
0
n. 120
.....
._>- 115
en
z 110
LLI
0
>- 105
a:
0
100
6 12 18 24
125 1 I
120 -F
115
110
\
105 \
\o.3
\
100
6 12 18 24
WATER CONTENT (%)
FIG. 22 NONLINEAR POISSON RATIO PARAMETERS FOR COMPACTED PITTSBURG SANDY

CLAY UNDER UNCONSOLIDATED· UNDRAINED TEST CONDITIONS
69
CHAPTER 5
ANALYSIS OF OTTER BROOK DAM USING NONLINEAR
STRESS-DEPENDENT STRESS-STRAIN PROPERTIES
Otter Brook Dam, a rolled earth dam constructed in New Hampshire

during the summer of 1957, is about 130 ft high and has a crest length
of about 1300 feet. As shown in Fig. 23, the embankment section is
symmetrical, with 2.5 on 1 slopes upstream and downstream. Except for
thin blankets of gravel and rock fill at the surface of the slopes and a
chimney drain within the downstream portion of the dam, the embankment is
homogeneous. The main portion of the embankment consists of a glacial
till which is a very well-graded clayey sand with between 10% and 20%
gravel and larger size particles. The foundation consists of a thin layer
of very dense basal till overlying bedrock.
When the dam had been constructed to about 55% of its final height,
it was noticed that the footing of the bridge pier shown in Fig. 23 had
tilted and moved outward. Reference stakes were placed to measure
additional movements, and construction was halted when the movement rate
was found to be increasing. After the stability of the embankment was
re-evaluated and found to be satisfactory, construction was resumed and
the dam completedo By the end of construction the upstream face of the dam
had bulged outward more than three feet, Thus, although the dam was stable
as designed, it deformed sufficiently to cause concerno Although these
aeforrnations could not have been anticipated at the time the dam was
designed, they can be calculated at the present time using the finite
element analysis procedures and stress-strain relationships described in
previous chapters.
Finite Element Mesh
The finite element configuration employed in analyses of Otter Brook

Dam, which is shown in Fig. 24, consists of 44 elements and 62 nodal
pointso Because the embankment was symmetrical (except for the chimney
drain) only a half-section was used for the analyseso The dense till and
bedrock foundation were assumed to be completely rigid and were not
represented in the mesh. In accordance with the results of the studies
described in Chapter 2, the analysis was performed using 8 layers and one
cycle of iteration per layer to improve the degree of correspondence
between the calculated values of stress and the values of tangent modulus
and tangent Poisson's ratio for each element
Properties of Otter Brook Dam Fill
The properties of the Otter Brook Dam fill (a sandy clay, SC-1) are
listed in Table 3. Because the permeability of the soil is low, it would
70
l
Upstream i
BRIDGE PIER
2' ROCK FILL

3' GRAVEL FILL
3'
"TILL• .nm=-u-----"?'h-
- - - - -u/'_--q:::= ,~/.:. ~-=-
-=----- - ~ ~~- - - - ~'.=-;<=- - -
~- -7~ BEDROCK '

~~
FIG. 23 OTTER BROOK DAM

(AFTER LIN ELL AND SHEA, 1960)
44 ELEMENTS
62 NODAL POINTS
8o2
788
773
....:
POINT A IS THE LOCATIOf~ lL
756
OF THE BASE OF THE z
739 0
BRIDGE PIER. ....
722 ct
>
l&J
..J
705 l&J
688
671
327.5 .jt2.~
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE (FT.)
FIG. 24 FINITE ELEMENT MESH FOR OTTER BROOK DAM

be expected that virtually no drainage would take place during construction,
which required only one season. Therefore it seems logical that uncon-
solidated-undrained tests would be most appropriate for determination of
strength and stress-strain parameters applicable duririg construction and
at the end of construction.
Linell and Shea (1960) presented stress-strain curves for the results
of unconsolidated-undrained tests on the Otter Brook fill which showed
that the values of stress difference continued to increase even at very
large values of strain. The stresses corresponding to axial strains of 20%
were selected by Linell and Shea for determining values of c and ¢ for use
in stability analyses, and these values were also employed in the finite
element analyses described in this chapter. Volume changes were not
measured during the tests reported by Linell and Shea, and the values of
the Poisson's ratio parameters employed in these analyses were estimated on
the basis of the series of unconsolidated-undrained tests described in the
previous chapter. The soil on which these tests were performed is a sandy
clay (Pittsburg sandy clay) which is similar to the Otter Brook fill
material. The values of the Poisson's ratio parameters were selected in
accordance with the compaction conditions for Otter Brook Dam, with dry
density approximately equal to the Standard Proctor maximum and water
content slightly wet of optimum. The values of the soil parameters employed
in the nonlinear analyses of Otter Brook Dam are shown in Table 7.
Comparison of Calculated and Measured Displacements
Reference stakes were installed in Otter Brook Dam when the fill
reached elevation 744, five feet above the base of the bridge pier, which
is about 55% of the full height of the dam. Besides four reference ~takes,
two ahove and two helm-.r- elev-ation- 744,- measurements_ were- alS-o_ made_ to_
ascertain the horizontal and vertical movements of the bridge pier.
Measurements made ac locations below elevacion 744 do not reflect all of
the displacement at these locations, but only that part induced by place-
ment of fill above elevation 744. In order that the calculated and
measured values could be compared on an equal basis, the calculated dis-
placements at these points were corrected by subtracting those portions of
the displacements resulting from placement of fill below elevation 744.
The calculated displacements are compared to the measured values

described by Linell and Shea (1960) in Fig. 25. The variations of the
horizontal displacement with height above the base of the dam are shown on
the left, and the measured and calculated variations of the horizontal and
vertical bridge pier displacements with fill height are shown on the right.
It may be noted that in bach cases the agreement is very good, indicating
that the values of the stress-strain parameters determined from triaxial
test results, together with the incremental analysis procedure described
previously, provide a rational basis for estimating embankment deformations.
The close agreement between the measured and calculated displacements

provides evidence chat the results of the analysis closely reflect the
actual behavior of the embankment. For this reason it would be expected
73
Table 7. Soil Parameter Values for Nonlinear Analyses of
Stresses and Deformations of Otter Brook Dam.
Soil Parameter Symbol Value Employed in Analyses
Unit Weight y 140 lb/ft 3
Cohesion c 1. 08 T /ft 2
Friction Angle ¢ 14 degrees
Modulus Number K 40
Modulus Exponent n 0.48
Failure Ratio Rf 0.68
Poisson's ' G 0.43
Ratio ) F -0.05
Parameters d 0.60
74
830~----~------~------~---~--~ 815~------r------.r------.-------,
Crest of Dam Crest of Dam

....,:
790 u. 795
"-...
.,.:
'a--~ ..J
-
"-
~
..J
u. HORIZONTAL
~ 750
1-
'j ~ 775
a..
DISPLACEMENT
~
~_.,~
0
1-
LIJ
..J u.
0
1&1
710 /,/' z 755
0
jJ 0 MEASURED POifiTS 1-
MEASURED
--CALCULATED <t - - - CALCULATED
>
LIJ
670 ..J 735 Base of Bridge Pier
Base of Dam LIJ
670
0 2 3 4 0 2 3 4
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENl" DISPLACEMENT OF BRIDGE PIER (FT.)

OF UPSTREAM FACE (FT.)
FIG. 25 DISPLACEMENTS IN OTTER BROOK DAM USING A NONLINEAR MODULUS AND POISSON RATIO
that the calculated values of displacement for other points within the
embankment, and other calculated results, such as embankment stresses,
would also provide useful information concerning the behavior of the
embankment.
Additional Results of Finite Element Analysis
Calculated values of deformation within the embankment are shown in

Fig. 26; the values shown are total displacements resulting from con-
struction of the entire embankmento The horizontal displacements along
several vertical lines are shown in the upper portion of the figure. The
magnitude of these displacements which are everywhere directed away from
the embankment centerline, vary from zero at the base of the embankment
and at the embankment centerline to a maximum value of about three and one-
quarter feet about midway beneath the toe and the crest, slightly beneath
the surface of the slopeo The calculated vertical displacements are
largest at the embankment centerline about two-thirds of the height above
the base, where the settlement is about three and one-half feet. Along
the lower portion of Lhe slope there is an upward movement of the surface
which results from the large outward bulging deformation; the deformed
shape of the embankment is shown in the lower part of Fig. 26,
It should be noted that compared to the embankment height (about

130 ft) the displacements are very largeo It was this fact which caused
some concern with regard to the SLability of the embankment. The maximum
vertical displacement at the embankment centerline amounted to more than
2.5% of the embankment height" These large deformations undoubtedly
resulted from the fact that the material of which the dam was constructed,
at the conditions of water content and density employed in the dam, was
-characterized by a srr.all value of modulus -as comp-ar-ed to shear strength.
Thus although the embankment was stable (the factor of safety with regard
to slope failure is about 2) the deformations were large enough to cause
difficulties with the bridge pier and even to alter the appearance of the
dam.
Contours of the calculated stresses within the dam are shown in

Fig. 27. The values of major principal stress, shown in the upper part of
the figure, are roughly equal to the overburden pressure (yh) at any point
varying from about 90% of the overburden pressure beneath the centerline,
as shown by the scale at the right, to values exceeding 100% beneath the
outer portions of the slopes. The variations of the minor principal stress
(cr ), which are shown in the center part of the figure, are quite similar
3
to those of the major principal stresses, being highest at the base beneath
the crest and decreasing to zero on the slopeso The values of maximum
shear stress, shown in the lower part of the figure, range from low values
near the face of the slope to values of approximately one and one-quarter
tons/ft 2 at two locations, in the lower half of the dam at the centerline
and at the base of the dam midway between the toe and the crest.
The contours of stress level or percentage of strength mobilized are

shown in Fig. 28. It may be noted that the maxima, which are slightly
76
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENTS
ALONG SELECTED SECTIONS (FT.)
..±-
+
VERTICAL DISPLACEMENTS
ALONG SELECTED SECTIONS (FT.)
r +
VECTORS OF
FACE DISPLACEMENT ( FT.)
0 2 4 FT.
DISPLACEMENT SCALE I I I
FIG. 26 DISPLACEMENTS WITHIN OTTER BROOK DAM

USING A NONLINEAR MODULUS AND POISSON RATIO
77
yh
(TSF)
0
MAJOR PRINCIPLE STRESS I
Dj (TSF) 2
3
4
5
5 6
7
7 8
9
MINOR PRINCIPAL STRESS

o- (TSF)
1
MAXIMUM SHEAR STRESS

t' MAX (TSF)
FIG. 27 PRINCIPAL STRESS CONTOURS IN OTTER BROOK DAM

USING A NONLINEAR MODULUS AND POISSON RATIO
78
t
I
FIG. 28 CONTOURS OF MOBILIZED STRENGTH IN

OTTER BROOK DAM USING A NONLINEAR
MODULUS AND POISSON RATIO.
79
greater than 50%, are located near the places where the largest values of
maximum shear stress occur. For a material with ¢ equal to zero these
maxima would coincide exactly, and it is interesting to note that their
variations are very similar for the Otter Brook Dam fill material which
has an angle of internal friction of 14 degrees under the undrained
conditions reflected in these analyses.
The values of tangent modulus and tangent Poisson's ratio correspond-

ing to the stress conditions at the end of construction are shown in
Fig. 29. It may be noted that the values of tangent modulus vary by a
factor of three, from about 20 tons/ft 2 in regions of low stress to about
60 tons/ft 2 in regions of high stress, and the values of tangent Poisson's
ratio vary from about 0.4 near the slopes to about 0.48 near the base of
the embankment. While average values of these elastic parameters might be
found which would result in values of displacement or stress in substantial
agreement with those calculated using nonlinear, stress-dependent properties,
it might be very difficult to select such a value rationally on the basis
of laboratory test results. Nonlinear analyses of the type illustrated in
this chapter, however, may be performed in a straightforward manner using
the results of laboratory tests. Based on the results of this analysis of
Otter Brook Dam, it appears that the calculated results are in good agree-
ment with the actual behavior.
80
TANGENT MODULUS (TSF)
TANGENT POl SSON RATIO
FIG. 29 ELASTIC PARAMETER IN OTTER BROOK OAM
81
CHAPTER 6
COMPARISON OF VARIOUS FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS
PROCEDURES FOR OTTER BROOK DAM
Types of Analyses
In addition to the nonlinear, stress-dependent finite element analysis

of Otter Brook Darn described in the previous chapter, a number of analyses
of the darn were performed using analysis procedures in which:
(1) The placement of fill in successive layers was not simulated, but
gravity forces were applied throughout the entire embankment simultaneously
(termed "gravity turn-on" analysis procedure). The embankment material was
assumed to be linear and to be homogeneous with respect to the values of
Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio.
(2) The placement of fill in successive layers was simulated, using

incremental analysis procedures. The embankment material was assumed to
be linear and to be homogeneous with respect to the value of Young's
modulus and Poisson's ratio.
(3) The placement of fill in successive layers was simulated, using

the same incremental analysis procedures as in the previous method. The
value of Young's modulus was varied in accordance with the calculated
values· of -stress, as in the analyses desc-r±}}ed in the previnus chapter, but
the embankment material was assumed to be homogeneous with respect to the
value of Poisson's ratio.
These analyses were performed for the purpose of comparing the values
of displacements and stresses calculated by means of the various procedures.
Previously, Clough and Woodward (1967) performed gravity turn-on analyses
and incremental analyses using constant values of Young's modulus and
Poisson's ratio. Finn (1967), and Finn and Troitskii (1968) presented
results of incremental analyses performed using nonlinear modulus values
and constant Poisson's ratio; and Clough and Woodward (1967) presented
results of an incremental analysis performed using nonlinear shear modulus
values and constant values of bulk modulus. Each of these types of analyses
resulted in good correspondence between measured and calculated displace-
ments, and it is therefore of some interest to examine the results of these
types of analyses in detail, to determine in what respects they are similar
and in what respects they differ.
Basis of Comparison
In the case of each of the three types of analysis, the values of the
elastic parameters employed in the analyses were adjusted so that the
82
calculated values of horizontal and vertical displacement at the location
of the bridge pier were equal to the estimated values of total displace-
ment at Lhis location. It was necessary to estimate the magnitudes of the
total displacements because measurements were begun at the time when the
fill height had reached elevation 744, seven feet above the base of the
bridge pier. The variations of the measured values and the adjusted
(total) displacements with increasing height of fill are shown in Fig. 30;
the estimated total horizontal displacement at the bridge pier is 3.2 ft
and the vertical is 1.0 ft.
A number of analyses of each type were performed using various values

of Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio, for the purpose of finding values
of these parameters which would result in calculated displacements in
agreement with those observed. The results of these calculations are shown
in Fig. 31. The upper part of the figure represents results of gravity
turn-on analyses, the center represents results of incremental analyses
with constant values of E and v, and the lower part represents results of
incremental analyses using nonlinear modulus values given by equation (10)
together with constant values of Poisson's ratio, The dotted lines in the
figure represent combinations of values of E (or K) and v which result in
horizontal displacements equal to those observed, and the solid lines
represent combinations of values of E (or K) and \! which result in vertical
displacements equal LO those observed" (In conjunction with the incremental
analyses performed using nonlinear modulus values, the values of the para-
meters c, ¢, n, and Rf were kept c,onstant, and were in all cases equal to
the values determined from the laboratory test results, as summarized in
Table 7 .) Where the solid and dotted lines cross, the combination of
parameter values results in values of both horizontal and vertical displace-
ment in agreement with those observed. Thus by Judic1ous selection of the
values o£ the required paramet.eJ::s~- it is possible to arrange- tha-t the-
calculaLed and observed bridge pier displacements are the same,
The three solutions represented by the points on Fig. 31 where the

solid and dotted lines cross are thus all equivalent with regard to final
bridge pier displacements, and it is of some interest to compare other
aspects of these analyses. The variations of bridge pier displacements
with increasing fill height for all of the incremental analyses are shown
in Fig. 32, and it may be noted that these variations are all very similar
and are in good agreement with those observed. Only the final value is
shown for the gravity turn-on analysis, because intermediate displacements
are not calculated when this analysis procedure is employed.
Comparisons of Displacements
Calculated and measured final displacements for four points on the

face of the embankment are compared in Fig. 33. On the right in this
figure, the final calculated finite element values are shown together with
the observed displacements; the agreement between the observed values for
the upper two points (above elevation 744) and the values calculated by
any of the three incremental analysis procedures is quite good, The
agreement is not so good in the case of the gravity turn-on arl.alysis. As
83
815 815 r------r--------,
-
.,_; D~'!!_ __ _
-
"'-
795
..J
_J
"'-
"'- 775 775
0
a.
0
.....
"'-
0
co 755
~ z
0
.....
ct
>
_,
LLI
735
LLI
670 ~:o..=-=.:...;.=~-----------___.
0 2
DISPLACEMENt (FT.) DISPLACEMENT (FT.)
a) OUTWARD HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT b) DOWNWARD VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT
FIG. 30 MEASURED AND ADJUSTED DISPLACEMENTS OF BRIDGE PIER IN UPSTREAM FACE OF OTTER BROOK DAM
CONSTANT MODULUS
~
...l
60 CONSTANT POISSON RATIO
:::>_ (GRAVITY TURN-ON ANALYSIS)
OIJ..
Ow
:::Et-
u-
-- -- -- --
j:::
U)
40
c(
~ 36.1
0.465 ---
20~----L-~------~------~------~----~
0.50 0.46 0.46 0.44 0.42 0.40
POISSON RATIO, '\)
CONSTANT MODULUS
U) CONSTANT POISSON RATIO
3 (BUILD-UP ANALYSIS)
=>-
OIJ..
QU)
:::Et-
0
~
30
30.0
------
c(
...l
1.1..1 10~---------~-------~---L--~~-------~--------~
0.50 0.4B 0.46 0.44 0.42 0.40
POl SSON RATIO, V
NONLINEAR MODULUS
50 CONSTANT POISSON RATIO
rr.·
0
....u
c(
IJ..
U) 30
:::>
...l
:::>
0
0
:e
10 ~------L-------~--~--~-------L------~
0.50 0.46 0.46 0.44 0.42 0.40
POISSON RATIO, '\)
- - - COMBINATIONS OF E (OR K) AND v TO OBTAIN CORRECT HORIZONTAL DISP.

- COMBINATIONS OF E (OR K) AND v TO OBTAIN CORRECT VERTICAL DISP.
FIG. 31 COMBINATIONS OF ELASTIC CONSTANTS REQUIRED FOR VARIOUS ANALYSES

TO OBTAIN CORRECT BRIDGE PIER DISPLACEMENTS IN OTTER BROOK DAM
85
815 ...--------.----.
CREST OF DAM CREST OF DAM

~
II..
795 795
..J
..J
II..
II.. JUSTED
0
775 775
a..
0
~
II..
0
755 755
z
0
~
0>
ct
(7\ >
liJ
..J 735 735
liJ
670 ~~~~~~~~£~~~~~---~ 670 ~~~~~~~~
0 3 4 0 2
DISPLACEMENT ( FT.) DISPLACEMENT (FT.)
O) OUTWARD HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT b} DOWNWARD VERTICAL DISPLACEMENT
------NONLINEAR MODULUS, NONLINEAR POISSON RATIO

- - - - NONLINEAR MODULUS, CONSTANT POISSON RATIO
-·-CONSTANT MODULUS, CONSTANT POISSON RATIO (BUILD-UP ANALYSIS)
0 CONSTANT MODULUS, CONSTANT POISSON RATIO (GRAVITY TURN-ON ANALYSIS)
FIG. 32 DISPLACEMENTS OF BRIDGE PIER IN UPSTREAM FACE OF OTTER BROOK DAM AS DETERMINED
BY VARIOUS METHODS OF ANALYSIS
830r-------r-------.-~---..------, 830r-------.------..------,--------,
CREST OF DAM CREST OF DAM

------------------~
790 790
-
.,..:
1.&..
z 750. 750
0
~
ct
>
_,
LIJ
LIJ 710
710
_,
00
0 MEASURED POINTS 0 MEASURED POINTS
670 -------------------- 670 --------------------
BASE OF DAM BASE OF DAM
0 2 3 4 0 2 3 4
HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT OF UPSTREAM FACE (FT.)
a) FEM VALUES ADJUSTED FOR LATE MEASUREMENTS b) FEM VALUES NOT ADJUSTED
------NONLINEAR MODULUS, NONLIN~AR POISSON RATIO

- - - - NONLINEAR MODULUS, CONSTA,NT
I
POISSON RATIO
--CONSTANT MODULUS, CONSTANT POISSON RATIO (BUILD-UP ANALYSIS)
---CONSTANT MODULUS, CONSTAr,H POISSON RATIO (GRAVITY TURN-QN ANALYSIS)
FIG. 33 DISPLACEMENTS OF UPSTREAM FACE C>F OTTER BROOK DAM AS DETERMINE£? BY VARIOUS METHODS OF ANALYSIS
mentioned previously, agreement could not be expected in the case of the
lower two points, because measurements were not begun until the embankment
fill reached elevation 744o In the case of the incremental analyses this
may be accounted for by correcting the calculated values for displacements
induced by filling below this elevation, as shown on the left in Fig, 33.
It may be noted that when this is done the agreement is quite good in all
cases. Adjustments of this type are not possible in the case of the gravity
turn-on analyses, because only a single value of displacement is calculated
for each point.
The final values of horizontal displacements are compared further in

Fig. 34, where contours of horizontal movement are shown for the three
analysis procedures discussed previously in this chapter, as well as for
the procedure using nonlinear modulus and nonlinear Poisson's ratio
discussed in the previous chapter. The contours for all three of the
incremental procedures are virtually identical to each other, and the
contours for the gravity turn-on procedure is also very similar, In each
case the maximum horizontal displacement is slightly greater than three
feet, and occurs at a point beneath the center of the slope, A similar
comparison for vertical displacements is shown in F1g,. 35. The results of
all three incremental analysis procedures are again very nearly the same,
with the maximum settlement occurring at the centerline beneath the surface
and a small amount of bulging on the lower part of the slope in all cases,
The results of the gravity turn-on analysis pro~edure, however, are markedly
different, being characterized by sectlemem:s which increase to a maximum at
the top of the embankment. Th1s difference in settlement patte1:ns represents
a basic difference between the results of i;:1cremem:al and gravity turn-on
analyses. The pattern of measured settlements in real embankmen:cs corres-
ponds to that calculated by means of the incremental analjsis procedures,
being largest in the center of the embankment where the combination of
added weight above and thickness of compressible material beneath is
largest. The d1fferent pattern of settlements in the gravity turn-on
analysis corresponds to the assumption of simultaneously applied gravity
forces throughout the embankment, which does not correspond to reality.
Comparison of Stresses
The stresses calculated by means of these four analysis procedures are

shown in Figs. 36, 37, and 38. Contours of major principal stress (o 1 ),
shown in Fig. 36, are very nearly the same for all methods of analysis with
gravity turn-on or incremental analysis procedures using linear or nonlinear
material properties. As discussed previously, these stresses are slightly
less than the overburden pressure (yh) at the centerline, and they slightly
exceed the overburden pressure beneath the outer portion of the slope.
Contours of the minor principal stress (03) shown in Fig. 37 are also very
nearly the same for all methods except for the zone of tension near the
crest of the slope which was calculated in the gravity turn-on analysis but
not the incremental analyses, The contours of maximum shear stress (Tmax)
are also similar for all procedures with the exception that the largest
value calculated by the gravity turn-on procedure is about 20% smaller than
the largest values calculated by means of the incremental analysis procedures.
88
ALL DISLACEMENTS ARE IN FEET (~)
CONSTANT MODULUS
CONSTANT POISSON RATIO
(GRAVITY TURN-ON ANALYSIS)
CONSTANT MODULUS
CONSTANT POl SSON RATIO
(BUILD· U.P ANALYSIS)
NONLINEAR MODULUS
NONLINEAR MODULUS
NONLINEAR POISSON
FIG. 34 COMPARISONS OF HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENTS IN OTTER BROOK DAM

AS DETERMINED BY VARIOUS METHODS OF ANALYSIS
89
ALL DISPLACEMENTS ARE IN FEET (' + )
CONSTANT MODULUS
CONSTANT MODULUS
(BUILD-UP ANALYSIS)
NONLINEAR MODULUS
NONLINEAR MODULUS
NONLINEAR POISSON RATIO
FIG. 35 COMPARISONS OF VERTICAL DISPLACEMENTS IN OTTER BROOK DAM

90
ALL STRESSES ARE IN TSF
CONSTANT MODULUS
CONSTANT MODULUS
(BUILD- UP ANALYSIS)
NONLINEAR MODULUS
NONLINEAR MODULUS
FIG. 36 COMPARISONS OF MAJOR PRINCIPAL STRESSES IN OTTER BROOK DAM

91
CONST~NT MODULUS
CONSTANT MODULUS
(BUILD-UP ANALYSIS)
NONLINEAR MODULUS
NONLINEAR MODULUS
FIG. 37 COMPARISONS OF MINOR PRINCIPAL STRESSES IN OTTER BROOK DAM

92
CONSTANT MODULUS
CONSTANT MODULUS
(BUILD-UP ANALYSIS)
NONLINEAR MODULUS
CONSTANT POlS SON RATIO
NONLINEAR MODULUS
FIG. 38 COMPARISONS OF MAXIMUM SHEAR STRESSES IN OTTER BROOK DAM

93
Usefulness of Various Types of Analyses
Although the vertical displacements calculated using gravity turn-on

and incremental analysis procedures are widely different the calculated
values of stress are nearly the same, suggesting that even the simpler
gravity turn-on analysis procedure may be useful for calculating approxi-
mate stress distributions in homogeneous embankments. The advantage of the
simple gravity turn-on procedure is that such analyses may be performed
using standard options in many readily available finite element computer
programs.
More accurate values of stress may be calculated using incremental

analysis procedures, even if the soil is assumed to be linear elastic and
to be represented by single, constant values of Young's modulus and
Poisson's ratio. Because the calculated values of stress are independent
of the value of modulus employed in the analysis of homogeneous embank-
ments, incremental analyses therefore provide a means of calculating
accurate stress values, even without an accurate value of Young's modulus.
The calculated values of displacement are inversely proportional to the
value of Young's modulus employed in the analysis, and are also influenced
by the value of Poisson's ratio, as shown in Fig. 31. Therefore, in order
to calculate accurate values of displacemen~ it is necessary that
appropriate values of Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio be used in the
analysis. The nonlinear, stress-dependent stress-strain relationship
described in previous chapters provides a means of determining appropriate
parameter values from laboratory test results in a straightforward manner,
and this procedure may therefore be used to calculate accurate values of
both stress and displacement. In the case of the other procedures, in
which constant parameter values are employed, some judgment is inevitably
involved in selecting appropriate parameter values and it is therefore
more difficult to calculate accurate displacements using these procedures.
The difficulties of using constant parameter analysis procedures are

compounded in the case of non-homogeneous embankments for which the stress
distribution depends on the relative displacements between adjacent zones.
In such cases nonlinear analysis procedures would be expected to provide
not only more accurate values of displacement but also more accurate
values of stress. It may therefore be concluded that the incremental
analyses using nonlinear, stress-dependent properties are the most generally
applicable of the procedures studied, and would be expected to give the
best results for the widest variety of conditions.
94
CHAPTER 7
EVALUATION OF EMBANKMENT STABILITY USING FINITE ELEMENT STRESSES
Procedures for calculating factors of safety against local and over-

all failure using values of stress obtained from finite element analyses
are described in this chapter. The value of the factor of safety against
overall failure determined from finite element stresses is very nearly
equal to the value determined using the accurate methods of limit
equilibrium analysis. For the most critical point within an embankment
the factor of safety against local failure may be considerably smaller
than the factor of safety against overall failure.
Local Failure
One method of assessing the stability of an embankment, using the

results of nonlinear stress analyses of the type described in previous
chapters is to examine the values of stress level or fraction of strength
mobilized, (o 1 - o 3 )/(o 1 - o 3 )f. This procedure is very convenient because
the mobilized strength value is calculated for each element as an inter-
mediate step in the calculation of the value of tangent modulus.
Effect of the Value of Poisson's Ratio. To examine the effect of the

value of Poisson's ratio on the development local failure within an emgank-
ment, analyses of Otter Brook Dam were performed using a wide range of
values of Poisson's ratio. The analyses were performed using the strength
parameters and nonlinear modulus parameters determined from the results of
the laboratory tests reported by 1inell and Shea (1960), together with
values of Poisson's ratio which were assumed to be constant throughout the
embankment.
Contours of the principal stress (o 1 and o 3 ) within the embankment

calculated using v = 0.475, v = 0.30, and the nonlinear Poisson's ratio
values as described previously are shown in Figs. 39 and 40. The values
of o 1 shown in Fig. 39 are very nearly the same for all three analyses,
but the values of 03 shown in Fig. 40 vary significantly with the value of
Poisson's ratio. The values calculated using v = 0.475'are slightly
higher than those calculated using the nonlinear variation, and the values
calculated using V = 0.30 are considerably lower. As shown previously
(in Fig. 29) the values of Poisson's ratio for the nonlinear Poisson's
ratio analysis ranged from 0.40 to 0.48, with an average of about 0.45.
Therefore it may be seen that the values of o 3 within the embankment
decrease as the value of Poisson's ratio decreases. In fact, if an
analysis was performed using v = 0 the values of o 3 would be essentially
equal to zero throughout the embankment. This is because a material with
v = 0 does not tend to bulge horizontally when compressed vertically, and
therefore no horizontal stresses would be generated by internal restraint
resulting from interference between neighboring elements. A mater~al with
a high value of Poisson's ratio, on the other hand, tends to bulge a large
95
CONTOURS ARE IN TSF
7 _ __,

\) •0.475

~ • 0.30
FIG. 39 CONTOURS OF MAJOR PRINCIPAL STRESS IN OTTER BROOK DAM

USING A NONLINEAR MODULUS AND DIFFERENT POISSON RAllOS
96
CONTOURS ARE IN TS F .

'0 •0.475

'0 • 0.30
FIG. 40 CONTOURS OF MAJOR PRINCIPAL STRESS IN OTTER BROOK DAM

'·
USING A NONLINEAR MODULUS AND DIFFERENT POISSON RATIOS
97
amount horizontally when compressed vertically, and therefore relatively
large horizontal stresses develop within the embankment, Thus the magni-
tude of the horizon~al stress in an embankment as well as the amount of
bulging deformation is determined primarily by the value of Poisson's
ratio.
The value of Poisson's ratio also has an impor~ant effect on the values
of stress level within embankments, as shown by the contours of stress
level in Fig, 41, which were calculated using the values of c and ¢ deter-
mined from the laboratory tes~s on the Otter Brook fill material. Even
though all of these values were calculated using the same s~rength para-
meters, the maximum values vary from slightly more than 50% for v = 0,475
to virtually 100% in the case of v = 0.30, The variations in these values
may be attributed to the variations in the values of o 3 shown in Fig. 40:
Because the values of o 1 are nearly the same for all cases, the values of
stress difference, (o 1 - o 3 ), increase as the values of o 3 decrease,
Furthermore, the values of stress difference at failure, (o 1 - o 3 )f,
decrease as the values of o 3 decrease, as indicated by equation (7), As a
result, when the value of o 1 is constant, the values of stress level,
(o - o )/(o - o )f, increase very rapidly as the value of o decreases.
1 3 1 3 3
The reciprocals of the calculated values of stress levelJ which are
(ol- o3)f/(ol- 03), may be interpreted as being values of factor of
safety against local failure. The numerator of th1s factor of safe·cy, the
stress difference at failure, is calculated assuming that a 3 is the same
at failure as for the mobilized stress stat:e; as discussed subsequently,
this is a different definition from that commonly employed in equilibrium
slope stability analysis procedures. The minimum values of factor of
safety against local failure for the conditions illustrated in Fig, 41
-vary -from -a -value -sli-ghtly l-ess -timn two -for v = 0. 475 to a value very
close to unity for v = 0. 30, It may thus be concluded that the likelihood
of local failure is very strongly influenced by the value of Poisson's
ratio.
Effect of the Value of Bulk Modulus after Failure, In standard plane

strain computer programs which employ a generalized form of Hooke's law,
the relationship between stresses and strains is expressed as
(1-V) \) 0
E
{o}
(l+v)(l-2v) 0 (1-V) 0 {d (21)
0 0 (l-2v)/2
In simulating the occurrence of local failure, the value of E is set equal

to a very small number with the result that the values of normal stress
{o} do not change appreciably subsequently, no matter how great rnay be the
changes in the values of strain {t.:} Thua, during placement of subsequent
layers these elements cannot carry any appreciable increase in loadJ so
the amount of load carried by their neighbors is increased, sometimes to
an unreasonable degree. The progressive development of failure zones in
98
t
v. 0.475
v•0.4
v. 0.3
FIG. 41 CONTOURS OF MOBILIZED STRENGTH IN OTTER BROOK DAM

USING A NONLINEAR MODULUS AND CONSTANT POISSON RATIO
99
Otter Brook Dam which were calculated using this approach with v = 0.2 are
shown on the left in Fig. 42. It may be noted that nearly all the elements
have failed by the time layer 6 has been placed.
The mode of post-failure behavior resulting when equation (21) is

employed and the value of E is reduced differs from the behavior of real
soils; even after failure real soils retain the ability to carry additional
normal stress. If the normal stress does increase subsequently, the
capacity of the soil to carry shear stress is also increased. Thus, even
after failure real soils may carry additional shear stresses provided the
bulk stress increases.
Clough and Woodward (1967) have suggested an alternate stress-strain

formulation which is obtained by rewriting equation (21) in the form
(K+G) (K-G) 0
{a} = (K-G) (K+G) 0 {d (22)
0 0 G
in which K =bulk modulus= E/[2(l+v)(l-2v)] and G =shear modulus=

E/[2(l+v)]. Studies conducted during the present investigation have shown
that the values of K and G prior to failure may be calculated using values
of Et and vt determined by means of equations (10) and (20) together with
the nonlinear stress-strain parameters discussed previously. When this is
done, the results are precisely the same as those obtained using the same
values of Et and vt in equation (21). Post-failure behavior corresponding
more closely to the behavior of real soils may be achieved by reducing the
value of G _to 2aro aLter _failure, _b_ut _maintaining t:he vruue o£ X at the
same value it had for the increment prior to failure. Using this procedure,
failed elements are able to sustain additional bulk stress after failure.
Failure zones within Otter Brook Dam calculated using this modified
procedure with v = 0.2, which are shown in the right in Fig. 42, are much
smaller at the end of construction than those on the left which were cal-
culated using the same value of Poisson's ratio, but reducing the value of
Young's modulus after failure. After layer 5 had been placed, the failure
zone as calculated by means of either procedure was the same, encompassing
about half of the elements in the bottom row. Upon placement of the next
layer, nearly all the elements failed when the value of Young's modulus in
the failed elements was reduced, but only a few additional elements failed
when the value of G was set equal to zero while the value of the bulk
modulus was kept constant. It is believed that the latter procedure more
nearly represents the behavior of real soils because there is no reason to
believe that the bulk modulus of soil decreases markedly after failure.
This procedure was therefore adopted for use in subsequent analyses of
embankment behavior performed during this investigation.
Overall Stability
Finite element stresses may be used to calculate factors of safety

against overall failure using the concepts of stress level discussed
100
~r--T,--.,r:----f
LAYER 6 LAYER 6
LAYER 7 LAYER 7
LAYER 8 LAYER 8
~a) ELASTIC MODULUS (E) SET " " " .,,_ SHEAR FAILURE b) SHEAR MODULUS (G) SET EQUAL TO ZERO
EQUAL TO 0.001 AFTER FAILURE T -TENSION FAILURE AFTER FAILURE
FIG. 42 DEVELOPMENT OF FAILURE ZONES IN pTTERBROOKDAMWHENUSINGANONLINEARMODULUSANDCONSTANTPOISSON RATIO

previously or using the same definition of factor of safety employed in
equilibrium analysis procedures.
Factor of Safety Based on Stress Level. A factor of safety with

regard to overall stability based on stress level may be defined using the
values of stress level for points on a continuous shear surface like the
circular arc shown in Fig. 43. The contours of stress level shown in
Fig. 43 were calculated using the nonlinear modulus and nonlinear Poisson's
ratio described in Chapter 5. A weighted average value of stress level
calculated for this circular arc was found to be 47.2%; the corresponding
value of factor of safety based on stress level (FSL), defined as the
reciprocal of this average value, is 2.12.
A computer program was written to calculate the value of FsL for any
circular arc using the values of stress calculated from finite element
analyses and punched on cards as input; a listing and user's guide for this
program are given in Appendix E. Using this computer program it was
possible to calculate values of FSL for many different arcs and to deter-
mine the most critical by repeated trial. For the stress level values shuwn
in Fig. 43, the circular arc shown on the figure is the most critical one
found, and the corresponding value of FsL is the lowest. As might be
anticipated, the circular arc corresponding to the lowest value of FSL
passes through the locations where the stress level is the highest,
Similar studies were also performed using the values of stress level
calculated using various constant values of Poisson's ratio, together with
nonlinear modulus values, which are shown in Fig. 41. The results of
these calculations, which are summarized in Table 8, show that the value of
FsL decreases rapidly with the value of Poisson's ratio employed in the
_atreas anal)[ses. As _di_scussed _pre'\donsly_, _this increase in stress level
or reduction in the value of FsL may be attributed to the fact that the
values of cr 3 throughout the embankment decrease markedly as the value of
Poisson's ratio decreases.
Factor of Safety Based on Shear Stress. In equilibrium procedures of

slope stability analysis, the factor of safety is defined with respect to
the value of shear stress for a potential failure surface. This factor of
safety may be expressed as
= l:(c+otancp) tiL (23)

l:TliL
in which the summations (l:) indicate that both the shear strength and the
shear stress are summed over a number of increments of length (liL) along
the shear surface. The value of a, the normal stress on the shear surface,
is assumed to be the same in the equilibrium and failure states.
Values of normal stress and shear stress for a number of circular

shear surfaces were calculated from the results of the finite element
stress ana1yses discussed previously, using the computer program described
in Appendix E. The variations of normal stress and shear stress for one
102
,,,...,
I '
I '
I '
I ',
I ',
I '
I ',
I '
I '
I ',
I '
I '
I ', l
I
II ' ' i '
I '
I '
II ' ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I '
AVERAGE STRESS LEVEL ALONG CIRCULAR ARC • 47.2 %

FIL • 2.12
FIG. 43 CONTOURS OF MOBILIZ EO STRENGTH IN OTTER BROOK DAM

USING A NONLINEAR MODULUS AND POISSON RATIO, AND
MOST CRITICAL CIRCULAR ARC.
103
Table 8. Values of Factor of Safety Based on Stress Level
for Otter Brook Dam Cross-Section.
Value of Poisson's Ratio Value of FSL
0. 475 2.22
0.40 1.90
0.30 1. 36
104
circular shear surface are shown in Fig. 44. The surface for which the
stresses are shown is the one shown in Fig. 43 and is for all practical
purposes the critical surface for all analyses. It may be noted that the
normal stress distributions in the upper part of Fig. 44 are nearly
identical for all values of Poisson's ratio. Although the shear stress
distributions differ appreciably, their average values are nearly exactly
the same, as dictated by requirements of moment equilibrium of the mass
bounded by the circular surface.
The values of FT corresponding to various values of Poisson's ratio

are shown in Table 9, together with values of FT for the same critical
circular arc which were calculated using the Ordinary Method of Slices and
Bishop's Modified Procedure. It may be noted that the values of FT cal-
culated by finite element analyses are influenced only a small amount by
the value of Poisson's ratio employed in the analysis, as would be
expected from the high degree of similarity in the normal stress distribu-
tions shown in Fig. 44. It may also be noted that the values of FT calcu-
lated using finite element stresses are only slightly greater than those
calculated using Bishop's Modified Method, the difference varying from 2%
to 8% depending on the value of Poisson's ratio used in the finite element
analyses. Wright (1969) has shown that equilibrium analysis procedures
which satisfy all conditions of equilibrium* give values of FT which are
very nearly the same as those calculated by Bishop's Modified Method for
homogeneous slopes, and Bishop's Modified Method may thus be considered
representative of the best equilibrium procedures for Otter Brook Dam, It
may be concluded, therefore, that values of factor of safety calculated
using finite element stresses are for practical purposes the same as those
calculated using the best equilibrium analysis procedures, provided the
factor of safety is defined in the same way in both cases,
Comparison of Factors of Safety based on Stress Level and Shear Stress.

The definition of factor of safety based on stress level differs from the
definition of factor of safety based on shear stress in two ways:
(1) The shear stress compared to the shear strength in the shear
stress factor of safety is referred to a single continuous surface--the
shear surface. The shear stresses considered in the factor of safety
based on stress level are the maximum shear stresses at each point along
a continuous surface, disregarding the orientation of the surface, and are
always greater than or equal to the shear stresses on the shear surface.
For this reason the stress level factor of safety tends to be smaller than
the shear stress factor of safety.
(2) The shear strength employed in the shear stress factor of safety
is calculated assuming that the normal stress on the failure plane (0) is
the same in the mobilized stress state and the failure stress state. On
the other hand, the shear strength employed in the stress level factor of
safety is calculated assuming that the minor principal stress (0 3 ) is the
*Bishop's Modified Method does not satisfy horizontal equilibrium, 'and the
Ordinary Method of Slices satisfies neither horizontal nor vertical equilib-
rium.
105
e~--------~--------~----------T---------~
en
en
w ....
0:1.1.
._en
en._
-~
cr a
2: b
0:
0
z
0: ....
C(I.L.
"2r---------~--------~----------T---------~
wen
% ...
en-
0,.,
w ..
E
Nen
-en
~w
ma::
0 ...
:ecn
_J
w
I
,,."
o# ...
... -____ ! ... ------~
>
w
_J
en 0.5 ""
(/)
1.&1
...a:
(/)
0
0 100 200 300 400
TOE CREST
DISTANCE ALONG CIRCULAR ARC(FT.)
---NONLINEAR MODULUS, NONLINEAR POISSON RATIO

·---NONLINEAR MODULUS, CONSTANT POISSON RATIO N•0.475)
------NONLINEAR MODULUS p CONSTANT POISSON RATIO (\) • 0.30)
FIG. 44 VARIATION OF STRESSES ALONG CRITICAL ARC IN OTTER BROOtc DAM·
106
Table 9. Values of Factor of Safety Based on Shear
Stress for Otter Brook Dam Cross-Section.
Analysis Procedure Value of FT
Ordinary Method of Slices 1.85
Bishop's Modified Method 1.93
Finite Element, \) = 0.30 1.97
107
same in the mobilized stress state and the failure stress state. For this
reason the stress level factor of safety tends to be larger than the shear
stress factor of safety (for values greater than unity). If it is assumed
that the shear surface is oriented at the statically correct angle at each
point, the stress level factor of safety may be expressed in terms of the
shear stress factor of safety by means of the following equation, which is
derived in Appendix B:
(24)
As shown in Fig. 45, the difference between the values of F51 and F
increases with increasing values of ¢; the values are identical for ¢ = 0.
Because of these two differences in definition, the stress level
factor of safety might be either greater or less than the shear stress
factor of safety. The values calculated for the Otter Brook Dam cross-
section are plotted against the corresponding value of Poisson's ratio in
Fig. 46, where it may be noted that the value of F51 exceeds the value of
FL at high values of Poisson's ratio and the reverse is true at low values
of Poisson's ratio. The values shown for the finite element analysis
performed using nonlinear Poisson's ratio are plotted at the average value
(0.45). It is interesting to note that the values of Fs 1 and FL for this
particular analysis are related very nearly as indicated by equation (24)
indicating that the assumptions on which this equation is based--that the
circular arc is oriented at the statically correct angle throughout its
length--is very nearly satisfied for this particular analysis. For smailer,
constant values of Poisson's ratio the circular arc orientations differ
greatly from the_static_ally correct orienta~ions and the value of FSL is
smaller than FL for small values of Poisson's ratio.
108
8
6
.J
IJ.."'
>-
..
1-
w !5
IJ..
<
en
IJ..
0
a:
0
1- 4
0
~
..J
w
>
w 3
..J
en
Cl)
1&.1
a:
1-
(It
2
SHEAR STRESS FACTOR OF SAFETY , F't
FIG. 45 COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT FACTORS OF SAFETY
109
3--------~--~--~----------------~------~
FINITE ELEMENT SOLUTIONS
F. (NONLINEAR Et)
...>- -(~
~\_ J----~-.-1'1"""',.....~~
lLI
u.. 2 - - ---l
<
fJ)
(CONSTANT v)
LL
0
........ a:
0
0 .....
u FAILURE
<
LL /
/
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

PO I S S 0 N R AT I0, v
FIG. 46 COMPARISON OF FACTORS OF SAFETY FOR

OTTER BROOK DAM CROSS SECTION
CHAPTER 8
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF ZONED EMBANKMENTS
To examine the effectiveness of the finite element analysis procedures

described previously for analyses of zoned embankments, analyses were
performed for two hypothetical zoned dams. Both dams analyzed had the same
cross section, but they differed with regard to the stress-strain char-
acteristics of the core material. The analyses thus provide a means of
examining the behavior of embankments having comparatively soft and stiff
central cores.
Finite Element Mesh
The cross section analyzed and the finite element mesh employed in
the analysis are shown in Fig. 47. The cross section resembles that of
Oroville Dam in California in a general way; it is the same height and the
slope inclination is approximately the same as the upstream and downstream
slopes of Oroville Dam. However, Oroville Dam has an inclined core whereas
the hypothetical embankments have symmet~ical sections and centrally
located cores. Because the cross sect:ion was symmetrical, it was only
necessary to analyze one-half of the section as shown in Fig. 47.
Material Properties
The values of the unit weights and stress-strain parameters employed

in the analyses are listed 1n Taoie IO. The same slielT and- transition
properties were employed in both of the analyses described subsequently,
but the core properties were different. In one analysis the property
values listed under "Soft Core" were used, and those listed under "Stiff
Core" were used in the other analysis.
The same value of unit weight (150 lb/ft 3 ) was used for all materials.
The values of the stress-strain parameters for the shell material were the
values determined from drained triaxial tests conducted by Marachi (1969)
on the Oroville Dam shell material. The values for the transition zone
are the same except for the modulus number, which is about 10% lower than
for the shell. The parameters shown for the soft core are those determined
from the results of unconsolidated-undrained triaxial tests on the Oroville
Dam core material by the California Department of Water Resources (1969).
The values for the stiff core are the same with the exception of the modulus
number, which is nearly 10 times as large as that for the soft core. The
values used in the analyses were thus selected to represent drained behavior
for the shell and transition zones and undrained behavior for the core.
The values of tangent modulus and tangent Poisson's ratio calculated

at the end of construction condition are shown in Figs. 48 and 49; in both
figures the values calculat:ed for the stiff core embankment are shown in
111
l
25' -II-
,,
I I
cROSS -SECTION I I
I I
~v~~ 770'
I ~I
SHELL I o I
I
I ~I
....
I OJ I w
I ~ I ~
I ll: I u
I ~ I
I I
....
....
N
FINITE ELEMENT MESH

(175 ELEMENTS,
204 NODAL POINTS,
12 LAYERS) ~::.._---4---+--+-+-f--f'+HY+fti
FIG. 47 CROSS- SECTION AND FINITE ELEMENT MESH FOR EXAMPLE ZONED EMBANKMENT
Table 10. Unit Weights and Stress-Strain Parameters
Employed in Analyses of Zoned Embankments.
Values Employed in Analyses

Soil Parameter Symbol
Shell Transition Soft Core Stiff Core
Unit Weight (lb/ft 3 ) y 150 150 150 150
Cohesion (T/ft 2 ) c 0 0 1.32 L32
Friction angle (degrees) cp 43.5 43.5 25.1 25.1
Modulus number K 3780 3350 345 3350
Modulus exponent n 0.19 0.19 Oo76 0.76
Failure ratio Rf 0. 76 o. 76 0.88 0.88
Poisson's G 0.43 0.43 o. 30 0 30

0
Ratio ) F 0.19 0.19 -0.05 -0.05
Parameters d 14.8 14.8 3.83 3.83
113
.CONTOURS ARE IN TS F
STIFF CORE
SOFT CORE
. FIG. 48 CONTOURS OF TANGENT MODULUS IN EXAMPLE ZONED EMBANKMENT

STIFF CORE
SOFT CORE
oAOO
FIG. 49 CONTOUR~ OF TANGENT POISSON RATIO IN EXAMPLE ZONED EMBANKMENT

the upper part of the figure and those for the soft core embankment are
shown in the lower part. It may be noted that the final values of modulus
at midheight of the embankment are considerably lower than those in the
adjacent zones for both the soft core and the stiff c~re embankment. Near
the top and bottom of the stiff core embankment, the modulus values are
considerably higher, and are approximately the same as those in adjacent
zones, whereas they are uniformly low within the soft core embankment.
The low modulus values in the center of the stiff core embankment appear
to result from the fact that the strength of this material is considerably
lower than that of the adjacent zones as indicated by the values of ¢
listed in Table 10. Thus, although the initial tangent modulus values for
this material are high, its tangent modulus values decrease rapidly with
increasing values of shear stresso
The final values of Poisson's ratio for the two cases shown in Fig. 50
are nearly the same for the shell and the transition. The values for the
stiff core, shown in the upper part of the figure, are slightly lower than
those for the soft core. In both cases the values of Poisson's ratio in
the core are more nearly constant than those in the transition and shell
and are higher on the average. It may be noted that the values increase
from bottom to top within the shell and transition, whereas they decrease
from bottom to top within the core.
Modification of Analysis Procedure
The fact that the stress-strain parameters for the three embankment
zones were different led to d~fficulties in the analyses which had not been
encountered with homogeneous embankments" Because the stiffer of two
adjacent materials does not sectie as much as the softer under the
influence of its own weight when first placed, the softer material tends to
"hang" on the stiffer material and for chis reason the stresses in the soft
material are very low and those in the stiff material quite high. When
the next layer is placed the soft material may fail because the confining
pressure is low and the shear stress high.
This mode of behavior appeared to result from the fact that the
layers employed in the analyses were quite thick. Analyses showed that if
very thin layers were employed, the stress conditions within each thin
layer immediately after placement corresponded closely to at-rest pressure
conditions, and failure did not occur during placement of subsequent layers.
Instead the strength of the material increased as the values of a
3
increased,
Because it was not feasible to employ such thin layers in analyses of

high embankments, the procedure was adopted of assigning at-rest pressure
conditions to each element immediately after placemento The vertical
pressure, al, was set equal to the overburden pressure (yh) and the
horizontal pressure, a 3 , was set equal to v/(1-v) times the overburden
pressure. During the placement of subsequent layers, the additional
stresses in the elements were calculated using standard procedures.
116
SETTLEMENTS ARE IN FEET (t+)
STIFF CORE
SOFT COR£
FIG. 50 CONTOURSI OF SETTLEMENT IN EXAMPLE ZONED EMBANKMENT

Results of Analyses
Displacements. Contours of the calculated values of settlement are

shown in Fig. SO. It may be noted that the maximum settlement, which
occurs near mid-height of the core in both cases, is nearly twice as large
for the soft-core embankment as for the stiff-core embankment. The settle-
ments within the shell are nearly the same in both cases. It is thus
evident that the stiffness of the core has a large effect on the settle-
ments in the central part of the dam, but not much influence on the settle-
ments in the shell.
Contours of calculated horizontal movements are shown in Fig. 51.

Within the shell the values are nearly the same in both cases, reaching a
maximum of about one-half foot away from the centerline near the middle of
the shell. The movements are uniformly upstream in the case of the stiff
core embankment, but are directed toward the centerline near the center
of the soft core embankment as shown in the lower part of Fig. 51. These
movements towards the centerline are due to the fact that the softer core
squeezes inward under the pressures exerted by the adjacent transition and
shell.
Stresses. Contours of the major principal stress (o 1 ) within the dam

are shown in Fig. 52. It may be noted that for both the stiff core and the
soft core embankment there is some reduction in stress in the core. This
effect is fairly small in the case of the stiff core dam but quite pro-
nounced in soft core embankment. At the base of the soft core embankment,
where the value of o 1 in the transition exceeds 60 tons/ft 2 , the value of
cr 1 in the adjacent core is only about 35 tons/ft 2 , The scale of overburden
_oressures shown in Fig. 52 shows that the values of cr. within the core are
~oughly 80% of the overburden pressure in the stiff c5re, but only about
60% of the overburden pressure in the soft core. Thus in both cases there
is appreciable arching within the embankments, increasing the stresses in
the shell and reducing them within the core.
Schober (1967) has reported similar variations in the vertical

stresses within Gepatsch Dam in Austria, which were observed by means of
stress meters placed in the dam during construction. The contours of
vertical pressure determined from these measurements, which are shown in
Fig. 53, indicate vertical pressures within the core which are roughly 70%
of the overburden pressure.
Perhaps the most important aspect of arching of this type is that

reduced stresses within the core would result in reduced pore pressures.
For conditions where the major principal stress in the core amounts to
only 60% or 80% of the overburden pressure, it would be expected that the
pore pressures would be accordingly lower than might otherwise be antici-
pated.
The contours of minor principal stress (o 3 ) shown in Fig. 54 are

quite similar in both cases and do not show any marked reduction due to
arching. For both the soft core and the stiff core embankments the
values of a range from 25% to 35% of the overburden pressure.
3
118
DISPLACEMENTS ARE IN FEET (.L)
STIFF CORE
SOFT CORE
FIG. 51 CONTOURS OF HORIZONTAL DISPLACEMENT IN EXAMPLE ZONED EMBANKMENT

7h (TSF)
CONTOURS ARE IN TSF 0
20
STIFF C,ORE
30
40
50
...
N
0
0
10
SOFT CORE
20
30
40
50
FIG. 52 CONTOURS OF MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL STRESS IN EXAMPLE ZONED EMBANKMENT

FIG. S3 CONTOURS OF VERTICAL SOIL fRESSURE MEASURED IN GEPATSCH DAM
(AFTER SCHROBER 19 6 7 )
Th (TSF)
CONTOURS ARE ~ TSF 0
10
S1'1FF CORE
20
8 30
' 40
....
N
~ 50
0
N
10
20
SOFT CORE
30
40
50
FIG. 54 CONTOURS OF MINIMUM PRINCIPAL STRESS IN EXAMPLE ZONED EMBANKMENT

Contours of maximum shear stress (Tmax) are shown in Fig. 55. It may
be noted that the values of Tmax within the stiff core are nearly twice as
large as those within the soft core, because the stiff core carries more
axial load. The values of Tmax within the transition zone are somewhat
larger for the soft core embankment, but the values within the shell are
very nearly the same in both cases. Contours of calculated values of
mobilized strength are shown in Fig. 56. It may be noted that the
mobilized strength exceeds 90% within a considerable portion of the stiff
core, whereas the largest value in the soft core is only slightly more
than 60%. The large percentage of mobilized strength in the case of the
stiff core appears to arise for the combination of high modulus and low
strength; the stiff core tends to carry fairly high loads, and is thus
subject to fairly high shear stresses, but its shear strength is fairly
low. The percentage of mobilized strength within the shell and transition,
however, is affected only a small amount by the stiffness of the core.
123
Yh (TSF)
CONTOURS ARE IN TSF 0
10
20
STIFF CORE
30
40
50
10
20
SOFT CORE
30
40
50
FIG. 55 CONTOURS OF MAXIMUM SHEAR STRESS IN EXAMPLE ZONED EMBANKMENT

STIFF CORE
SOFT CORE
FIG. 56 CONTOUR~ OF MOBILIZED STRENGTH IN EXAMPLE ZONED EMBANKMENT

CHAPTER 9
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
This study was undertaken to develop practical procedures for perform-

ing finite element analyses of the behavior of embankments during con-
struction. The procedures developed employ nonlinear, stress-dependent
soil stress-strain behavior in analyses which simulate the actual sequence
of construction operations. To check the utility and effectiveness of the
procedures developed, they were employed in analyses of Otter Brook Dam and
two hypothetical zoned embankments.
Simulation of Construction Sequence
The amount of time and the cost of performing finite element analyses
increases rapidly with the number of layers used to simulate the placement
of embankment fill material. These studies resulted in an improvement in
the procedure for calculating displacements, which is accomplished by
eliminating initial displacements at the top of each layer resulting from
the weight of the layer. They also led to the development of simple graphs,
based on the column analogy developed by Clough and Duncan (1969), which
may be used to determine the number of layers required for accurate
analysis of embankment displacements.
Stress-Strain Behavior of Embankment Materials
The tangent modulus stress-strain relationship developed by Duncan

and Chang (1970) has been extended to include volume change characteristics
by means of a nonlinear, stress-dependent Poisson's ratio relationship.
The values of the required stress-strain parameters were computed from the
stress-strain-volume change data available in the literature, providing
stress-strain information for a wide variety of soils ranging from cobbles
to fat clay. A comprehensive series of triaxial tests was also performed,
to determine the influence of dry density and water content on the stress-
strain behavior of compacted Pittsburg sandy clay.
Analyses of Otter Brook Dam
The stresses and movements in Otter Brook Dam were analyzed using the
finite element analysis procedures and stress-strain relationships developed
during this study. The observed and calculated movements were found to be
in excellent agreement. The analyses showed that the large amount of
bulging deformation of the dam observed during construction may be
attributed to the stress-strain characteristics of the compacted fill.
Additional analyses of Otter Brook Dam were also performed using

linear elastic properties in both incremental and gravity turn-on proce-
dures. By suitably selecting the values of Young's modulus and Poisson's
126
ratio employed in these analyses, it was possible to calculate displacements
in agreement with those observed using these procedures as well. Without
prior knowledge of the magnitudes of the displacements, selection of suit-
able modulus and Poisson's ratio values for use in linear analyses would
require considerable judgment. Thus the principal advantage of the non-
linear analysis procedures developed during this study is tha~ values of
the parameters required are determined through straightforward inter-
pretation of laboratory test data. Furthermore, because only conventional
triaxial tests with volume change measurements are requ~red, and the para-
meter values are determined using simple techniques, only a small amount
of additional effort is involved in the use of these nonlinear procedures.
Evaluation of Embankment Stability
Procedures for analyzing the stability of embankments using finite

element stresses were also studied during this investigation. The factor
of safety against local failure may be defined as the reciprocal of the
largest stress level or fraction of strength mobilized, This factor of
safety may be either larg-=r or smaller than the factor of safety against
overall slope failure,
Further studies showed that the factor of safety against overall

slope failure may be conveniently calculated from finite element stresses
by evaluating the shear and normal stresses along a c~rcular ar.::.,. When
the factor of safety is calculated in a consistent manner, i's value is
very close to that calculated by means of the best limit equilibrium
analysis procedures,
A procedure was developed for slmulating_ soil behavior after failure

which combines the formulation of the generalized Hooke 1 s law developed by
Clough and Woodward (1967) with the procedures for representing nonlinear,
stress-dependent stress-strain behavior described hereino Use of th~s
procedure appears to result in post-failure behavior which is in better
agreement with the behavior of actual soils"
Analysis of Zoned Embankments
In order to analyze stresses and displacements in adjacent zones of

dissimilar materials, it was found to be necessary to assign at-rest
pressures to newly placed elements. After incorporating this procedural
modification, the finite element analysis procedures developed were applied
to the analysis of two hypothetical zoned embankments having comparatively
soft and stiff cores, These analyses showed that the settlements,
horizontal displacements, and stresses within zoned embankments may be
influenced appreciably by the relative stiffness of the core and shell
materials. On the basis of the analyses conducted it appears to be feas-
ible to use the finite element analysis procedures developed for purposes
of calculating differential settlements and load transfer between adjacent
embankment zones.
127
Conclusions
The studies conducted during this investigation have shown that an

incremental finite element analysis procedure, coupled with the use of
nonlinear, stress-dependent stress-strain behavior results in calculated
behavior which is in good agreement with that observed, The procedure is
well-suited for practical use because the required soil stress-strain
parameters may be determined readily from the results of standard labora-
tory triaxial tests with volume change measurements. Based on the results
of the analyses performed, it seems likely that these analysis procedures
may be used to predict stresses and movements in embankments during
construction, to help in selecting desirable instrument locations in
embankments, and to help in interpreting the results of instrumentation
studies.
Perhaps the greatest value of these procedures is in connection with

instrumentation programs. If the instrumentation results are in agreement
with the results of the analyses, it may be concluded that the analyses
provide a reliable indication of the actual behavior, The results of
the analyses may then be employed to determine information regarding
locations where there were no instruments and regarding aspects of the
behavior not measured by instruments.
128
LITERATURE CITED
ASCE-USCOLD Committee on Design Criteria for Large Dams (1967) Current

United States Practice in the Design and Construction of Arch Dams,
Embankment Dams and Concrete Gravity Dams, ASCE, 131 p.
Bechtel Corporation (1969) "Report on Soil Tests for the Proposed New Don
Pedro Dam," San Francisco.
Bird, J. M. (1961) "Uncertainties in Earth Dam Design," Journal of the

Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol, 87, No. SM3, June 1961,
pp. 33-68.
Bishop, A. W. (1952) "The Stability of Earth Dams," Dissertation presented

to the University of London in partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Bishop, A. W. (1954) "The Use of Pore Pressure Coefficients in Practice,"

Geotechnique, Vol, 4, No, 4, December, 195~, pp. 148-152.
Bishop, A. W. (1966) "The Strength of Soils as Engineering Materials,"

Geotechnique, Vol. 16, No. 2, June 1966, pp. 89-130.
Bishop, A. W., Webb, D. L, and Lewin, P. I. (1965) "Undisturbed Samples of

London Clay from the Ashford Common Shaft: Strength-Effective Stress
Relationships," Geotechnigue, Vol. 15, No. 1, March, 1965, pp. 1-31.
Bjerrum, L. and Simons, N. E, (1960) "Comparison of Shear Strength Char-

acteristics of Normally Consolidated Clays," Research Conference on Shear
Strength of Cohesive Soils, ASCE, Boulder, Colorado, pp. 711-726.
Bricknell, R. G. (1962) "Shear Stresses in Batters," New Zealand Engineer-

ing, Vol. 17, No. 1, January 15, 1962, pp. 17-21.
Brown, C. B. and Goodman, L. E. (1963) "Gravitational Stresses in Accreted

Bodies," Proceedings, Royal Society of London, Series A, Vol. 276, No. 1367,
December 17, 1963, pp. 571-576.
Brown, C. B. and King, I. P. (1966) "Automatic Embankment Analysis: Equi~

librium and Instability Conditions," Geotechnigue, Vol. 16, No. 3,
September 1966, pp. 209-219.
Casagrande, A. (1940) "Seepage Through Dams," Contributions to Soil

Mechanics, 1925-1940, Boston Society of Civil Engineers, pp. 295-336.
Casagrande, A. (1960) "An Unsolved Problem of Embankment Stability on Soft

Ground," Proceedings, 1st Pan-American Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering, Vol, 2, Mexico City, pp. 721-746.
Casagrande, A. (1961) "Control of Seepage Through Foundations and Abutments

of Dams," Geotechnigue, VoL 11, No.3, September 1961, pp. 159-181.
129
Casagrande, A. (1965) "Hohe Staudamme~" Mitteilungen des Institutes fur
Grundbau und Bodenmechanik, Technische Hochschule, Vienna, No. 6,
December, 1965, 32 p.
Casagrande, A., Hirschfeld, R. C, and Poulos, S. J. (1963) "Third Progress

Report on Investigation of Stress-Deformation and Strength Characteristics
of Compacted Clays," Soil Mechanics Series No. 70, Harvard University,
November, 1963, 67 p.
Casagrande, A. and Wilson, S. D. (1953) "Effects of Stress History on the

Strength of Clays," Soil Mechanics Series No. 43, Harvard University,
June, 1953, 71 p.
Chan, C. K. and Duncan, J. M. (1967) "A New Device for Measuring Volume
Changes and Pressures in Triaxial Tests on Soils," Materials Research and
Standards, Vol. 7, No. 7, July, 1967, pp. 312-314,
Chang, C-Y (1969) "Finite Element Analyses of Soil Movements Caused by

Deep Excavation and Dewatering," Dissertation presented to the University
of California, Berkeley, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the degree of Dor.tor of Philosophy.
Clough, G. W. (1969) "Finite Element Analyses of Soil-Structure Interaction

in U-Frame Locks," Dissertation presented to the University of California,
Berkeley, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy,
Clough, R. W. (1960) "The Finite Element Method in Plane Stress Analysis,"

-Rror.-eedi.ngs, -2nd -Cnnference _on -Elec_t:_r_unic ~Gomputation~ ASCE~ Pittsburgh~
1969, pp. 345-377.
Clough, R. W. (1965) "The Finite Element Method in Structural Mechanics,"

Chapter 7 in Stress Analysis, ed. by 0. C. Zienkiewicz and G. S. Holister,
John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Clough, R. W. and Woodward, R. J., III (1967) "Analysis of Embankment

Stresses and Deformations," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations
Division, ASCE, Vol. 93, No. SM4, July, 1967, pp. 529-549.
Crawford, c. B. (1964) "Some Characteristics of Winnipeg Clay," Canadian

Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 1, No. 4, November, 1964, pp. 227-235.
da Cruz, P. T. (1963) "Shear Strength Characteristics of Some Residual

Compacted Clays," Proceedings, 2nd Pan-American Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 1, Rio de Janeiro, pp. 73-102.
Department of Water Resources (1965) "Oroville Dam--Key Unit of the State

Water Project," State of California, August, 1965.
Department of Water Resources (1967) "Instrumentation Results, Oroville

Dam," State of California, November 1, 1967,
130
Department of Water Resources (1969) "Report on Unconsolidated-Undrained
Triaxial Shear Tests for the Core of Oroville Dam," State of California.
Duncan, J. M. and Chang, C-Y ( 19 70) "Nonlinear Analysis of Stress and

Strain in Soils," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division,
ASCE, Vol. 96, No. SM5, September 1970.
Duncan, J. M. and Dunlop, P. (1969) "Slopes in Stiff-Fissured Clays and

Shales, 11 Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE,
Vol. 95, No. SM2, March, 1969, pp. 467-492.
Duncan, J. M., Monismith, C. L. and Wilson, E. L. (1968) "Finite Element

Analyses of Pavements," Record 228--Soil Stresses and Pavement Element
Analyses, Highway Research Board, pp. 18-33.
Duncan, J. M. and Seed, H. B. (1965) "The Effect of Anisotropy and

Reorientation of Principal Stresses on the Shear Strength of Saturated
Clay," Report No. TE-65-3, Soil Mechanics and Bituminous Materials
Research Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, California,
November, 1965, 171 p.
Dunlop, P., Duncan, J. M. and Seed, H. B. (1968) "Finite Element Analyses

of Slopes in Soil, 11 Report No. TE-68-3, Soil Mechanics and Bituminous
Materials Research Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley,
California, May, 1968, 232 p.
Durrenberger, R. W. (1967) Patterns on the Land, National Press Books,

Palo Alto, California, p. 78.
Engineering News-Record (I968} 11 Muds tone Looks Strange But Makes a Record
Dam," April 18, 1968, pp. 52-53.
11
Engineering News-Record (1968) Russians Fire Off an Instant Rockfill
Dam," May 30, 1968, pp. 24-25.
Engineering News-Record (1968) 11 Tarbela Dam: Seven Years and 160 Million
Cu. Yd. to Go, 11 November 7, 1968, pp. 64-66.
Felippa, C. A. (1966) "Refined Finite Element Analysis of Linear and Non-

linear Two Dimensional Structures," Dissertation presented to the
University of California, Berkeley, in partial fulfillment of the require-
ments for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy,
Finn, W. D. L. (1967) "Static and Seismic Behavior of an Earth Dam,"

Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol, 4, No. 1, Februar~ 1967, pp. 28-37.
Finn, W. D. L. and Troitskii, A. P. (1968) 11 Computation of Stresses and

Strains in Dams Made of Local Materials, Earth Slopes and their Foundations,
by the Finite Element Method," Hydrotechnical Construction (GIDROTEKHNICHESKOE
STROITEL 'STVO), No. 6, June, 1968, pp. 492-499, (Translated from Russian
for ASCE by Consultants Bureau.)
131
Fox, A. J., Jr. (1968) "USSR Breaks Records: Earth and Arch Dams,"
Engineering News-Record, October 24, 1968, pp ,. 32-37.
Gamboa, J. and Benassini, A. (1967) "Behavior of Netzahualcoyotl Dam

During Construction," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations
Division, ASCE, Vol. 93, No. SM4, July, 1967, pp. 211-229.
Gianelli, W. R. (1969) "Oroville Dam and Edward Hyatt Powerplant," Civil
Engineering, June, 1969, pp. 68-72.
Gibbs, H. J., Hilf, J . W., Holtz, W. H. and Walker, F. C. (1960) "Shear

Strength of Cohesive Soils," Research Conference on Shear Strength of
Cohesive Soils, ASCE, Boulder, Colorado, 1969, pp, 33-162.
Girijavallabhan, C" V. and Reese, L. C. (1968) "Finite Element Method for

Problems in Soil Mechanics," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations
Division, ASCE, Vol. 94, No. SM2, March, 1968, pp. 473-496.
Glossop, R. (1968) "The Rise of Geotechnology and Its Influence on

Engineering Practice," Geotechnique, VoL 18, No. 2, June, 1968, pp. 107-150.
Goodman, L. E. and Brown, C. B. (1963) "Dead Load Stresses and the In-
stability of Slopes," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations
Division, ASCE, Vol. 8g:-N~SM3, May, 1963, pp. 103-134.
Gordon, B. B. (1968) "DWR Experience and Current Practice in Instrumenta-

tion," Lecture presented at short course on Recent Developments in Earth
and Rockfill Dams, University of California, Berkeley, March, 1968.
Gordon, B. B. and Miller, R. K. (1966) "Control of Earth and Rockfill for

Oroville Dam;1i Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division,
ASCE, Vol. 92, No. SM3, May 1966, pp. 1-23.
Gruner, E. (1967) "The Mechanism of Dam Failure," Proceedings,. 9th

Congress on Large Dams, Vol. 3, Istanbul, pp. 197-206.
Hall, E. B. and Gordon, B. B" (1963) "Triaxial Testing with Large-Scale

High Pressure Equipment," STP 361 - Laboratory Shear Testing of Soils,
ASTM, pp. 315-328.
Hathaway, G. A, (1958) "Dams--their Effect on Some Ancient Civilizations,"

Civil Engineering, January, 1958, pp. 58-63.
Hirschfeld, R, C. and Poulos, S. J. (1963) "High-Pressure Triaxial Tests

on a Compacted Sand and an Undisturbed Silt," STP 361 - Laboratory Shear
Testing of Soils, ASTM, 1963, pp. 329-339.
Hughes, J. M. 0. (1969) "Culvert Elongations in Fills Founded on Soft

Clays," Canadian Geotechnical Journal, VoL 6, No. 2, May, 1969, pp. 111-117.
Insley, A. E. and Hillis, S. F. (1965) "Triaxial Shear Characteristics of

a Compacted Glacial Till Under Unusually High Confining Pressures,"
Proceedings, 6th IntL Conf. on Soil Mech. and Found. Eng., Vol. 1, Montreal,
pp. 244-248.
132
Janbu, N, (1963) "Soil Compressibility as Determined by Oedometer and Tri-
axial Tests," Proceedings, European Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering, Vol. 1, Weisbaden, pp. 19-25.
Kaufman, R. I. and Weaver, R. J. (196 7) "Stability of Atchafalaya Levees,"

Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol. 93,
No. SM4, July, 1967, pp. 157-176.
King, I. P. (1964) "Finite Element Analysis of Two-Dimensional Time-

Dependent Stress Problems," Dissertation presented to the University of
California, Berkeley, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
Kondner, R. L. (1963) "Hyperbolic Stress-Strain Response: Cohesive Soils,"

No. SMl, February, 1963, pp. 115-143.
Kondner, R. L. and Horner, J. M. (1965) "Triaxial Compression of a

Cohesive Soil with Effective Octahedral Stress Control," Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 2, No. 1, February, 1965, pp. 40-52.
Kondner, R. L. and Zelasko, J. S. (1963) "A Hyperbolic Stress-Strain Formu-

lation for Sands," Proceedings, 2nd Pan-American Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 1, Rio de Janeiro, pp. 289-324.
Kondner, R. L. and Zelasko, J. S. (1963) "Void Ratio Effects on the Hyper-

bolic Stress-Strain Response of a Sand," STP 361 - Laboratory Shear Testing
of Soils, ASTM, 1963, pp. 250-257.
Ladd, C. C. and Lambe, T. W. (1963) "The Strength of 'Undisturbed' Clay

Determined from Undrained Tests," STP 361 -Laboratory Shear Testing of
Soils, ASTM, 1963, pp. 342-371.
Lambe, T. W. (1963) "An Earth Dam for the Storage of Fuel Oil," Proceedings,
2nd Pan-American Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,
Vol. 2, Rio de Janeiro, pp. 257-308.
Lee, K. L. (1965) "Triaxial Compressive Strength of Saturated Sand Under

Seismic Loading Conditions," Dissertation presented to the University of
Linell, K. A. and Shea, H. F. (1960) "Strength and Deformation Characteris-

tics of Various Glacial Tills in New England," Research Conference on
Shear Strength of Cohesive Soils, ASCE, Boulder, Colorado, pp. 275-314.
Lowe, J. W., III (1967) "Stability Analysis of Embankments," Journal of the

Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol. 93, No. SM4, July,
1967, pp. 1-33.
Lowe, J. W., III and Johnson, T. C. (1960) "Use of Back Pressure to Increase
Degree of Saturation of Triaxial Test Specimens," Research Conference on
Shear Strength of Cohesive Soils, ASCE, Boulder, Colorado, pp. 819-836.
133
Lowe, J. W., III and Karafaith, L. (1960) "Effect of Anisotropic Consoli-
dation on the Undrained Shear Strength of Compacted Clays," Research
Conference on Shear Strength of Cohesive Soils, ASCE, Boulder, Colorado,
pp. 837-858.
Marachi, N. (1969) "Strength and Deformation Characteristics of Rockfill

Materials," Dissertation presented to the University of California,
Berkeley, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy.
Marsal, R. J. (1963) "Triaxial Apparatus for Testing Rockfill Samples,"

Proceedings, 2nd Pan-American Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Rio de Janeiro, 1963, pp. 99-122.
Marsal, R. J. (1967) "Large Scale Testing of Rockfill Materials," Journal

of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, Vol. 93, No. SM2,
Marc~ 1967, pp. 27-43.
Marsal, R. J., Gomez, E. M., Nunez, A., Cuellar, R. and Ramos, R. M.

(1965) "Research on the Behavior of Granular Materials and Rockfill Samples,"
Comision Federal de Electricidad, Mexico, D. F., February, 1965, 76 p.
Marsal, R. J. and Ramirez de Arellano, L. ( 196 7) "Performance of El

Infiernillo Dam, 1963-1966," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations
Division, ASCE, Vol. 93, No, SM4, July, 1967, pp. 265-298.
Moretto, 0., Bolognesi, A. J. L,, Lopez, A. 0. and Nunez, E. (1963),

Propiedades y Comportamiento de un Suelo Limoso de Baja Plasticidad,"
Proceedings, 2nd Pan-American Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Vol. 2, Rio de Janeiro, pp. 1.31.-1.46.
Morgan, G. C. and Harris, M. C. (1967) "Portage Mountain Dam II. Materials,"

Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 4, No. 2, May, pp. 142-166.
Polivka, M., Pirtz, D. and Adams, R. F. (1963) "Studies of Creep in Mass

Concrete," SP-6 - Symposium on Mass Concrete, ACI, 1963, pp. 257-285.
Richards, R., Jr. and Schmid, W. E. (1968) "Body-Force Stresses in Gravity

Structures," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE,
Vol. 94, No. SMl, January, 1968, pp. 205-229.
Scherrer, H. U. and Britto, P. A. (1963) "Equipamento e Technica Referentes

Aos Ensaios Triaxiais Conjunto de Resultados Obtidos com Amostras de Solos
Residuais," Proceedings, 2nd Pan-American Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering, Vol. 1, Rio de Janeiro, pp. 163-179.
Schober, W. (196 7) "Behavior of the Gepatsch Rockfill Dam," Proceedings,

9th Congress on Large Dams, Vol. 3, Istanbul, 1967, pp. 677-699.
Seed, H. B. and Chan, C. K. (1961) "Compacted Clays: Structure and

Strength Characteristics," Transactions, ASCE, Vol. 126, 1961, pp. 1344-
1385.
134
Seed, H. B., Mitchell, J. K. and Chan, C. K. (1960) "The Strength of Com-
pacted Cohesive Soils," Research Conference on Shear Strength of Cohesive
Soils, ASCE, Boulder, Colorado, pp. 877-964.
Sherif, M. A. (1967) "A Method for Determining Effective Stress Envelope

from Consolidated-Undrained Tests Without Pore Pressure Measurements,"
Proceedings, 3rd Pan-American Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Vol. 1, Caracas, pp. 29-41.
Skempton, A. W. (1954) "The Pore Pressure Coefficients A and B,"

Geotechnigue, Vol. 4, No. 4, December, 1954, pp. 143-147.
Squier, L. R. (1967) "A Study of Deformations in Selected Rockfill and

Earth Dams," Dissertation presented to the University of Illinois, Urbana,
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy.
Taylor, R. L. and Brown, C. B. (1967) "Darcy Flow Solutions with a Free

Surface," Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, Vol. 93, No. HY2,
March, 1967, pp. 25-33.
Terzaghi, K. (1943) Theoretical Soil Mechanics, John Wiley and Sons,

New York, pp. 406-409.
Turner, M. J., Clough, R. W., Martin, H. C. and Topp. L. J. (1956) "Stiff-

ness and Deflection Analysis of Complex Structures," Journal of Aeronautical
Sciences, Vol. 23, No. 9, Sept. 1956, pp. 805-823.
Tuthill, L, H., Adams, R. E. and_ Mi_tch~- n_._ R.- (l9b3} "Mass- Concrete- for
Oroville Dam," SP-6 -Symposium on Mass Concrete, ACI, pp. 179-197.
Wagner, A. A. (1957) "The Use of the Unified Soil Classification System by

the Bureau of Reclamation," Proceedings, 4th International Conference on
Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 1, London, pp. 125-134.
Wilson, E. L. (1963) "Finite Element Analysis of Two-Dimensional Structures,"

Dissertation presented to the University of California, Berkeley, in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of
Engineering.
Wilson, S. D. (1964) "Suggested Method of Test for Moisture-Density

Relations of Soils Using Harvard Compaction Apparatus," Procedures for
Testing Soils, 4th ed., ASTM, 1964, pp. 160-162.
Wilson, S. D. (1968) Closure to "Investigation of Embankment Performance,"

No. SM5, September, 1968, pp. 1184-1185.
Wilson, S. D. and Marano, D. (1968) "Performance of Muddy Run Embankment,"

No. SM4, July, 1968, pp. 859-881.
135
Wilson, S. D. and Squier, L. R. (1969) "Earth and Rockfill Dams,"
Proceedings, 7th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, State of the Art Volume, Mexico City, pp. 137-223.
Woodward, R. J., III (1966) "Analysis of Embankment Stresses and Deforma-

tions," Dissertation presented to the University of California, Berkeley,
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy.
Wright, s. G. (1969) "A Study of Slope Stability and the Undrained Shear
Strength of Clay Shales," Dissertation presented to the University of
Zienkiewicz, 0. C. and Cheung, Y. K. (1967) The Finite Element Method in

Structural and Continuum Mechanics, McGraw-Hill, London.
136
APPENDIX A
LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES AND RESULTS
A comprehensive series of unconsolidated-undrained triaxial shear

tests was conducted on a compacted, partially saturated, sandy clay to
measure its stress-strain-volume change behavior during shear under
undrained conditions. These tests were conducted because it was shown
in Chapters 3 and 4 that there was virtually no data available on the
stress-strain-volume change behavior of compacted, partially saturated
soils. Therefore a need was evident to establish the range of behavior
that might be expected for these soils.
Soil Classification
A moderately expansive, light brown, inorganic sandy clay (CL) from

Pittsburg, California was chosen for this study because it is quite
similar in gradation and plasticity to many soils presently being utilized
for the compacted fill in homogeneous embankments and for the impervious
cores in zoned embankments. Seed, Mitchell and Chan (1960) and Seed and
Chan (1961) have presented classification data for this soil which is
sununarized below
Percent Sand 33%

Percent Silt 43%
Percent Clay 24%
Liquid Limit 35/o
Plastic Limit = 19%
Modified AASHO Maximum dry density ll8.9 psf
Modified AASHO Optimum water content = 13.5%
A mineralogical analysis of the clay fraction disclosed that the clay
minerals present were predominantly montmorillonoid, with a trace of
kaolinite.
Specimen Preparation
All of the specimens used in the tests were prepared from previously
processed bulk supplies of soil which were air-dried, crushed and sieved
through a No. 30 sieve. For each test series, a sufficient amount of air-
dried soil was used to give three specimens plus an additional amount for
water content determination and trimming waste. To obtain the desired
water content, sufficient water was added from a spray bottle during mixing
in a rotating pan mixer. The air-dried soil was mixed during the addition
of water and for a minimum of ten minutes after the addition of all the
water. The moist soil was then removed from the mixer, placed in plastic
bags, sealed and cured in a moist room for a minimum of 24 hours prior to
compaction. Before compaction, the mixed, cured soil was again thoroughly
stirred with a steel ladle.
137
Specimen Compaction
Specimens were compacted in 1.4 inch diameter Harvard miniature com-

paction molds using the general procedure described by Wilson (1964). A
tamper similar to the standard spring-activated Harvard miniature tamper
was used, the only difference being that pressure was applied by a constant
air pressure supply instead of a spring. Seven layers of soil with
fifteen tamps per layer were used for the preparation of all specimens.
Compactive efforts were varied by using 12.5, 25, and 50 pounds of force
behind the compaction foot, Three specimens were prepared at each water
content and compactive effort for a total of 36 specimens. The results
indicated (Fig. 57) that the highest compactive effort yielded a compaction
curve slightly above that for the modified AASHO curve presented by Seed
and Chan (1961), After compaction, the specimens were extruded with a jack
and carefully trimmed to insure squareness and smoothness; the final
heights therefore ranged from about 3.2 to 3.5 inches.
Specimen Storage
Immediately after trimming, each specimen was placed between a solid

lucite cap and base and enclosed within two Trojan prophylactic membranes
separated by a thin layer of silicone grease. The membranes were sealed
to the cap and base by four rubber "O" rings, and the specimens were
stored under water in a moist room for a minimum of seven days to cure
before testing.
Unconsolidated-Undrained (UU) Triaxial Shear Test Procedure
After storage, specimens were placed in a triaxial cell developed at

the-University o-f -ca:rnornia, 13erke-rey. (See Seed, Mitchell and Chan
(1960) for details of the triaxial cell.) The desired chamber pressure
(values used were 1, 3 and 6 tons/ft 2 ) was applied by air pressure on the
chamber water and the specimen was tested 30 minutes later (see section on
calibrations for further details) in a Wykeham-Farrance strain-controlled
testing machine at a strain-rate of 0.030 inches per minute. At this
strain rate, 20% strain could be achieved in about 20-25 minutes. During
the test, measurements were taken of the axial load with a load cell, axial
deformation with a dial gage and change in volume of chamber water with a
volume change device developed at the University of California, Berkeley.
(See Chan and Duncan (1967) for further details.) With this equipment,
values could be determined to accuracies of 0.01 kilograms for the axial
load, 0.0001 inches for the axial deformation and 0.01 cubic centimeters
for the change in chamber volume. After shearing, the triaxial cell was
dismantled and the water content of the entire specimen was determined,
Equipment Calibration
Because specimen volumetric changes were evaluated by measuring the

flow of water into or out of the triaxial cell chamber, it was imperative
to evaluate all of the deformations which could occur during application
of the chamber pressure and during shearing. For all of the tests, the
138
125
I
KNEADING COMPACTION
\ '' 7 LAYERS, 15 TAMPS I LAYER
120
\
\
\
''' 0 12.5 LB. TAMPS
\ '' 6 25 LB. TAMPS
\
\
'' 0 50 LB. TAMPS
'
\ '' , • MODIFIED AASHO
.....
\
' . MAXI MUM DENSITY
u
Q. 115 \
\ ''
>-
'' ''
....
-
(I)
z
w
\;/ ''
''
''
''
.....
0
>- 110
\
\
\ '' ''
""'
\0
cr
0
\
\
' ''
\
\
'0
'' '''
'1\
'' ,
'~.....
105
''
\d'
""·'(a
'
' d'
\:...
'<Po
. '"'o,o.
,c;
'''
' Vi"
0
,.!.
• '' '
100
8 10 12 14 16 IB 20 22 24
WATER CONTENT (%)
FIG. 57 MOISTURE- DENSITY RELATIONSHIPS FOR COMPACTED PITTSBURG SANDY CLAY

same equipment was used to insure uniformity and consistency of all of
the calibrations. In addition, each calibration was checked several
times to insure that it was reproducible.
To insure that no air bubbles were entrapped in the chamber water, it

was necessary to use de-aired water and to let it trickle slowly into the
cell through the cell base until the entrance nozzle was completely sub-
merged. After nozzle submergence, the flow rate could be increased to
full flow through a 1/8" 0. D. Saran (trade name) tubing until the chamber
was completely filled,. This procedure took about 45 minutes to complete
but it did not permit any air entrapment in the chamber water.
To evaluate the volumetric creep in the chamber and volume change

device, a series of tests was conducted under varying confining pressures,
with dummy specimens and with no specimens, to determine the amount and
rate of creep. It was found that the creep rate was non-linear during
the first 20 to 30 minutes after application of the confining pressure,
but within the range of 30 to 80 minutes after the application of the
confining pressure, the creep rate was approximately constant. Therefore,
all specimens were allowed to sit for 30 minutes after application of the
confining pressure" At that time, the specimen was sheared and a
correction for chamber volume increase was applied to the measured
readings. These values are shown below
Confining Pressure Chamber Volume Increase

(tsf) (cm 3 /min)
1 0.00225
3 0.00467
6 0.00730
Flexibility of the test equipment under load was investigated by

setting an invar steel specimen in the triaxial cell and loading it at a
constant strain rate. It was found that the axial compression was 0.00007
inches/kg and the chamber volume increase was 0.00025 cm 3 /kg.
Piston friction and volume of chamber water decrease from piston

movement into the cell were evaluated by measuring the chamber volume
change and load cell response during loading. These values were checked
at chamber pressures ranging from 0 to 6 tsf. It was found that the piston
friction was 0.31 kg and that the decrease in volume of chamber water was
0.71 cm 3 for one inch of piston movement into the cell.
To determine the validity of these calibrations, checks were made by

conducting UU tests on a specimen of slightly porous rubber, 1.383 inches
in diameter by 2.840 inches high. Pure, non-porous rubber should have no
volume change during loading and, therefore, should have a Poisson's ratio
equal to 0.5. Thus, these tests provided a means of checking the calibra-
tions. Results of the tests showed that Poisson's ratio varied from about
0.496 at 1% axial strain to about 0.499 at 10% axial strain. The magnitude
of the discrepancy (less than 1%) indicated that the calibration factors
could be confidently applied to the data obtained in subsequent tests.
140
Unconsolidated-Undrained (UU) Triaxial Shear Test Results
A total of 30 UU triaxial shear tests were conducted on compacted,

partially saturated, Pittsburg sandy clay to determine the variation of
the stress-deformation characteristics during shear with compactive effort,
water content and confining pressure. The results of these tests are
plotted in Figs. 58, 59, and 60 which show the corrected values of
deviator stress and volumetric strain versus axial strain for the condi-
tions investigated. It should be noted that the results from three of the
tests are not shown because leakage developed during these tests and
therefore the results were not valid.
These data were subsequently re-plotted in the form of the trans-

formed hyperbolae discussed in Chapters 3 and 4. From these plots the
nonlinear elastic parameters, which show the variation of modulus and
Poisson's ratio with confining pressure and stress level, were deter-
mined. The variations of these parameters, as well as the strength para-
meters, were then contoured over the compaction curve shown in Fig. 57.
These plots are presented and discussed in detail in Chapters 3 and 4.
141
... 10
... 10
b b tT. • I TSF
I
en
.
b- b-
.
8
CT1 a 3 TSF
...,en 6 en
en_ 6
a:- .... ~~.
.... ~ ~I!!
en !:4 en- 4 Oj•ITSF
a: Ill:
....c
0
....c
0
IIIUADIIU COMPACTION
2 2
...,> ...,> 7 LAYERS, IS •IZ.SLI. TAIIPSILAYU
y~ • 101.1 PC', WI 14,) 'ro
0 0
....
25
8 ..r
0 15 20 25
z
. ·2 ~
0
Ci-
a: ..
....en - ...._
c-
c: .. ·2
en
·4
_j .J
0 0 ·4
> > 0 5 10 15 20 25
25 AXIAL STRAIN, ta
Pl. I
b
... b"'
2.5 •6TSF
•3 TSF
I
b-
.
v.'. i ts•j b-
.
I
2.0
• I TSF
en en
-cr5-·-:-w - en
-w _1.5
a: II.
.... en
en ....
- 1.0
m:
KIIUDIIIG COIIPACTIOII ~ UUDINI COiliPACTIOII
!! 0.5
>
..., 7 UYEIIS, 15•12.5 Ll UIIPS/LiTEit ...,
> ? LlYIEitS, 15•12.5 Ll. TAIIPSILAY[II
0 y.,
•101.0 PC,, w I . . . . ., . c r. •lor.• ,c,, w • .....,.
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
...,. 0 ..r 0
z
Ci-
....
a: ... , _ z
.
.,. CTs• I TSF c- -o.5
...._
G:af
CT I I TSF
_j en
0
>
·Z
0 5 10 15 20 25 .J
-1.0 as·•
0
,.,., '•
AXIAL STRAIN, > 0 5 10 15 20 25
c.,. t
AXIAL STRAIN, fa
FIG. 58 UU TRAXIAL SHEAR TEST RESULTS FOR COMPACTED PITTSBURG

SANDY CLAY, LOW COMPACTIVE EFFORT
142
b
...
20
b...
I
10
b
. 5
u 5 •3TSF
16 8 4
b- b- b-
Us•6 TSF Us •3 TSF
en en
.n
........
en-
a::: en
.........
12
Us • 3TSF
en_ 6
.....
a::: en
...
..........
U:s•ITSF en
.....
a:::"-
t-en
- 3
en- 2 en- 4 en.t: 2

a::: U3 •I TSF a::: a:::
0 0
..... ~ .....
~ 4 KNEADING COMPACTION ~ 2 ltNE ADING COMPACTION ~ KNEADING COMPACTION
> 7 LAYERS, 15- 25 LB. TAMPS/LAYER > 7 LAYERS, 15-25 Lll. TAMPS/LAYER ·> 7 LAYERS, 15-25 Lll. TAMPS/LAYER
..... ..... w. 14.5 .,. .....
y,•llt.7 PCF, W•11.5% y, • Ill. t PCF, W •17.1-,.
....
~
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
i-2
""' ......
...... 0 ...... 0
0 z
z
c;;
~--2
ca:::..,
.....
en
_
--1 cz
a:::~
..... -
-0.5
en U:s•lTSF en
_j -2 _j
...J 0
0 -4 > 0
> 0 5 10 15 20 25 > 0 5 10 15 20 25
0 5 10 15 20 25 AXIAL STRAIN, f:a AXIAL STRAIN, Ea
AXIAL STRAIN, fa (\I (\)
I '1.1
FIG. 59 UU TRIAXIAL SHEAR TEST RESULTS FOR COMPACTED PITTSBURG SANDY CLAY, MEDIUM COMPACTIVE EFFORT
b
.. 20
IG
b,.
I
20
IG
b""
10
8
b- b-
b-
UJ
UJ-
12 fiJ -
UJ..,.
W~a,.
12
,_,-------.!!)• 6 TSF
'~TSF
UJ
UJ
w-
6
w&a.
a:UJ
~=.
......
a:UJ
UJ- c ~Oj•ITSF
a: &a.
1-UJ
UJ !:: 4
0"3• I TSF
a:
0
~ 4
0"1•1 TSF
COM PACTION
...c
a:
0
~ ltiiUDII:G COMPACTION
...a:
0
~ 2 lllllUOIIIG COII:PACTIOII
> >
>
w .... f LIYERS, 15 ·50 LB. TAMPSILAYEJI
Y •liS. 3 PCF, W •11.7 "4 w
Q
7 LAYERS, IS• SO Ll. TAMPSJUYER
r•• 111... " ' . w ....... .,.
....
~
a
0
0
0 10 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
•
....
z
...c-_
a: . .
UJ
~
~z
-2
......
:!
UJ
~
0
-
c-o
.....
a: . . _ ··r;
~2
0
~CT1 •1TSF
5 10 15
-
O"J•3TSf
O"J•6TSF
20 25
...,.,
~
c-
a:,.
..... --1
UJ
_j
0
CT1•6TSf
-z 0
,,,
0
0 > >
>
-4
AXIAL STRAIN,
'a 10 20 25
AXIAL STRAIN~ .fa
0 5 10 15 20 25 ",
AXIAL STRAIN,
( ., , 'a
FIG. 60 U U TRIAXIAL SHEAR TEST RESULTS f'OR COMPACTED PITTSBURG SANDY CLAY 1 HIGH COMPACTIVE EFFORT
APPENDIX B
DERIVATION OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STRESS LEVEL
AND SHEAR STRESS FACTORS OF SAFETY
Values of the factor of safety based upon stress levels differ from
the values of factor of safety based upon shear stresses, but these two
factors of safety can be related to each other if it is assumed that the
shear surface for which the factor of safety is calculated is oriented at
the statically correct angle with the principal stresses. In this case
the shear stress, Tmf• and the normal stress, an, are related to the
principal stresses as shown in Fig. 61.
In calculating the factor of safety based on stress level, it is

assumed that the soil is brought to failure by increasing the value of a 1
while holding a 3 constant. Therefore the stress level factor of safety,
FSL' is defined as
(al-a 3) f
= (25)
(a 1-a 3) m
in which (a -a )f deviator stress at failure and (a -a ) = mobilized

1 3 1 3
deviator stress. Using the Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion~ the deviator
stress at failure can be expressed as
2 (c coscp + a sincjl)
3
(26)
(1-sincjl)
in which c = cohesion and cp = angle of internal friction. A similar equation

can be derived for the mobilized stress state by using em and cp~ instead of c
and cjl. Substituting these two equations into equation (25) will show
(1-sincjl )(c coscjl + a sincjl)

F = m 3
(27)
SL (1-sincjl)(c
m
coscjl
m
+a 3
sincjl)
m
In defining the factor of safety with respect to the value of shear

stress on a given plane, it is assumed that the soil fails with no change
in the normal stress on the plane, an. Therefore this factor of safety,
called the shear stress factor of safety, F , is defined as
T
(28)
in which Tff =shear stress at failure on the failure plane (i.e.,' shear
strength) and Tmf = mobilized shear stress on the failure plane. From
145
FIG. 61 COMPARISON OF MOBILIZED AND FAILURE STATES OF STRESS
the Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion, the shear strength can be expressed as
(29)
A similar equation may be written for the mobilized stress state using c
m
and ¢m instread of c and ¢. Substituting these two equations into
equation (B-4) will show
tancp
F = (30)
T tan¢m
By trigonometric expansion of equation (30), it can be shown that

sin ¢ = tancp (31)
m (F 2 + tan2¢)1/2
T
F
T
cos ¢m = ------~------~ (32)
(F 2 + tan2¢)1/2
T
Similar expressions may be developed for sin¢ and cos¢ by substituting

unity for FT in equations (31) and (32). Substituting these four equations,
plus the equation for em shown in Fig. 51 as expressed in terms of c and
F , into equation (29) results in the following equation.
T
112
(F 2 + tan 2¢) - tan¢
T
FSL = 2
1/2 ( 3 3)
(L + tan ¢-) - tancjL
It may be noted that equation (33) indicates that the two factors of
safety are related only by the value of ¢ and that FSL is always greater
than or equal to F-r if the shear surface is oriented at the statically
correct angle as assumed in the derivation.
147
APPENDIX C
COMPUTER PROGRAM
FOR THE
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF EMBANKMENTS
Identification
This computer program which consists of a main program (LSBUILD) and

six sub-routines (LAYOQT, LSSTIF, LSQUAD, LST8, BANSOL, LSRESUL) was coded
by F. H. Kulhawy (1968-69) using the general programming concepts and
solution techniques of Prof. E, L. Wilson (1963 to date), the linear
strain element formulation of Felippa (1966) and the incremental loading
concepts of King (1965) which were subsequently modified by Woodward (1966).
Purpose
The purpose of this program is to calculate the stresses, strains and

displacements in embankments (homogeneous or zoned) by simulating the
actual field construction sequence. The analysis is performed by finite
element methods, assuming plane strain and isotropic conditions.
Options
The program has the capability of treating linear or hyperbolically

nonlinear material properties. Provisions are made to include a founda-
tion with initial anisotropic stresses, if desired.
To simulate the usual practice in large dam construction where

cofferdams are constructed prior to the main embankment, the following
approach is suggested. First perform a finite element analysis of the
cofferdam and have the computer punch out the results using the punch
option in the program. If the finite element mesh for the cofferdam
differs from the mesh for the cofferdam portion of the cofferdam-embankment
mesh, the auxiliary program (FEMINT) may be used to interpolate stresses,
strains and material properties to the proper element locations in the
cofferdam portion of the cofferdam-embankment mesh. Displacements in
the new mesh must be evaluated and punched by the operator using a linear
variation between nodal points. These values can then be used as coffer-
dam input in the analysis of the embankment construction on the cofferdam.
An example of this approach is the analysis of Oroville Dam.
Factors of safety can also be computed from the finite element

stresses by punching the output from the finite element analysis and
using the punched output as input data in the auxiliary program (FEMFS).
148
Sequence of Operations
The main program (LSBUILD) monitors all operations by calling the

following sub-routines to perform the analyses for each construction
increment:
a) LAYOUT reads and prints the input data, computes the initial
foundation stresses and computes the initial elastic properties
for the elements.
b) LSSTIF develops the stiffness matrix of the entire assemblage of

elements in the structure up to and including those at the
specified construction elevationo It also modifies the stiff-
ness matrix for the specified boundary constraints.
c) LSQUAD is called by LSSTIF for each quadrilateral finite element

and sets up the stiffness matrix for each element.
d) LST8 is called by LSQUAD for each quadrilateral element and sets

up the stiffness matrix for an 8 degree of freedom (4 nodal point)
linear strain triangular finite element. LST8 is called twice,
once for each of the two triangles comprising the quadrilateral
element.
e) BANSOL solves for the unknown nodal point displacements by a

Gaussian elimination technique.
f) LSRESUL calculates and prints the stresses, strains and displace-

ments in the structure at the end of each construction increment
and evaluates the nonlinear material properties of each element
for the next increment. LSQUAD is called by LSRESUL for each
quadrilateral element for the stress and strain computations.
Digrammatically, the operations can be shown as below:
once
LSBUILD LAYOUT
( each ) ( each
element sub-element)
+
~onstruction
~ LSSTIF LSQUAD LST8
each
increment
t
BAN SOL
( each ( each )
~ element) sub-element
LSRESUL LSQUAD LST8
149
INPUT DATA PROCEDURE
1) Control Cards (6 cards required)
a) Card 1 (12A6)
2-76 RED - Title card for program identification
b) Card 2 (6I4)
1-4 NUMELT - Total number of elements in the complete
structure (Maximum = 275)
5-8 NUMNPT - Total number nodal points in the complete
structure (Maximum = 300)
9-12 NFEL - Number of elements in the foundation portion
~ NUMELT)
13-16 NFNP - Number of nodal points in the foundation portion
0S_ NUMNPT)
17-20 NUMCEL - Number of elements in the cofferdam portion
(Maximum = 100)
21-24 NUMCNP - Number nodal points in the cofferdam portion
(Maximum = 100)
c) Card 3 (7I4)
1-4 NUMBC - Number of nodal points in the structure with a

constrained deformation (fixed in x, fixed in y,
fixed in x and y (Maximum = 100)
NZONES - Number of different material types (Maximum = 10)
NLAY - Number of construction layers desired (Maximum =
25)
13-16 NUMIT - Number of solution cycles per construction layer
(e.g. - for 1 cycle of iteration per layer,
NUMIT = 2).
17-20 NONLIN - Code for linear or nonlinear material properties
(0 for all linear material, 1 for some or all
nonlinear materials)
21-24 NWATER - Code for additional loads (e.g. - water forces)

to be placed on the structure after the usual
construction sequence is completed (0 for no added
loads, 1 if loads are to be added)
25-28 NPUNCH- Code for punching out stresses etc., after last
layer (0 = no, 1 = yes)
d) Card 4 (2Fl0.0)
1-10 AKO - Initial earth pressure coefficient in the founda-

tion
11-20 REDMOD - Factor used in simulating construction sequences.
(0.00001 yields good results)
150
e) Card 5 (7Fl0. 0) (See following figure for details)
1-10 FNL - X coordinate of foundation surface to the left
of the embankment
11-20 TL - X coordinate of embankment toe to the left
21-30 CRL - X coordinate of embankment crest to the left
31-40 CTR - X coordinate of embankment centerline
41-50 CRR - X coordinate of embankment crest to the right
51-60 TR - X coordinate of embankment toe to the right
61-70 FNR - X coordinate of foundation surface to the right
of the embankment
f) Card 6 (7FlO.O)
Same as Card 5 for the Y coordinates
CRL CTR CRR
FNL TL TR FNR
If the X-coordinates of the following are equal:
FNL = Tt and FNR = TR
then the embankment is considered to be on a rigid foundation.
If only the half-section of a symmetrical embankment is being

analyzed, the full section geometry must still be read in above.
2) Material Property Cards (See description following input procedure)
a) Units conversion card (FlO.O)

1-10 CONS - Units conversion constant
b) Weight and elastic constant cards (I 4, 6 F10. 4)
(number of cards required = NZONES)
1-4 N - Material type number
5-14 GAM - Unit weight
15-24 COEF }
- Tangent modulus constants
25-34 EXP
35-44
45-54
55-64
DD
GG
FF
}
- Tangent Poisson ratio constants
151
c) Strength cards (I4,4Fl0,4) (Number of cards required = NZONES)

5-14 cc - Cohesion
15-24 PHI - Angle of internal friction (degrees)
25-34 RF - Failure ratio
35-44 CODE - Code for linear or nonlinear material properties
(0 for linear, 1 for nonlinear).
CONS equals a units constant to convert the units that one desires to
use into atmospheres, assuming that one uses the modulus and Poisson ratio
constants as presented in the main text, Therefore, one of the following
units combinations should be used:
GAM - ton/ft 3 - kip/ft 3 - lb./ft 3 (etc,)

CC - ton/ft 2 - kip/ft 2 - lb./ft 2
CONS - 1.058 - 2.116 - 2116.2
Since the output fields have been made small, it is best to use ton or kip
units. For all of these cases, it is assumed that all dimensions are in
feet.
When assigning numbers to the different material types in the embank-

ment-foundation system, note that the output contains the principal
stresses/yh. Therefore the program has been set up to evaluate yh using
the following values:
-for a rigia rounaation, y (Dam) = y (Dam) = y ·(Shell) = y (1)

for a flexible foundation, y (Foundation) = y (1)
and y (Dam) = y (Shell) = y (2)
The numbering of the material type should conform to the above.
If NONLIN = 0 on control card lc (all materials are linear elastic),

use the following for each material type:
COEF modulus of elasticity RF = LO

GG =Poisson's ratio
EXP = DD = FF = CODE = 0.0
If NONLIN = 1 on control card lc (one or more materials are nonlinear),

the tangent modulus (Et) and the tangent Poisson ratio (vt) are automatically
calculated after each construction layer according to the following hyper-
bolic relationships:
V./(1-DD*E ) 2
l. a
152
where:
= CONS * COEF
(o /CONS)EXP
3
= GG - FF log (o /CONS)
3
hyperbolic strength= (o -o )f/RF
1 3
The evaluation of these parameters is discussed in the main text. If the

material is nonlinear, CODE = 1, but if the material is linear, evaluate
the constants the same way as is done above for NONLIN = 0. If vt becomes
greater than 0.49, it is automatically reset to 0.49.
If NONLIN = 1, the initial values of Et and vt in a foundation zone

are calculated by assuming that 01 = yh and o 3 = AKO * o 1 . The initial
values of Et and vt in an embankment zone are calculated by assuming that
01 = yh and 03 = 01 (v /1-Vt). Iteration is required to assure that the
value of vt used to calculate o 3 is equal to the value of vt calculated in
the equations above. This is done automatically.
Since the stress-strain relationship is written in terms of the bulk

and shear moduli (as calculated from Et and vt) above), simulation of
failure can be approximated in the following manner which is done auto-
matically in the program. For tension failure [o 3 < 0] or shear failure
[mobilized (o 1 -o 3 ) ~shear strength (ol-a3)f], the shear modulus is set= 0
and the bulk modulus is set = constant = bulk modulus at failure. These
values are used in all subsequent computations in the program.
3) Nodal Point Cards (I4,2F8.2)
(Use as many cards as necessary to define the structure.)
1-4 MM - Nodal point number

5-12 ORD(~,l) - X coordinate of nodal point (+ to right)
13-20 ORD(MM,2) - Y coordinate of nodal point (+ up)
If nodal point cards are omitted, the program generates the omitted
information by incrementing MM by one and by calculating ORD (MM, 1 and 2)
at equal intervals along a straight line between the two defined nodal
points. The first and last nodal points must always be given. (e.g.,
MM=l and MM=NUMNPT.)
Nodal points must be in numerical sequence from left to right in the

finite element mesh and must increase from the foundation up in layers.
4) Constrained Boundary Cards (1814)
(Use as many cards as required to define NUMBC nodal points.)
1-4 NBC - Number of constrained nodal point.

5-8 NFIX - Code to define type of fixity at this nodal point.
(NFIX 0 for X andY fixity.)
(NFIX 1 for X fixity.)
(NFIX 2 for Y fixity.)
153
Continue across the card for the constrained nodal points at repeat-
int eight column intervals as above for a maximum of nine alternating
values of NBC and NFIX per card.
Omitted nodal points are considered as freely moving nodal points"
5) Element Cards (6I4)

(Use as many cards as necessary to define the structure")
1-4 N - Element number

5-8 NPN(N,l) - Number of nodal point I for this element
9-12 NPN(N,2) - Number of nodal point J for this element
13-16 NPN (N, 3) - Number of nodal point K for this element
17-20 NPN(N, 4) - Number of nodal point L for this element
21-24 NPN(N,5) - Material type of this element
If element cards are omitted, the program generates the omitted

information by incrementing the previous N and NPN (N,l through 4)
by one while retaining the same NPN (N,5). Cards must always be
supplied for the first and last elements (e,g., N=l and N=NUMELT")
Elements must be numbered consecutively, proceeding counterclockwise

around the quadrilateral elements. Nodal point numbers within an
element must be ~ 39.
In the finite element mesh, elements are numbered consecutively from

left to right in horizontal strips, starting at the bottom of the
mesh and proceeding upward.
Triangular shaped elements may be used as long as a fourth nodal

point is placed in the center of the "slope side" of these elements.
Care must be exercised that the diagonal from nodal point J to nodal
point L is not on a straight line including either I or K. Numbering
must be done in the following way.
K
I J
~
L I
6) Construction Layer Cards (5I4,F8.2)

(One card is required for each layer totaling NLAY cards)
1-4 LN - Number of construction layer, increasing upward

from the bottom.
5-8 NOMEL(LN,l) - Smallest element number of the newly placed
elements in this layer.
154
9-12 NOMEL(LN,2) - Largest element number of the newly placed
elements in this layer.
13-16 NOMNP(LN,l) - Smallest nodal point number of the newly placed
nodal points in this layer.
17-20 NOMNP(LN,2) - Largest nodal point number of the newly placed
nodal points in this layer.
21-28 HEIGHT - Surface elevation of this layer.
If a foundation is included in the mesh, it must have LN=l.

Therefore the first constructed layer= 2.
If NWATER=l, an additional layer card must be added to simulate added

loads placed after the embankment is completed. In this case,
columns 5 through 28 on the LN=NLAY card (last card) will be identical
to those on the LN=NLAY-1 card (last layer of the constructed embank-
ment).
7) Cofferdam Element and Nodal Point Cards
a) Cofferdam element cards (18I4)

(Use as many cards as required to define NUMCEL elements.)
1-4 NCEL - ·Number of cofferdam element

5-8 NCEL - Number of cofferdam element
etc.
Continue across the card for all of the input_ co££e_rdam_elements_ at_
repeating four column intervals for a maximum of 18 values per card.
b) Cofferdam nodal point cards (18I4)
Same as 7a using NCNP for a total of NUMCNP nodal points.
If NUMCEL = 0, these cards are omitted.
8) Force Cards (I4,2F8.2)
(Use as many cards as necessary to define the added loads.)
1-4 MM - Nodal point number where force is applied.

5-14 FX - X component of force applied at MM (+ to right)
15-24 FY - Y component of force applied at MM (+ up)
If NWATER = 0, these cards are omitted.
If NWATER = 1, these cards must be supplied, in numerical sequence,

and the first and last cards must always be supplied, even if there
are no forces applied at these points.
155
If cards are omitted, MM is incremented by 1 and FX and FY are set
equal to 0.
Care must be exercised to be sure that a force is not applied at a

nodal point which is fixed in the direction of the applied force.
9) Cofferdam Existing Property Cards
a) Stress cards (Il0,5Fl0.3)

b) Elastic property cards (Il0,5Fl0.3)
c) Strain cards (Il0,5Fl0.3)
These cards (a,b,c) are punched out propertly from the auxiliary
program (FEMINT).
d) Displacement cards (Il0,4Fl0.3)
1-10 NCNP - Cofferdam nodal point number

11-20 ORD(N,l) - X ordinate of nodal point
21-30 ORD(N,2) - Y ordinate of nodal point
31-40 DISP(N,l)- X displacement of nodal point
41-50 DISP(N,2)- Y displacement of nodal point
When the finite element meshes for the cofferdam and the cofferdam-
embankment systems are different, be sure that the nodal points are
in the same locations. If this procedure is followed, only the nodal
point numbers will have to be changed on the punched output from the
cofferdam analysis before it is used as input in the r~-1lumher~d
cofferdam-embankment system.
If NUMCEL = 0, all of the cards for 9a through 9d are omitted.
156
,........................................................................
PHOGRA.'4 lJLIUilO I I NIJUTtOV H'UT t TAP( ltf M'l2, TMJUttPUNCHI CALL lX II
,..........................................................................
uo PH I NT 20"u
ft.M NU~·LINLA~ lf-11\A~l.I·:U,.T ANALYSI~ .. F ,11, KlJLHA"'V t 1Y68-69 C TN~ • lL12 HI I h112)•TLU II' ICHH I 1-TLt 11 tiC TRil t•fLC U II
00 1bV N•ltNUMNPT
C.U~"~•"~UI-4 /lo-.1 f./ fiUII lJ I tf'tl.JMt.l.. l tl'fJ•-11~._, f tNF I;.L tid l'tl-' tNIJUNCH IF fUt(L)Ik•11 •l[, C:hU 1J I AUIH•ICfHI lJ-VHDIIhll t/ICUtlJ-TLUU
(.u"~o"~IJI• /f.tl LL I ~f-'l't I J I~, !J) t\JtUJI JvU tl. t tX(.,I4. 7!Jt tYCP 127~ I IF IOMOI~tlJ ,c;T. CTHilJ I JIDU•htOMOCNtiJ•CTMfliiiiTRtU•CTRflH
C!Jit\MUI~ /CJJAi4/ NU~Ctl t~UI<\(I'tJJtNClL llUOI tNC.NP llOO I YDIM• f OAOt NtZI-CTR, IICTN f Z J -CTR, J
CIJMI-~1'4 OW~(/ NoJMIJC tNt" t 1 \JV) tNI- Ill I IOV t tN.<~ATUit, X I JOll t ,ry I JOOI uo ~HINT 1V2Wt NtCUHOCNtMitM•J•Zttli.OIMtYOIM
CU~~N IU4f4;,/ MllANUtNUMIJI.kttifUUitACU 1.,tdOI
(Ufo4MON /I,. IF fl N\.AY tlNtkOMt t.lz,,z t tN<.iMNP IZ~ tlt tHUC.HTt ZS I •HtJ~Jt tl Y ME:AU IOU~t INOCIK.)tNFUU,ItK•lt,.Ui4UCI
I..UMMUii l~t;.I.H41 tNLilt t TLI21t<.NLI2) •l Uti llt<.NH Ill t 1M lllt'ltMI Zt PRINT 20"'
(\lf'tMUI'II /,..Af 1/ fotVI-fL INtHULA.Il Ul t:aHEANI J7.., J tf'OI ~127) I tC,AMilOhNLUMO&I DO tau k.•ltNVM8C
,.......................................................................
(\Jf"'MUf.t /MAT I. I C~N~tC.Ut.f flU I tlX.Pf 1u. tOU I .tO J tUC..IlU ltF, llU J tHtUN~:t . I' INfiXUI ,Eo, OJ PRJhT ZO~OtNACIKt
CUMMOtc /MAT)/ CC f 101 tPHIIIU I tRF 110 I t0EV111U I tt'IE\1'21lOhCODE 110 hAlO H INFIXtk.l .Eo, 11 PRINT 20,tNBCUI
,c......................................................................• ,...................................................................•...
IF INFIXIK.I ,t:.o. 21 PRINT Z060t.N8C Uti
C AEAO ANO PHINT HtPUT DATA • SET UP INITIAL CONCIITION5 II~ CON II NUE
,......................................................................•
C N(AU ANo .,HINT tLCMCNT AAHAYt COMPUTE PT, FOR STRE!t\£$
,c........................................................................
IUO CALL LAYOUI
NN•O
lOO N(AtJ lOO~t NtfNPNIN•MhM•ltSI
C AfttALYlt. fuH (ACti CONSTRUCTION LAYER J 10 NN•NN+l
c••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• IF IN •LE• NNI UO TO i30
00 «HJO L"t•ltftLA Y , DO ZZU 1<.•1tlt
l Pte lNT lUvvt ~~~~~~:~:~ME\. I LN ,,.., tN•It21 'I NOMNP I LNtMI tM•lt21t 210 NPNt,..Ntk.I•~PNIN"t•ltf.l+l
NPN CI\IN t !I) • NPN I NP~""lt !I I
00 •ww I T•1tNUMIT JJO IF' IN ,c;r. NNI r,o TO ZlO
CALL ~£<.0/1110 t T IMClJ JF INUHELT .UT• NNJ UO TO 200
IF ILN ,Uf• l •UN. Nf[\. •EU. 01 GO TO lOO c
PRINT l!Jv' PAINT ZU6:t
GO TO )\lv 00 2,0 N•l tNUMEL T
c J•NPNINtZJ
c O(Yt.LUP ~TIFfN(~$ HATNIXt ~CJLYE [UUATIUNSt EVALUATE RESULTS L•NIJNINtltl
c X.CPI N l•tJ,)•IORDI Jt II+OROtl tlll
2LJO CALL L$:)TIF YCPI N l•v, , . , QROI Jt ZI+ORn f L, 2 I I
CALL HAN~OL IF IXCf.ICNI ,Lt• CTHt 111 X.OIM•ICTNili-ACPthiJifCTRili•TLilJ I
CALL L!»H[~UL IF IJICI-'INI ,~,T, CTNilll XVIM•UCPINI-CTHilll/ITktli•CTJUltl
,.•.•................................................................•.•
YOIM• t Y(P I NI•CTRF Ill CTR f ZI•C TAF J
)UO CALL :,[COHO If IME21 ItO PHI NT 2U71Jt Nt tNIJ1'41Nt1<41tM•lt )J tJI.CPINI th.t'tlttltX0""'YUI1'4
,....................................................................... ,...•................................................................•••
IJM[oii>4El•IIMrJ
•OO PAINT l011Jt LNtl TtTIMt C N£AO AND PHINT CUNSTRUCTION ~[iJUEMCE JltfONMATION
IUUO ""'MAT t lH6 I l l UA6 I l l 20H

LAY[R NOt • U II READ 10)1.1 t I Uh I NOf'IEL I LNtN I tN•l tU t I NDMnPfLNtMI•M•J tZ It
I 2vH ADDEO ELEMUtT S. • THAU II 1• ••H I• I HEIGHTfLN)tLN•hNLAYI
,Z 2\o!H AODCD ~DAL POINTS• 14t6H THRU 14 II PAINT 2"H
I 2vH WA,AC! [L[VAIIOH • 'IOo) I PNINf 208\.11 CLNtCJ\IOMEltLNtNttN•ltlltiH~tLihMitM•ltZh
,....................................................................•..
100, ,OMMAI 149H•,UUHOAIION LOH[o SEE PREVIOUS PAGES 'OA SIAESSU I 1 HEic.HTfLHhLh•ltNLAU
li)IO II'UMMAT fTtt-LAYER•IltSXtiiH IYERATION•U•'X•l"H TI,_.EfSECOMOSI•'f•JI C
IF INUMCEL ,[0• 01 GO TO UO
GO 10 100 P~INT 2LI82
!110 READ lt.hJh INCELfNJ tN•ltNUMCELI
PRINT hJVh INCELCNhN•llfiiUMCELt
PRlfH ZUBJ
READ lU\oth INCNPINhN•ltNUMCNPJ
PAINT lOtl't fPtefrriPtNJtN•ltNUMCMPJ
,........................................................................ c
SUOHOUT IN( LAYOUT
CIJM140N /I Nl T I HU)f 12 I tNU~ll T eNUMNPT tNFtL tNFNPtNPUN(H

1".1 IF INWATER ,[0, Ul GO TO ,00
PRiftT zoe'
(-{JIA~N- 1-~U./- NPN+l-!-,-;-5--f-;-Utt-O.f-!UU-;-2-J-i-lt-C-P-! -l-1-~ 1-;-¥(-P--! Z.-7~ I- 00--~QU-- NN"-ltNIJHN-P-t--
COMMON /COAM/ NUMCELtNUMCNPtNCfltlOOftltCNPtlOOt FXINN1•.J,u
(UM11UN /Nt-IJC./ kUMU( tNI.!C. llVU I tN~ I X. I luU I tktoA fi;.Htf )I I )0Uit FYI 3001 400 FYCNNI•O,v
COMMON /LiAN5/ foltJANOtNUMUlKtlill601 tAl l6Ut801 NN•U
(tJi<IMUI• /L I FTI kl.AY tLNt NVMt.L I Z~ tl J tNU/4l~PC 2::. t2 I 1M~ IC.HT 12~ I tNUHI T II f •10 READ IOZ:tt MMtFXIMMit,YtMMI
CUM,.,ON /C)[UM/ FNl. C2 I, TL 12 I tCRLl2 J tCTR I 21 t(RN UJ t TRf 2 h ,NA 121 420 NN•NN+l
COMMON /MAT 1/ NUNLINtBUliC I 27~1 t$H[ARt 2 7:, I tPU I~ I 27, I tCloAMf 10 I tREDHOD PRINT 11.1~'' NNtFJI:tNNJtFYINNI
,.......................................................................
CVMI·1UN /t"!A f 21 CUN~t(.Utf llU I tlXPilu I tiJOilv I tYC..IlO I tFF 110 I tNlONEil IF IMM tUT, NNI UO TO 420
CUM14VN /MAT l l CC 110 t ,PHil lUI tNF IIU t tOEV 1 CHH tOE\1'2 110 It COO£ t 10 ltAlO IF INUioiNPT .C.T. NNI GO TO 410
,....................................................................... ,.......................................................................
Ulroott.N:,I UN ~ THE.N 127h 3 I t!iTNA INi.! H tJ) tUI !iPI 300t 2 I
fwUIYALLNCL. I .~TML..)~ tAtlUIJUII tl ~ f~AI NtAC •1.100 II 1 10 I ::i.Pt A C61JOOI I C OETEHI-IINE dAfu.> WIDTH 0' ~TIFf"NE~S MATNI.lt ABORT If TOO LARGE
( NEAt> AND PrfHH CUNTHOL DATA 100 MBAND•O

c••••••••••••••• ••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 00 )'l~o~ N•ltNUMELT
REAO lOVUt HEU II•MAX.Of NP"fl N • II tNPNC NtZ I tNPNUh l I tNP .. f Nt•l t
HEAU lOU,t NvMEL T tHUI"NYf tNFE.L tNFNP tNUM([L tNUMCNP JJ•MINU t NPN IN tl I tNPNt Nt2 hNPNI Nt)) tNPitiN•" I
HEAD lOu' t NUMUCtNlONE~tNLAY tNUMJ T tNONLJNtNWATEHtf'iiPUNCH u:.•z•t 11-JJ•t 1
AEAO IOlvt AKOtH(OHOO IF IKK .GoT. MUANOI FoiOANO•KK
HtAU 10 lVt I F~L INJ t TLINI tCioiL I hI tC TNI Nl tCNHC HIt TR INI tFNRINt tN•& •,Z I IF IMUAND eLE• 801 GO TO SlO
PR PH ZU..J\.It t1t0 PRINT 'OO'- N
.,....................................................................•••
f.' HI ~T .:vll'' NUMt:L. T tNU"'-NPT tNFEL ,HfNP,NUHCEL tNUM(NP GO TO 999
PHI f"'T 201Ut NUM6C •"'lfJNES•NLAY tNUMl T tNONLINtN-.ATER tNPUfiiCH 110 CONTINUE
,.......................................................................
PAINT 2011)t AKO•AEDMOO
PAINT ~02\ott flll J tTL121tCHLilltCALf 21 tCTAI lltCTRll I tCRRflltCfUIUI t C INITIALIZE VALUES IN FOUNDATION AND IN fMBAHt:;H["T
1 TNflltTH11.)
,.......................................................................
I' UtHL .EO• VI PNPH 2021 PRINT ZU9u
IF INFlL ,ur. Ul PHINT JU2lt FNLfl1•'NLI21tFNRilltFNAI2J 00 '~1..1 N•ltNUMEl T
DO 5c~U '-hlt)
( NEAl> AND PRINT MATEMIAL PfiiOPERTV OAfA STRES:)INtMJ•O•U
c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
READ 1Ulvt CONS.
, SIW STAAtNINtM1•UtU
00 ,60 N•ltNUHNPf
lUAU lOUt I htGAMINJtCOtftfU tElPINitDOINitVC.fNh,'tNI tN•l tNlOHlU DO '6U M•lt2
Rt:AO 1021.1 t I NtCC INitPHI I HI tRFI Nt tCOOt:UtJ tN• hNlOftES I t•O OtSPtNtMI•O•O
PRINT 2U2'• CUNS IF INfEt.. ,[Q, Ul GO TO ,10
00 STO N•ltNFEL
~=~=~ fg:~, l••tC..A141NI tCUEf I HI tt.XPIHJ tOUINI •(tfifNI ,,., INI tN•hNlOfill•t STRES~I r•h2 hlJAMf ll*fH[ IG-HT 111-YCPINI I
,........................................................................ c
tTO :aTHt.~ .. IIHlJ•:aTH.[:J!i1Nt2t*AIC.O
::: ~1 fg~~~ I Nt(C INI tPHI UU tAft NltCOOliHttN•ItkZONESt
,.......................................................................
tiO ·IF CNUMCEL ,[Ut 01 GO TO 600
( Nf:AO AND ..-~«tNT NODAL VOihT ARRAY READ 103h IN tXCPI Nt tYCPIPO, I $TR(~SI Nt .. ltJrhltJ I tJ•ltfltUfo1CEL I
READ l03St t l'hXCPI NltYCP t Nl tl STMAI .. IHtf'IJ tM•lt) hJ•lt,.UMCEL I
ll•..J READ lOnt I NtXCPt Nl tYCPC Nl tOULl II'U t$11(AA Uti tPOI$1 Mit J•1t'*UMCU.. l
100 HEAU ll.l2~t MMtiOROIMMtMitH•ltll Rt.AU lU.Ut lrft IUHOCNtMt tM•1t21tiOI!.Pt"•MI •N•hZ, t..l•hiNHC ..PI
OX• I ORO I P.t-4tli-OA'Of LL tll J IIMM•ll t c
OY•I ORO I MMt l I .. ORO ILL t2 t 1/ f HM-lL 1
110 LL•LL•J
•00 " INOHL IN ,[Yo II
00 620 N• hNUJo("[L T
GO TO ••o
IF IMM-llt l•Otl10tUO MfYPE•NPNINtSI
llO OADILLtii•OMOILL•ltlJ+OX POl Sf 1111•(-GIMTYP[ I
OAOILL1Z hOAOILL•J tZ t+DY [MOO•CO[FI MTYP[)
GO 10 II" SHE. ARC Nl•£1400112•0•1 hO+POISI,.t I I
UO I ' INI.IMNPI•MMI J•OoUOoiOO UO BUUINhSH[AA INI/IIoO•Z,OIPOJSINII
UO PAINT SOUOo MM c
157
640 00 6~u N•ltNlONfS 20•S FUH,..Af I ~UHl llEM(Nf ARNAY • PTe WHEHf. :.t..:t.SSlS AR[ lVALVATlD I l l
PHI t ~l •PHil N ll 5o 7,29,77951
(OifST•Ze1.11 I IU I NJ I lleO•SI HI PHI Uft,
OEY II H • •CON.Sf •cc INt 'CUSIPHI fflt I
t,
l
Z
)OH Elf.
ZvH X-OAOIW
ZU7\ol FORMAT f6Ut4FlUt31
I J
Y-ORD/H
Y. t. MAll
,, •·ORO 't'•ORO t
6,0 DtY2ftt1•CO,...~T•51NIItHIIHII 2UU FUHMAT lllHl CUH~t,.UCTIOPtl LAVI;N JNf'Ujoir4ATIUN II 6H LAY[Rt

I' INONLIN e[Ue Ot GO TO UO 1 4tttt INCLU51Vt EU."OH!. INCLU:tl'llt; "WlS tl.lYATION It
c 2U80 FOH:MAT ll:>ti1Uttltl12•1btfl1tell
DU 69..1 Lt~•J tNLAY 2UU fUIH<IAf tl'IH•(VtFlHUAM llt,MlNTS Ill
IF ILN el!Je ~LAY tANO, .. WAT£R •lOt lt GO TO 690 IWII 'OMMAf l~)li•Cm:Ft.MOA~ ~OUAL POINTS Ill
I' f~N .~r, II C.O 10 660 Zllll f~MAT U~ttl NUI)AL t-'UitiT 'OHCt:.IIIQ" Nt' IC•r~CI Y•lllottCI. Ill
660
'' '"'n.• oTt "'' no
NFELl•NO~[LfVhlJ
TO 690 IOWO ,ORMAf ll~Hl INITIAL \IALUF:5 IN [LE~!NIS I l l
1 -~H {L[ X-oRO Y•OAO (LA:, MOO tsUl.C MOOt
6?0 NfEL2•NOME'LfLNt21 Z $UH SHEAR MUD PUISSON SIG•JC SIG-Y U.V•II:Y I l l
00 bdJ N•NFllltNFf:LZ lCifS fORMAl fl>tlflU•ltJf'lOeh .. FIO•ll
MfYtJ't•NPNINt5J JI,)UO FORMAT f 35H1 INITIAL CDfflRUAM tLEMErtT !)lNAI~$ Ill JOH [~h
HT•ftE IUHT I Lfitt •TCPtNt 1 )IJH J•ONO "•ORO [PS-• [P~·Y GA~XY l i t
IF IN tGf, NF'ELI eANO• N eLh t<t,E:Llf GO fO 6 . . JQOI ,ORHAT IUHI I~ITIAL COFHMOAH ~OOAL POINT OI$PLA([H[NT$ I l l
Je,.PNINtll 1 '"" pt,p, X•OHO Y•OMD X OUP T•DIS" II.
,......................................................................•
l•NP~HNt)l IJOOO FORMAT 117H lteP• £NNOA t It • 1 .. 1
L•NPNINt .. l ~001 f()!(HAT llZH OAIW WIDTH TOO LA•GE AT [LlHENT Ul
I' IN e(Y, Nfi:Lll HT•IiT•0,, 1 1UHOICt21-uMOCLtZit
l ' tONOil.tll elU• OlfOILt211 GO TO 610 H9STOP
If IN tlWt NfLlJl IIT•Itl•f.h)lfUMOiktlt•UMOI.ItZI t ENO
610 !.hct:S.:,OI Ntl f •HI •UAMIMTYPt.: 110,1
69\1 CUNfJNU[
POI~l•GGIII
00 1)0 N•l tNUM[lf
IF Ut~UI>ICEL ,£Ch 01 GO TO 696
DO bf) M•1tNUMCEL
•n IF IN eEUe N\.LLIMI J GO TO 7JO

(uNIINV[
696 MTVP[•NPN1Nt51
IF IN eLEt NFI:LJ GO TO 110
700 IF fPUJSl eGTt Ot491JI P01Sl•n, .. 90
:tfN£$!)1 Ntlt ·~ IHE:,SrN,zt•POI !.11 f J,O•POI $1 I
flO OEVUR•SfRES.$CN•lt•:.tA[~SfNt11
OEYfH•O£Vl CMT 't'P( I +O(VltMJ VP£ t•STA!SSC Htll
E l•(.t)H I MTYPE t I(.QN~ 1 CI $TIH.SSfNtliiCUMSI••ElCPf M!YPE It
[P$•0(V$ fHif E l•t 1,0-1 OEV!IoiAID(V,HI I I
PUf Soi•C.C.t Mfl'f.l~ t•F' lfiiiiJYP[ t•ALUGlO I StM£$Stfh 1 IICOff$1
ltOI5T•P01 S.f If ChO•bOIMTYP[ t•lPS t••JeOI
" IPOUt eGJ. "'''"'' POIST•O••to
I ' IN •I.E• "F£ll GO TO TZO
Jr IAd~IPOI$1-POISTI oLfo OoOOOOII 10 TO UO
POl $I•POI U+IPOIST•POUI II IOoO
GO TO Tu"
UO POI$1NI•POIST
IF IN eLEe Nf'~LI GO TO '725
!ifR[SSINtli•U,LI
STR£SSUh2 t•O,Q
U' lMOO•U•I I loO-ICOO[IMIYPU•O!VUR/OlV,MII . . ZoOI
SHEARUU•EMODII Z.O•f l•0+'01SINJI I
OULKINI•SHEAN IMIII h0•2•01P01Sf NJ I
1JO CONTIHVt:
C Uu 00 Hu N•loNVMCLT
--[-MOOc-l-.-u•-5-H£-AM-tNi ec hB+POf S-tNII
,.••....................................................................
SUOROUTINE LSS.TIF
COMMON IINffl HlOilll tNUMt.L T tNUMNPT tNFLL •"FhP,~~UN(H

7!10 PNINT ZUYh NtlCPINitYCPINI•[MUO•tslA.KINitSHEAAtNhPOISINit CvH,,.UN /hl-'t.LI tt.,t.ll P$t )t tUNO I JUO tll 1X(PI ~l!tol •'1"(~12 1~ »
I ISTIIIESSINtMhM•l•U COMMON /COAHI NUMCELtftU:.tCNP,HClt.tlCOI t"tCNPil OCII
IF INUMCEL e[U, Ul GO TO 160 CUMHOI't IN.,!JC/ N...N1UCtNUC 1100 I tNI lA I lOil I'"""" H.Me'U JOO h'Y f lei OJ
PRI Nf )OUU COMMON IUANS./ MdANOtNUMIJLk•Uil60JtAC 16D•IOI
P~~~; JNT IOJ~t I N,l(PIHitYCPC Nl t CSJRAINffthMI tM•ltJ t tH•ltNUHELTt /LIFT/
CI.H'I,.,Of1 NLAY•LNtNOt-lt.t.tzhlltHuMNt'l 2~•2 I tHfJCioHT 12) I tlti..I"'IT el T
P~INT lOU' CL114MQN I"'AT 11 HUNLI"ttBUUU 2Uit.S.H(ANf21~1tPIJ15t 21SieC...UU lOI,RtU"OO
PRINT H14.,., CNtiOROI N•M I tM•ltZI •IOI5Pf N•.,U tM•hZI tfl•hfiVMNPU CU"""''h /L:.T 11 I eJtK.tSfiU•lf.l I1~H hUH t(l ltllePilOI ,,.PUI1VOL
,.......................................................................
160 REWH-10 4
I I STkESSI N,MI tM•ltJ I tN•l tNUHtLTI
c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
WRITE Ul ( INI riALil.t. tJt.UCk COft~TANf~ A'-0 STIFFNt.,::. ANRAY
wNJTE C.t II ~TAAINC NtMhlo(•ltJI tN•ltNUMEL TJ
"'HIT£ 14f II OISP INeMI•M•I•21tN•hNUMrtPU REWIND 2
~ETURH P4A•41"'
c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
lviJU FO~MAT
1l2A61
NO• 2•NO
ND2•Z•NO
100, FURMA T 11814 I NIJMULK•v
J\)lU FORMAT 17Fl0tUI c
IC,U FONMAT CI••6Fl""•"l 00 210 N•l tNUZ
lOZU 'QMJotAT ll't, .. Flu, .. t UINI•UeU
·l"Z' FVR""AT t t••z,a.zt 00 21U
M•ltM6AND
lUlU FQRM-'f C,U,FIIeZI ZlU AINtMI•IJ,v ,
,..•..................................................................•.
hUS ,ORMAT lllUe'!JF lo,~,JI
lO .. D I"OAMAT 11lJt4Flve41
c••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
C FO~M S.tiHN(S.$ MATRIX IN BLOCkS
ZUUD '0RMAT llH6 1111 lZA6t
ZUUS 'OAMAT lllti'"'TUUL P'tU, (l(Mf~T~ •I.. 21H TOTAL NO• NODES •I• JOCJ NUMUL~•NW-tdLK+l
l 21H FUUNUATIO"'f Elll"tNTS•I.. ZlH '0UNl\ATION NOnES •I• NH•NB•I NUi4UlK+lt
2 2lH CuFHMDAI-4 H£14ENTS •14 I 21H CUFFEROAJ.t NODES. •I• NM•NH'"'Nd
2U1U FORMAT C21HONO. RCSfRAI,..EO NOOES • h I NNL•NM•P48+ 1
1 21tt NU, OIFFF.A£NT MATERIALS. • 1.. I KSHI,T•l'NNL•Z
Z 27H NU, CQN:,TRVCTION LAY[~$ • I .. I c
J Z7H NU• ITCHATIVNS PEA LAYf:A • I .. II NU•4EL•P.IUM£LI LNeZI
4 .. 9H NUNLINCAR CODE IO•lJN(AN, l•NUNLIN[AMI•••••••-•• 14 IF INUr<tCll ,H(• 01 NUI'tEL•M... XOUt0."4ELILN•21•1fCLLINUM(E.Lt t
' lt9H CUl.IE tO~ PRtStHC.l OF tlliATllt tl.IMCt!J IO•t.!Otl•YES.I•• I• OU ,. .. "" N•lthUMEL
6 4YH (UIJE FOH PUNCitiNC, FINAL STRl~S.E~ f •N0t1•Y[SI-·• 1• I(.MIN••·•II'<IIJI l•fl-'iit Nt 1 J tNP/1Cf.. l I tM-'NI Ntl I 1HP.;t "''' r)
,.......................................................................
JUit POHMAT tJZHU[ ... ~JH PH(SSU!(t. COEFt IN FNUN. • F6,) I IF UMI~ eLf• ffNL eUA. K.MIH eGf• ...... G4J TU . . .
l llH 1"\UOULUS R£DUCftON FACTOR • F9e6 II CALL LS.QUAOINJ
,..•....................................................................
ZO~O fCJMMAT fllliUtMUAN~t#'II:.NT CUVMOINATt$ I 5le'IH TUIE l.lFTtlOlt
1 llH CHl.:~f LVftYX•llH (.(Nll:.HliN"'9X,llH <.KEST RUitfft9Xt C 1• AOIJ ELLMtNT ltf1F'FNC$S. TO TOTAL $TIFfN(SS
l 1VH h)l AIGitf I ~le1HXt'tX.IHV.YAtiHIIIIU•lHYt9XtiHXt9XtlH'h
Z~o~Zl
J 9X•IHXe9XtlHl't9lltiHXt9Xt1Hl' I l1J'l0e) II
rORMAT lllH FUUitOATION ASSUMtl> TO Of.: AIC.IO I )
,.u
00 ..
00 ••v
1•1·•
K•l•2
2\IJ~ FUN1ot.t.T IZJ•i t-UVHLIATIUN (WMDI~ATES I 7lt!IH Lt.FTtUXe6H RIC.HT I J I•Z•NPN I N1l t •Z+k•lSHI fT
1 !tll•lHl<t'IX•lH'ft9X.lHX.'JX.lHV I 11f'l0e) .It Klt•2•1·2•K.
l\.IZS tUNf'IAT 12lH-foiAJ[MIAL PIWPt.HTY IJATAII/lJh U~ITS CONSTANT • Fit. l i t DIIJI•UIIIt+PCkKI
ZVlO FORMAT lll!lX,aH M00UlUStl3ltl4H POISSON NAfiO I 00 4ftU J•)t4
l )9H MAll. UNIT wT CON.::.JANT [XfiONENf Ot9Jit1HG•9Jit1HP'It DO ... o L•l•2
tul' FUMI'IAT I .. IH•MATL C PHI fAIL.RATIO N0"LINI1•Y[S.I If JJ•Z•NPNUhJI •Z+L•II+l•KSH.,f
2u40 FOftMAT ll91tl NOOAL POINT AAAAY II LL•Z•J•2+L
I UM ~p W•OI<O Y•OMO x-o•01~ Y•OR0/14 II IF tJJ •L£• u I GO TO lt)U
2U., 'OAMAT I )'ll'tlMOOAL POINT~ wUH G(OMETAIC RL:tJRAH•TS II) IF CNU ,c,t,, JJI GO TO •zo
ZU~O FONMA f I lZH NUOAL POt NT 1 I., 1 UH CAN NOT MOVE t PHIMT lUUVt Ml:tANOtN
lQ)J ,UHMAT I UH HUOAL ~lNh 14 tllH CAN HUYE UNI..Y IN THl Y•DIAECTIUHI CA~~ Ull
IU.. , _ , IUH - NINTt r.
tUM U" 100¥1 IIOO~Y Ill TMI •-oiRlCTIONI Ol~ AllltJJI•AflltJJIOliUt~~~
158
,........................................................................ ,.......................................................................
lt)J (UNTI~UF •oo Pt 2•1 t •Pf z•J 1-GAHt HTYPU•VOL/.,0
ltltV (t,~flfiUt RETURN
,....................................................................... ,.......................................................................
( J., AlJv
If IL~
LVf-fi.U~II\A1LU f"UH{t.,<;,
,Nt,., '"lAV ,QH, N011ATtN

Wlltil~
,[Q,
t::ACU ULOtJ;. IIF PH(!i[ltTI
01 C.U TO 6n0
IUOO ,UI<MAT ll4H lt"O OH HEGAT IVE AHEA AT ELLMENT 141
!NO
00 ~JJ III•NIIIl tN! ..
K•Z'N'"''-:,UI F J
Olt..l•llllr. l+fVI Nl
(tl.tll•••• I1111111 Illlll.llell·l································ffllfll

,OJ IIIK•\I•IH<.•11HX1Nt
,.......................................................................
( J. M.JUifY ;.11tFIIIt.$S E.WUATIUN!. 'UN UUUNUAMY CU~STHAINTS
60U NUMftP •IIIIJ• lr~P f Lfh 21

If 11'4UI~CN~ 1 Nl 1 Ot NUMNP•~AXQCNOHNPILNt2ttNCNPChUMCNPtt
00 6,0 M•l,NUMilC
If UWCfiH ,LT• N~LI Go TO 6,0
If INLICIMI ,C,f, NH ,uH, NHCIMI ,GTt NUMNPJ GO TO 700
N• Z•NUC I M l•l•IC.SHIFT
If 1Nf-1Xf,.4J 1lY• 0 •UH, NfiXIMI eEUt 1t GO TO 620
6lU 1f fill~ IJtiMI ,t,u, 0 •ORe NFIXIM'l ,[Q, 21 N•N+l
620 OU bltl1 MM•2•M8AND
.,_k.•N-M.Hl
IF IU. ,LEe OJ (,0 TO 610
AIKI(,,·I,\II•ueu
6)lol K"'•N+MM•l
IF INUJ. •Lft IIOll GO TO 640
Al~•"'·'~l• ..hO
6fllu CUHf INU~
A INtl) •leO
RINI•oJ,W
,.......................................................................
JF INf IXIMt ,[u, 0 •A~O• N tE\h ll'NB(IMI•l-ltSHl'Tit GO TO 610
6)-U CONtiNUE
,.......................................................................
t ,., "'~I Tl UL.UC.~ "'" TAf'E.tMUVE U~ LUWLM ttLUCK.tCHE(I(. FOR LAST OLOU.
7UD "HI fC IZ J fOfNJ tiAINtMitM•ltMI:IANOitN•ltNOt

00 11U N•ltNO
-.•NHtU
RINt•HIItl
RllthOeO
00 710 M•ltMOAND
AHhMt•ACKtMI
71U AIKtHI•U•v
IF IN"' ,LT• NUMNPI ~ TO JOO
WUV~N
,........................................................................
c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
luUO '0RMAY llJH BAND 'AIUTH • lh20H EXCEEDED AT Ifill 1::LEMf~T
END
~UUHOU11NE L!IUUAOINI
c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
(C.H'MVN II t•l T I 14[01 U I tNU"'(L T tHUMNPT tNF(L •NfNPtNPUN(tt
,.......................................................................
SUOROUTINE L5TtiiN)tN2tNll
CUMMON INI'I;;LI N~Nt 2 ' ' ' ' leUHDI lOO tll tJI(Pt ZU lt'I"CPIZH I
(.UM•<~Uii /f.ti'LLI N.,Nf .l ' ' ' ' I tUifUI JOOtll t XCYI .17) I tYCP llH I ,J,.._,:,
(Ufo\4<0\U"' /L;..I i I I I I Ut 101 t!tfl J •lUI t(.l J1 Jl ePt lO ltNP( fll J tYUL
,........................................................................
t_ui..HON IC_UAHI /lofVMC_LL ,NUUC.NI'tNCLL 1100 I eN<.NPilOOI U IMlN:,toN UAI ltll 1Uf l ' " tYI lt_-.1 tWI Jt.4•1_l _
(Ol"•<IUN IL H TI NLAY tLNtNOMCL.I Z~ ell tNIJMNPI2, 12 l 1HE H,HT 12$ ltNu141T tl t [UUIVALENCE IUVf lltUitiUYI UhVt -
,..•....................................................................
CVI"•"VN lt#.AT 11 NVN ... IN•ttUU.IZf!:t lt$Ht.ANI 21~) ePUISt 2 n I tt.AHilU I tREUMOo
,........................................................................
CVM,\401'4 /L.)T II ltJtKtSf httlO I t~TI hlOI JC I 3t ,, tPilOit .. Pf •1 t\IOL C OH INt. THIANUUL.AH ELEMENT HUOAt. POINTS• GEVMETAYt AHO AREA
DATA C 11 •l J t(l 2•lltCf ltll tCf 3t2110tt0t tU,tOel
,.......................................................................
NPf li•Nl
C INITIALI.ll ANU FORM STAE5$•STRAIN "'ATRIX N~IZI•NZ
NPf lt•Nl
DO lOu ll•ltlU NP141 •9
PCI fl•u,v BAt ltli•ORDCJt21-0A0fl(t21
OU hill JJ•l.tO BAIZt li•ORO IK •2 J -OROIItZI
lLIU S.llleJJf•..,,u BAI ltli•OHOf lt21-0ROI Jt2 I
VOL•O• oJ OAf ltZ I•OROIIIO •11•0RDI Jtll
IF IN eLE• NOMCLILr-.tZJ ,oR, NUMCEL eE'Ot 01 (,() TO lJO lU12t21•0J.IOIItli-OROCittll
00 UU M•leNUMCEL UAt Je2 J•OHOIJ •li ...OAOIItll
IF IN tEUe NClLfHII GO TO UO A~-tt:A•I UMUI J•li 11 UAUtll +OROiltli•BAt hli•OROflttl1'&At lellll Z.O
Uv COHtiN\JE IF IAH(A ,L[, OeOI GO TO •oo
At TuRN VOL•VOl.+A~EA
lJO ,MOOEhl,.., c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
·., tNLAY ,[Q, l .oRe NOMCLILNtU tl'O• Nf£L1 CiO TO UO C SET U... Tt:Ho<t;, FtJtoC STME.$So•ITRAift ANU STMAiti•OI~'I..A(lMEHT MA1AltLll
IF IN ,G£• NU"'Et.lllhlt ••NO•
N •LE.• NOHt.t.fLNt2ll fMOOEl•RI:DMOO c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
150 HIYP£-'"PNI Nt~ I AREA415• .. B,u•AHt.A
C lltli•FMOOL l•tuut.KINI+S.HEAR INI I C ll•Ct 11 1 t IAt<lAittt
C ll•Z t •FMUUC t•IUUC..IIOf NI•SHt:AN INI I Cl2•Cilt211AHl:.Afli8
Cl2tll•<llt21 C ll•C I leli/ARC.UI
,.......................................................................
C12•21•Ciltll C22•C I 2 • 21/AMl:.Ait$
Cl )tlJ•Fio4UL>tt•!JH[ARINI C2l•Cf2tJJ/AHEA118
,.......................................................................
Cll•Cilt )IIAAlA•I
C FVHM 10'1V UUAOt 5TI''~£S5t REOUC£ TO 1 1 1t CALCVlAT£ GRAVITY LOADI c
OU 2U(J M•lt2
I•NPNINtll UV'CltltMI• OAil•M•
J•NPNitftJ. J Ul/f2tltMI• I:IA.CltMJ
IIO•NPNittt4d UVIl,ltMI• 8AiltMI
CALL L~ltltlt:hlt UVI lt2t,.O• 8AI2tMI
I•NPNINt]l UVC2t2eMI• HAIZtMJ•.Z,O•BAIJtMI
J•N~HUhflll UVI )t 21M t •·BA IZtMI
llii!HPNUh21 UVIlt3tHI• UAI JtMI
CALL L:,Oftll ~,h)t UVC ltJ eM I ••dAI l•MJ
IF IVOC.. ,GTe OtUI GO TO 200 UVI)tJtMJ• dACJeHI•Z•O•BAChM•
PAI~T lUUUt N uvta ......... u.o
,.......................................................................
CALL EJIT UVI2tflitMh OAI]tM)efii,O
20'-' 00 Jvu It• l •Z JOO UVI1t4tMI• 8At2tMI• .. ,o
,.......................................................................
IH•lV-1'.
IO•IH+l c;; Ut":V'LLUfJ C..UtJLH NeP.• ITNAitt-DUPt MATRIX AHD TRIA"GL£ ~TIFFN[~;,
00 lu"' l•ltiH
5110•1 J•~IIDtltiSf lOtiO I
00 300 J•l•IH
JLI~ SdJtii•SIJ•II-SIJtiOI•SIIOtll
If IN 1Lfe N01'4£t.ILNtlt eON• H t6h HOMt:.LfLNtltt
I ' IN 1LEt Hf[Lt AETlJAH
RETURN c
........
AkE.Ati•W•U*AMl:.A
00 lOU l•ltfll
.STt lt Ill •$Tf 1t Ill •HUll• U+UUtllliAREAII

DO 400 l•loA lfU•II+ll•lltltl .. ll+l fYf 2• I I+VU til IIAMfAit
159
.>TIJtiiJ •!>TIJtiiJ +tfVI-ZtiHVIJtUJ/AA£AU DO 310 IC.•2tMBANO
.)f CJ• ll+lt•.,~l I J•lltll+ t CUt ltll+UC Jt I I I /AN£ AI) L•N•K-l
c JIU BINJ•~fN,-~INtKIIflflt
~UMI.I•\Jf
ltl J+lllltlt+Uf h i I N...,•N+N'f
~W4l•~UMIJ+UIItl I BINI·H•OINI
:.,uMZ•~UMV+VIZtll 11" AfNMtNUI•BINI
~UV.J•~UMU+UI h fI NU•NB•l
:,Uir4V•VC l•lhVIZtiHVI )til
:i,VMl•S.UMV+VI J 'II ~~c!~~.~~Qi o • Go ro •o~
$V""Z•~UfotV+VCZtl t READ Ill IOINitUINtflti.H•ZtMAANOJtlt•l•Jrtltl
,.......................................................................
~VMJ•.,~UMV+Vt Jt I I BACKSPACE I
c GO fO )IJoJ
,.....................................................................•.
00 )UJ J•& ••
JJ•NPIJI C OKDE" U~UO.HS IN 8 ARRAY
UUU•Uf)tJII!tUMJ + Uf,ZtJI15>UN1 t UlhJII~\JHl
VOU•VfltJIISUMl ,f. YthJII!.UMZ + YC3tJII$UMJ -00 k•O
YUV•Yt hJJI$VMJ + VIZ.JI'!»VM.l: + Yf3tJII$YM) 00 •10 N8•1t"l.o48~k
UUV•t.Jth,JII$VMJ + IJI,hJII$YNZ + UtJtJ)I,WMJ 00 411J N•ltNN
NM•N+N,.
1-111 •JJ •·~•• 1 •JJ 1 • cu•wu • cu•tvwu uw1 • cu•vw k•(+J
. ,...................................................................••..
$C II+& •JJ+ll•:tt lhltJJ+JI • CZZ'VOV + (,UifYQtJ UOYJ + CJJIUOU -10 8fKt•AfNMtN81
,......................................................................
Stll ••IJ+ll•~n• .JJ+ll • czJ•vwv • cu•uuu cu•vou + cu•~ RE TUII~
,..,.., $1JJ+hll h~fll •JJ+lt
!NO •
•oo RU~N
tNO
,......................................................................• ,•.•....................................................................
StJBNOUTtNE BAN!JOL SUUAOUT I NE LSRESUL
,.......................................................................
CUt•MON /BAN.$/ H8AMChr.UMtii..Ktlf1601tAJl60tiOI (UMMO~ I lit I Tl Ht::l)f lll tNUMlL T tNUMNPT tNFt.L •'tFNP ,~P\;~(H
,.......................................................................
CUMI"1UN /rtt't;;L/ ~._,1112 U t !I; I tOki)f JUOtl l eX(Pil HI t'YCP Cll~ I
C - IH!1-IA.U1E -C--L~I'!W/1!
-1-CO-AM! -NU<-~Ct~NU~(-N-P~J.tC-£-L-1-HH'H--.'tC~-l-l-'...-N
(Uf"'fo.ION /OAH:,/ HUANOtNU1<4dL'-tti f 160 ItA t Uu•BO I
,.,.. •• 0 (UI-4/<ION /L IF Tl NLAVtUhNU•.((L 12~t21 tNUMNP 12> •21 tH[ IC.f-IT 12!> l, NUM I I tl T
NL•NN+l CUI"'riUN /(,t.U"''I FNLI ll • ILilltCkLI ll •C. hcllltf..k~C l ltTRIZJ •'frtA 121
NH•Nf"''+NN CUfo4..t011 /MAf 11 NUNL INttWLK f 27!t J •~HEAR 12 'I) I tPUISf 2 HI tVAMf 101 tAt.IJMO.)
REWI~O I (UHoo4(}1t /r'IA Ul (IJNStCUEff 10 t t(XP I ll.l I tOOt lO! tVC,IlO , . , , 110 I tllllO~E.)
RCWINO 2 (t»>l"ll~ 11'\A. T J/ Cl f 11.1 ltPtH lltJ t tAP: I lUI tiJ(W'l I 101 tCEVZilOhCUCt t lOitAI.U
,.......................................................................
f4D•U CVMI'\QN IL:;.f 11 ltJelt:;.f lUtlOI t~l I ltlfJitCC ltJ) tPf lOhNPt•t tVOl.
GO 10 IZu Ol•o4EN!,hJN ~I Gl) I ,[PSI Jt tO I~~ •UUU J
,....................................................................... ,....................................................................•..
OIMEN:;.IOtot $IC,I rt Zl~t) l t[PS.I I 12?,_,) l•Ol ~IT I 100•1)
C lo SHifT 8~0CK 0' EIIUAIIOitS ANO RUO NEXf 8l0Cl INfO COR! OIMt:N~IUN $TN[S!Jf ZJh J It STNAINIZ7!'1tl t tO I $PI lCOtl I
EUUI VALENCE I ~rRE~5tAI ZUOOt ttl ST'IAI NtAt•t~OU Itt ID I SPt A 16o0001 t
,...................................................................•.•.
100 NB•Ne+J
00 lliJ N•ltNN C INIIIAlllE
N""•NI'I+H
BIHhtHNMI REWINO "
BINMI•u•"' AlAO lttl II.:..IKESSINtMitM•hJt•N•ltf4LUIIJ(LJt
00 ll'J M•ltMISAN'D READ r•t lf!ITRAINHitMitflt•l•lJ•N•ItHUHU.TI
AIPhJr41•AfNMtM) READ Ul tt OISP UhMhM•hllt .. •hfitU,.IIPTt
llU AfNMtHI•~o~,u IF liT eGf, ll GO TO JOO
c OU 10"' N•ltNl.H'4E\. T
00 lUO M•lt)
IF CNUMBLK ,[th Nnt GO TO 200
,.......................................................................
UO ~EAO 121 IU(NJtiAINtMhH•hMaANOhN•Nl•,.,l SIGI T I NtHI•\Itt.l
IF INS tCUt 01 GO JO 100 [P$1JINtMit0aU
,...................................................................•••.
SIGI T I NtMI•STNE~Sf NtH)
C Zt NtWCE I:SLOCI(. OF fWAtiONS t THIN WRJJ£ TK!H Oft TAPE 1 IQO CPSITtNtMJ•:iTNAII''HNtMJ
00 ZOO N•ltNUMNPT
100 00 2JO N•leNN 00 ZOU M•ltl
IF U.UhU tEO• (hOI Go TO ZJO OISPIJINtMI•OeO
Bl N IIIUINI lliNtll 100 OISPIIINti'II•OISPIHtHt
00 zzu L•ZtMdANO c
IF IAINtLf t[Ut OtOI GO TO 220 CTRF• 1~121+11 INIZI·T~I Z II•ICTNIII·f~lll II IIRIII•Illllll
C•AINtLI/AINtll tMUHf•C IN 12 I •CTMF
l•l<t+L-1 S.lL• ICNLI Z 1-TLt 21 I If CALf li•TLilll
JoU ~LR•I CHNI Z I•TN f Zl t/1 Tilt I t•CMRI l t I
00 210 lt•LtM8ANO JF CFNLill tEW• TLill tANO. FJIIRIU .£Ue IACUI GO TO Z,O
J•J+l C.AMF•GAHI 11
llO AI J tJI•AI ltJf•(IAfNtU GAMt>•CiA:.O.IZt
Bl I l•t:UJI•AIIhLI'8ffU EMOO•COEf I 2 I
AIPhLI•C GO TO 28v
l2U CONI I HUE lt\1 GAMF•v,Q
l)U CONTINUE GAJ40•GAMI11
EMOO•C0fFI11
JF INUM8llt .EO• NOJ GO fO 30"0 ItO OIHEN•£MCA>I I C.Aoi40'EMttUT'(MUHt I
,..•.................................................................•..
wAITE fll fBINitiAUhMitM•ZtMBANOitN•l•ptiU c•••••••••••••••·•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
( CALCVLAT£ frlL OI~PL-'CLMlfriiSt CVN~ltTiriU 1HUSt. lllf tH( Nl"' LA'Y{IIC
c;o TO lUoJ
,.......................................................................
c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
C 8AC<•SU8H IIUIIOH JOO NUM:f'rwP•r.oM,._.,ILNt21
I' tfrtUMCNt-1 ,lilt.• 01 1\iUMHP•HAICOf~OHHPH,htllt'-ChPfhVM(,.Ptt
...,.,...,.....
JOO DO JZO M•ltNN ()() '"" lt•ltNUMNP
1P llf oLio ltUOIITI <10 tO JIO
160
X~•N O•t ~TH(:., ..d Nt21 ... ;,1H.ES~I N•liiiZ•O
XXN•N/~1.1
UIJI• .. v•HC.,IHL,!ti~•H••z + 0••21
IF txXN •ll<~• fXNI)v•Ut eOH, N ,[Q, 1) PMUH 1. .0 Coli li•C+UC Jl
Jlu '""Vl>l T•1•" lii21•C .. VI l I
IF I~LAY .(ue 1 •OR• NOf.1NPJLNt21 tUh "-FNPt CtO tO 1U QC.I~<J,v
.u:, HUMf1PtLNtZtl 'MODET•M£ONOD
If' IN tU'.e .....~,..,.. ,...,lN•II tAHD• H , t:,ll-<l!.l'JINtlJ eECJe o.o eANOe D eC(.I• OeOJ C.0 TO.,.
JU OX.•UI.Z•'i•l)•F'h40!"(f Ul*l•'Ju,.,l J •141 ''12,,•AT ANZ t -~.TRE !»511ft) I tO I
O.,..Bil•NI•f':-.uor.T •16 HJYP[•I~PNII~,~ J
IF tNI.AY ef.Ue 1 eORe N el,.[e NFNPI GO TO JlO OCYlT'I•tJfll·t~l21
I' I"WV•<4'N._. elWt 01 ('il) TU U~ LH:Yt lt•ULYll 1<1 I '~1: lti,)(Y .. IMT Y..-t IIUt U
Dv J2>J "1•ltNU~CNJI I' IOlVF•l ,uy, "'•Ot 00 TU friU
If IN elY• 'KNPI!~IJ (10 TO ))0 ~fNLEIJ•Uf;.YI.k.V•..,,O
UO CLlNTI,..Ut:. GO TO 4~8
u' ox• .... u •tf 01;.\ILE.V•OLV~TH/tH:VrH
ov.u,o ~ TALEV•OfVL(V I RF f a4TVPE t
Uu Ol!iVIN•li•I)I':JPIN•li+OX
D I !:.PI~ 1 21•01 :.OP IN •2 J +DY ,..,,. IF liT .l.T. r-.uMITI GO TO ,.6)
IF liT .ll4• NvMITI OIS.PINtl1•015PITOhl1+01( IF fCIZI .Eu, (..,OJ 01~1•9?9,999
H Ill ,L\.1• NUI<~Ifl 1Jl!iPHh~I•VI5PIHNtl)+DY IF lOili eNEe UeOI Ut,I•Ufli/YIZI
TO•!:.WoC T I OJ .>VI Nt11 . . Z+O I !.P t Nt2 I ••21 VHT•GI1f•,..e.J
I' Ill .LT. NUMITI C,O TO 3*0 I, I'HYINJ •C.(, F!\11..1211 YHf•YCPINI•TLilt
I' 11..1.-!0INtll ,L[, CfiH)H OU•lOO.O•OI!JPINtltiiCTRfli•TlllU IF tYCPINI •LT. F~LI211 GHF•GAiotF*ITLI2t•Y(PINit
H IVW:LIOhll .ut,
CTI<If1Jf OIX•lOOeO•OI!!<PHhltiCTRIH•ctRil»> IF IX<.PINl ,...,,, FNLiltl UH•GHF
D I Y•} .... u,v•O I :,PIN •11 I£MOHT IF l.ll.t..YIPtJ •llle TLIUI UH•<IHF+C.Jt.MCJ•IU\:.Ptllti•H.IlrJ•~LL•YHU
OJJt•OI !JP I Ntl t •OIMEN IF IXO'INI •'-''• CKLilll UH•UtiF+CJI.Mu•IClNtli•Tlflt•Y'HTI
OJY•OI !JP I 'hll •01 M(N If IX1..I·'INI euJ, CRAIIII <JH•C,tt~•UA"'v•tiTMCII•Il(PINit•S.LR•YHTJ
PH INf 1\Jv:, 1 N tUX tOYt I 01 !IJII NtMI tH•1 tll t TtJtO IX tO I hOJX tOJYtN IF IXCPINI ,t,Te TRill! C.H•(tt1F
)•u CU"tT I NUf CJl•UI111C.,tl
c•••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• G.!•UI21/lJH
,.......... ····························································•
C CALC.ULAJ( ht( ~TN[~!tE!t AND STAAJNSt PJcJNT $-THAIN~ GJ•UflJIC.tl
PH I r-.T 103..., • Ntl.;t T~E;,Jt N•M t tM•l ' l I t IWI L I tL•ltS) tSfALfY•Gl tU2 tCihN
ARE AT f•t\N(Aft:.•AR[ATN•O•O c
NUMEL•NOM£LI LNt7 I •• , IF IN .L.E• NO~ELILN•ZI •OR, MJJ<~CEL eECe 01 GO TO •60
IF UtUMCEL eNE• 01 NUMEL•HAXOifiiOHELILNtZhN(fLtNUMCELil 00 4t~'l M•l•NUMCEL
OU fri~U N•ltNUMEL IF IN •EU• NClLIMII GO TO *6:J
If I l l ,LTe NVMJfl GO TO 3190 " ' ' CONTI Nut:.
YN•N GO TO 1t7J
YYN•~USO ... 0 IF INUNLIN ,f;.(,l, vi GO TO *7V
IF IYYN ei:.!Je tYN/SO•OI tOR• H tEOt 1J PAINT 1•10 IF 10121 .Lr. <~t(..l GO TO •62
J90 MTYPE•NPNI N,, J •U IF l!:.fRLI:.V ,Lf. ltO eAhDe ',H[ARINI eC.T. 0•01 GO TO 46,
FMOO£ f •l•u
IF INLAY e[U, 1 eOMt NOM[LCLMtZI t(Cole NFEL, GO to 19~
••z SHF.ARINJ•u,u
GO TO •Tv
IF IN eCit.e NUt'lt:LILNtU •ANOt N •Lt.. NOfoiLLILfftZ . . '1400ET•MEDM00 " ' ' l:.IN I T•<.Uit~•CULt IMIYVL I *llut <!! t llOh~I••LA~IHHPU I
,,, oo •oo l•l•l [MUO•t:: IPtl Y1 111ev-.OEVLEV'COOE H1TYPf Jt••z.o I
SJGIII•Oeu PUI ~I•UUII"IfYPt:. I-FF liHYPt.: I•ALOC.lUII.IIll /(IJN~I
[PSt t I •O,O tPS.AX•OEV:,tR/1 E INJ T•lleO-DEVLEV I I
00 "00 J•ltlO POl SUU •PUJ 51/ t lleO-OOtMT YPE I*EPSAX 1**2•0 I
400 S.TIIeJJ•veO IF IPUISINI eGT, Oe490I POISINI•Q,.90
c SHEARIN I•EMOOII2 eO*Il•O+POI$ IN II I
,.......................................................................
CALL LSOUAOI N I BULl!:. t Pti•:,HEAN I Nil t leO•l•O•POI Sl Nil
c lt?O CO,..TINU[
AREATT•AR(ATT •VOL
EHOD•le0 1 UUU:.n•t•t a.o+POI SIN, 1•1 hO•Z•O•POISINI t IF CJl eLf• NUMIT) GO TO 600
ARE AT E•AA£AT E •YOL•EMOO NFEL•NO,..EL llNtll
ARt ATN•AREA TN+VOLIPOI S I HI NFHP•NOI<~HPI LNt2 I
600 REWIND 4
00 fill\)
11•.2•1 ••••• WRIT( 141 Cl!.lTRES~INtMitM.•l•lltN•ltNI..:MlLJJ
JJ•2•,.PNHh II 'WRITE Ul fi;,TRAININtMitM•1dltN•leNU)o;tLfl
Pfli•U•QIJJ•lJ WRITE 141 II UI!:.P INtMitM•ltlltN•ltNUMNPTI
410 PtiiJ•81JJI IF-I{.N--,Nlt NL~v--,oR; IT-,I'f[; hU,.HT ,OM, NPur-.(H ,Jit(, 11 RnVM'-
DO 1t2U 1•9tl0 PUNCH 1UJ~t I NtXCPI N I tYCP I Nl t I :>THI:;;,.:.I N•1'4l tM•I 1 ) 1 ,,.. i. .~ .... ·.-tl T I
Pit J•O•U PUNCH lOJS• IN' XCPOU tYCP I ttl t I~ INA INI HtM l eM•l t ) J eN•I t'-(JV[L T I
J.k•l-1 PUNCH 10l)t I ~,A{PtNI tYCIJihltUULK.t .. l ,,:,rtc..A.HHU 1 P.J; ~lNh·'ll•l t~v.tc..f.. T 1
DO ,.z..,
JC.•ltk.W. PUJrrfCH lU'-Vt I 1'-.ti0.-101 NtM 1 tM•l •21 t I Ol ~PHIItMI•M•lt 21t ,., h Nt..~hPY I
,.................. ·····················································
•20 PII J•PIII"'Sf I tKI•PtiO ~fTUqfrrf
DO 4]\J l•ltl l\JOU fORJo1Al

IS,.Hl NP DELTA .. Jt O(LfA ... Y .C-DI~P Y-OJSP fOI.t.L•
00 frl)v K•ltlu 1 48H X-OISPIIili Y-OJSPIH l011r4f;.lt YOI"tH "P II
410 EP!tiiJ•f.P~III•!iTIItiC.I•PIIC.J lOOS FORMAT ll4tt7Fioe4t1FllehUI
00 44v l•ltl UHO FOfMAT C!JuHlELE ELA$ fo\00 bULK. MOO SHEAIC MOO NV [PS•x
••o 00 440 K•lt3

$IC.IIJ•51&1ti•CIItK1•EP51KI
IF II~LAY ,[y, 1 ,ONe r-.OKELILPhll •fQ• NFEL, GO TO ••2
l ltlH I::PS-Y C.AM•JtY
l~U FOHMAT ll4•lFl\l•l•F6,1t6ffl 1 hl•1
1UZO FURMAT Cttti AVI.I,FlO.&.lOXtf'6tlt
EPS•l EP~-J C.A"""'Ax ELE II
IF IN ,LJ, NUMELILNtlt eON, N •GT11 NOMELILNtZtl GO TO ft•J IU2' FOM:MAT C)4tHit:.U:: SIG-X SIG•Y TAU•lY SIG•l SIG•h
DU •H l•l•J 1 )uH IAv-MAX THETA Slul/3 LEVEL SIVJ/Vt'f $1<1)/<tHt
NUMREF •NOM[LI LNt 1 t +1 2 llH TAUH/GH ELE II
[LHT •HE IVHT I LNl•YCPI NUMRk.F t lUJO 'URMAT tt•t6FlUeh6FI.lt('l
S Jlif 2 l •· I ELHT •GAHIHTYP[ t J lOU FORMAT 111Ut,f'IV•11
SIGI 1 J•SI612t•POI SIN III l•O•POISfNt I au•o'OAMAT cuo.-.Flv•••
••1 SIGIJI•U,O
"ft2 00 ttlt~ l•ltJ
c.......................................................................
[NO
IF IFMOO(t ,£Q, "EOHOOI [P~III•O.O
IF Ill ,LT• NUMITI $TAESSI1hii•STR[SSINtii•SIGIJttO•!f
IF 11T ,[Ue NUMITl STNESSIHtii•SIGIT INtii•:UGCit
tF tiT eLT, HVMITt STRAJNIHtiJ•STRAININtlt•EPSIIJ•l00 1 0*FHOOtf
JF liT ,t;.~.», NUHITI STRAIPUNtii•EPSIT Uhii•EPStlt•IOO.O•FHOOET
•• , CONTINUE
[•I ~TIU I Nl Nt 2 J +:, TRA I til Ntl t I /leO

F•l !J T.tAI Nllhlt-;,TI<A IN I Nt 11 I I leO
*
6•S.UA I I I !;THAIN IN tl I 12t0f 1 2+F . . 2 J
CJOI li•E+G
QUI 21 •E·G
QQI l l•le..J*G
I' liT •Lf•
NVMITI GO TO "'0
P.-!INT IOl ~~~ H tE"'WtUIJLKI NJ t~HlAA IIU tPO l$1 N I tl StRAI NCNtMJ tH• hJ It
1 t c.HII Lt tt..•l tl ltN
4~0 CONTI NU£
fMOOAV•AHEATEIANEA YI
POI!:.AV•fiR( ATN/AR(A fT
IF Ill ,(Ue NVHITJ PAINT 1020• [MOOAVtPOISAV
c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••"•••
,.................. ·····················································
( CALCULATE PRINCIPAL ~TNE:ioJ£S AND PAUtlt CAlCUlATE NEW E At.D HU
00 470 N•ltNUMEL
IF Ill tlfe NUMITI GO TO •SS
ZH•H
~:H;~:~o •EQ• .OAt N .EO• U

tlNISOtOI ftAJNT 1e2t
Ott C•l $1NU~I Noli+>IRlSSI No Ill /ZtO
161
APPENDIX D
COMPUTER PROGRAM
FOR THE
INTERPOLATION OF FINITE ELEMENT STRESSES AND STRAINS
FROM KNOWN LOCATIONS TO DESIRED LOCATIONS
Identification
This program which consists of a main program (FEMINT) and one sub-
routine (SLAE), was coded by F. H. Kulhawy (1969) using the SLAE sub-
routine coded by S. G, Wright (1969).
Purpose
The purpose of this program is to provide a means of evaluating the

stresses, strains and material properties at desired locations when values
are known at other locations. This program is primarily intended for
usage with finite element embankment analyses where a cofferdam is first
built using a fine mesh, but will have a coarser mesh when constructing
the embankment on the cofferdam.
The main program (FEMINT) reads and prints the input data then inter~
palates for the stresses and strains at the new locations. With the
values of the stresses, the corresponding non-linear material properties
are then computed using hyperbolic nonlinear relationships as described in
the LSBUILD user's guide.
SLAE is called by FEMINT for each interpolation to solve the simul-

taneous equations required in evaluating the stresses or strains at the
new locations.
1) Control Cards
a) Card 1 (12A6)
2-72 RED - Title card for program identification.
b) Card 2 (3I5)
1-5 NUMELT -Number of elements in cofferdam analysis.
162
6-10 NUMINT - Number of elements to be used for the cofferdam
in the embankment construction sequence onto the
cofferdam.
11-15 NUMMAT - Number of different material types in the coffer-
dam.
2) Material Property Cards (15,Fl0.0,8F5.0)
(Number of cards required = NUMMAT)

6-15 COEF} - Tangent modulus constants
16-20 EXP
21-25
DD } - Tangent Poisson ratio constants
GG
26-30
31-35 FF
36-40 CCC - Cohesion
41-45 PHI - Angle of internal friction (degrees)
46-50 RF - Failure ratio
51-55 CODE - Code for linear or nonlinear material properties
(0 = linear, 1 = nonlinear)
These values must be in the proper units and are discussed further in
the LSBUILD user's guide.
3) Stress and Strain Cards (Il0,5F10.3)
(Number of cards required = NUMELT)

a) Stress cards
b) Strain cards
These cards are punched directly from the cofferdam analysis and are
directly used for input at this point.
4) Interpolation Cards (I4,2F8.2,514)

(Number of cards required = NUMINT)
1-4 }. J - Element number in the new finite element mesh.
5-12
13-20
XCTR
YCTR
} - X and Y ordinates of element stress and strain
point in the new mesh. When the element nodal
points are numbered in the form I,J,K,L, the
stress and strain point has ordinates mid-way
between J and L.
21-24} Numbers of the 4 elements in the cofferdam

25 - 28 NUMEL (1-4) - analysis to be used to interpolate for the new
29-32 element location. These should be the· 4 closest
33-36 elements, 3 of which cannot be in a straight line.
37-40 NUMEL (5) - Material type of this element.
163
PHOGIU,fol: FEI"IffT I I'IPllftOU(PUTtPU-.CHI
C l l l l l l l l l l l l f l l t I I I I I I I l i t I 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 181~ ~z:=:; u~~:l:~~''tt:~tAJ S.fHt.~~E~ , LlhtiXtl~•
....... " ... .~~.zH
,..
l)JJoolt.,.. ..tiV" HlLHilltXXf J)U It Yr t l'JOJ • :.,lH[,l.Jil~Ot Jl f!.TRAINI t!JOt!l I )Vfi S.IG•II: SIG•'1 TAtJ•XY Ill
tJI··II.tf ...dV .... t..IJU f '> ltlXPf) I t~'llJf "I tllul) ltFf. I !.tl t<.C..C.I ~ ltPHII ~ ltMFC iU t 2UZO I"UHMAf l.iUHIINP\.11 ELEMENT .ifNAJN:, II f:IAt"H t.Ltt1Xt2H JltiAtZH 'YI
I COllCI'tl 1 )..iH [P:,-X [P~·Y 6AM-u Ill
OIMU.!.IOr• ,I(JI H t(..P!)I) I tAA.Utft ltUUI C. I tClU ltHUMEl.l tl I~JO FORMAl lllHI IHTlRPOUTIOOI INPUT AND OuiPUI I l l
(111111111111111 I l l 111111111 l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l f t e l "H [L£t6X•2H X•61tZH YtlOH FONM[N M(SH [l.£eM,U,
( Ht.AIJ ANll PIC(ftf IJ~PUT D&fA 2 'OH !if(,•X SIG•Y TAU•li:Y Alti.IC !':·HEARt
c••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• J 4VH POlS [PS•X fP~-Y GA'4•XY I l l
,.......................................................................
lltLAI) lU\hlt ttt.a•~'"LL T tNoJMIPtf tNUMI-IAr ICIOO 'OAir•.aT IJH X•,lVtlt5olltJH Y•,IO•)t,Xtii.Ht LLLMLH11J•""'~Ilt,."l'-•'"' t
..,NI,.T .ZOO>Jt Hl.OtHoJ.~£&.TtNVMIHTtftUMMAT J001 ,UHMAT I ]H .W.•f h•Jt!:lltll'f Y•, lUe.J •~Xt IUH LLtMl#IIT~••&••'h,HI"''"' t
c
PRI'-T 2..1•,, END
N(AIJ 10 1"' t CNeCOtFI ~I ttl!. PI H ltOOINI t6GI "'It I"F 1"1 tCCC INI tPHI tr.t t
I NF ll'tlt(OOE ll'fltft•ltHIJM~AT I
PHihT 2Uh t t ktCOlf f ttl tllPOtl ttJUHU tUC.t ftl tH I HI tC(( IPtl tPHI UU t
I RF l"t ltCVO£ f H t tN•ltNUMMAT I
IJP'IINT l!Jl)
lil:t.A~ i"'l"' • I Ht.lllf N I tYYC NJ tl ~1 HE!t!l UhMI tH• It )I '"''ltNUM£LT t
P" I t•T 1u2 ... • fHt.IIXf HI tH'I "'' t I :tTNt.:.~t NtMitM•l t.J ltN• hNUMLLT I
Pk I ~T loJl•1
Nl AU lUl"' t tHe.IIXI'-l • YY t HI 1 t .JTNA lt.fhtMt tH•le S leN•ltNuHEL T I
PM I "'-f lUlv • ll-4t.UI Nl tYY I HI tl ::O.fAAINt Nt"U •M•l•J ltN•ltmJMtL T I
,.•..................................................................•.•
c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
C INTlHJ.'uLAfE FUR .Stlf£$$1.,!; AMO. STRAUUt COMPUTE It G AJIIO NU
PRI~T 21Jl0 .
OU J!JoJ 't£'1i'•l•NUMJttT
AEAO lu)_,, JtJI.(Tit.YCTAtiNUM£LIJ.JitJ.J•htl
c
C IP4TEAPULA1'E: FUN $TR(SS£S.
c
00 Uu ll•ltJ
00 lOU l•lt41
CCC lt•~o~eU
II•NUMU.III
A811 J•S.TRE.;,S11Itll
A All ti 1•1•0
AAIItZI•JI.XIIIJ
AAIItlJ•YYIII J
1"0 AAIIt«ti•JilfiJII'IYIJit
ltOUE•O
CALL ,:,LA[ 14AtUih4•Ut"t4tCCtOE:ftK0011
IF UOOE ,[Q, Ol t".O TO I''J
PRINT )Y!J"'t XCTMt'YCHhHtUM[Lfllel•l••t
STOP .
110 'IGfli•CCili+CC IZI•.IICTR+CC CJ I'YCTIIII+CCI •t IX(T .. •YC'Ut
PvttCH 102"' • .JtMCtA,YCTAt U fGCll tk•l t ll
c
C CUMPUTE [LAST IC PAUI'ENTIIS 'AOM AIOVE STNISnS
' O•OtS•t SIGI 2 J•SIGil J I

R•o,s•tSIGUI•SIGtlll
TAUI"AX•:..tiRTI:..ICdli•!JICii)J •
.SIGl•C+UUMAX
R•RJ
, ••••• i~2~~~!! ~!. ~~ ~~.! !: :~~: ~ :e~~ :~ 1: ~!: ~~: ~~!: ~~2!: •••••••••••••••••••
~16J•I.l•TAoJo.-&X OIMEN.)JON AAIIU tltZ l t8BIN11 tCC I Nl J
=;
,......................................................................•
---or:v~-H,-r.-Jw- ..-JGl (DIII11il<1; ;;; ; ~ t = ;1#6~1111e;Gww•;w;w&55~~1i1i._1J1t-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.•••••••••
114TYPE•~UMEL I! t C MAlfll l.LIMIHAfiON LOOP• INfERCHAMC.£ RO•~ IF ,.(([!i~ARY
AN6•PHI U4f 'YPL 11!7 1 2'151719 U
Dt.V l•Z•u•CCC t MT'IP( t•Co~ IAPU,IItl,O•.SINI Altril t NMl•~-1
Dt:V2•2,\J*~INI ANr.llll •11-S.I PtUirfGII OEf•t,u
O(VF~oieOfYl+O[. Vl•S JGl 00 ISO K•ltNMl
OEYltV•OEV!t f RIOF'VFH KPI•IC.•l
IF fSIG! ,c;r, v,llt GO TO 170 L•K
tsULil•~HEAR•POJ S.•O•O (
Gv TO U·J OU'IOU l•KPitN
ll'O [I Nl T•<.OfFIMT YP[ 1•1 "'IGJII[XPUU'JP£ I I I~ IAbSIA411o(ll oLEo ABSIUILollll GO TO 100
f.MO~ohUNJ f 1 lll•U-i>EVL[YI(00£fMTYPt t 11'2•01 L•l .
POl SI•~GI~IYPE 1-f .. MIYPt I•ALOGIOI UOU 100 CO"T I NUE
[P~AJI•Ot Y~TMif[INI Tlll.O-b(VL[YI t IF It eLE• ltl GO TO UU
POts• POlS Ill ll•U-001 MTYPU I(PSAX t••hOI 00 110 J•ll•"
IF U11 01$ ,Gft u •• 90I POJ~•0,,.9Q TEMP•AAIK,JI
S.H£AR•t.MOD'II2 eUifJ,vtPOI $1 I AAU,Jl•AAtL•Jt
8UliC.•:tHf.Atll I ltU•l,QIPOI $-I 110 &AfLtJt•H..-~
110 PUNC .. 102"'' JtXC fR tYC fA tBULl•.SH!AihPOI 5 fEAP.iHtH IC.I
c
C INTERPOLATE FOR SfAAI"S ::~~::i~!~·
'
DE(•·OET
oo ,no K•l , , c
00 lU\J l•lt• 110 PIYOhAAIIC.tKJ
CCIII•t.~•"' DET•OET•PtVOT
II•NUMELC II If UUS.CPIVOO •LEe ACCI GO TO 999
eotl t •S.TRAJNIIItk I oo ua I•KPh"
..... ,,..,,.,,,,
&AI ltlt•l•O
A&C lt2J•UCtl I
FAC•AAI I tiC. II PI VOl
'" r,u.o.o
00 llu J•kPitN
,.......................................................................
ZlooU AAII••t•Ufiii11'Yfllt IJO AAIItJI•AAII•Jt-F&C•A .. IltJ,
I( ()I) [au tto netlt•nntti ... FAC•oau.t
,.......................................................................
CALL !fLAE UA•I::IU•"•"'•"•hCCtO(TtkOO(I
IF f IC.OO£ e[U, ..,, GO TO .Z'O C CHECK: LA~T ElEMENTt THE.N IIACl•$0\.V[
PM INT :Juvlt JI(UhY(TAtiH\JM£Lf I ttl•l••l
S.TOP PIVOT•AAUhNI
Z!JO EPSfli•CC ll l+CCIZ J •XC UhCC ll )IV( tA•CCf •t •XCtA•YCTiit OET•DEf•PtVOf
PUNCH 102"'' JtltC1'RtYCTRti!P~IIlltK•lt31 , IF UUS.frtiVOTJ eLf, ACCI GO TO 9tt
_;1 ~~~=: •em liP I VOT
Jf.JO Pfellltf 1UJ"'•· JtA(fP'It'ICIMtlfrtUMELIJJitJJ•lt,)ti$1GI.IJitJJ•ltJitiUL&t
1 SH(AH,POIStf[PSIJJJtJJ•ltJt 100 JPI•t+l
c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
IJV\.1 FO'ftMAT I UA6 I l t ' l
:,uM•O•I.i
00 ZlU J•IPltN
ltllU FUAHAT r lhFlO•oJtiF,.OI 110 S>UM•SUM+AAfi•Jt•CCt.JI
lU2tJ FORMAT t llUt''H' 1Ut31 CCII t•t88f ll•$1..it41/AAt I tl)
lUlO FORMAT tl-.t2Fth2t~llttl)f'l0•JI 1•1-1
ZUUO PORMAT t 1H6 I l l llAb I l l " II oGTe 01 GO TO ZOO
1 ZJH NOt REAO IN [LtMfNT$ • I" I l l AETuAN
2 ZJI'4 NO, l"tERPt U.£MENT$ • t• I l l 9tt KOOE•I
J ZJH '-0• OI,F£A!.NT MAlL,S,• • t• lilt RETUIIN
ZOOt PORMAT t,X,,H MATLtl.lltZH ktiXtlH "tiXtJH OtlltiH GtlltlH , , ••• r110
l ZH Ct6h4H PHIISH RFt'H COO! l i t
164
APPENDIX E
COMPUTER PROGRAM
FOR THE
STABILITY ANALYSIS OF EMBANKMENTS OR SLOPES
BASED UPON FINITE ELEMENT STRESSES
Identification
This program which consists of a main program (FEMFS) and four sub-
routines (CIRCLE, FSSTR, SEARCH, SLAE), was coded by F. H. Kulhawy (1969)
using the SLAE sub-routine coded by s. G. Wright (1969).
Purpose
The purpose of this program is to evaluate the factor of safety of

embankments on rigid foundations using stresses obtained from finite
element solutions. The analysis is performed by evaluating the mobilized
stresses and strengths along circular arcs passed through an embankment
and then calculating the factor of safety from these values.
The main program (FEMFS) reads and prints the input data and monitors
all operations by calling the following sub-routines for each circular arc
to be analyzed:
a) CIRCLE computes the intersections of the circular arc with the

embankment, as well as the size and subtended angle of the arc.
b) FSSTR computes the factor of safety of the circular arc by

evaluating the mobilized stresses and strengths at points along
the circular arc.
c) SEARCH is called by FSSTR to select the proper input finite

element stresses to use in computing the mobilized stresses and
strengths at desired points along the circular arc.
d) SLAE is called by FSSTR to solve the simultaneous equations

required to evaluate the stresses at desired points along the
circular arc.
1) Control Cards
a) Card 1 (12A6)
2-72 HED - Title card for program identification.
165
b) Card 2 (315)
1-5 NUMELT - Number of finite element stress cards to be

reado (Maximum = 500)
6-10 NCIRC - Number of circular arcs to be analyzedo
11-15 NSLICE - Number of segments along the arc to be used
in evaluating the mobilized stresses and
strengthso (i.e • , "number of slices")
2) Geometry and Strength Cards
a) Card 1 (BFlO.O)
1-10 TLX - X coordinate of toe at left of embankment
11-20 TLY - y coordinate of toe at left of embankment
21-30 CLX - X coordinate of crest at left of embankment
31-40 CLY - y coordinate of crest at left of embankment
41-50 CRX - X coordinate of crest at right of embankment
51-60 CRY - y coordinate of crest at right of embankment
61-70 TRX - X coordinate of toe at right of embankment
71-80 TRY - y coordinate of toe at right of embankment
t +y
References axes are -r +x.
Slopes facing to the left are analyzed with this program.
b) Card 2 (5Fl0.0)
1-10 CTR - X coordinate of embankment centerline

11-20 CCC - Cohesion of embankment soil
21-30 PHI - Friction angle of embankment soil
31-40 XMAX - Twice the height of the highest element
41-50 YMAX - Twice the width of the widest element
If the stresses from a half-section of a symmetrical embankment

are read in, the actual value of CTR must be read, If the stresses
from a full-section of an embankment are read in, the value of CTR
must be set equal to 0.
3) Finite Element Stress Cards
(Il0,5Fl0.3) Number of cards required = NuMBL±

1-10 N - Element number
11-20 XX(N) - X coordinate of element stresses
21-30 YY(N) - Y coordinate of element stresses
31-40 STRESS (N, 1) - Horizontal stress (ox) in element
41-50 STRESS(N,2) - Vertical stress (cry) in element
51-60 STRESS (N, 3) - Shear stress (Txy) in element
These cards should be punched out from a finite element solution

with the above information on each card. An option is provided for
this punch in the finite element program LSBUILD.
166
4) Circular Arc Cards
(2Fl0.0) - Number of cards required = NCIRC

1-10 XY - X coordinate of center of circular arc
11-20 YC - Y elevation of center of circular arc
167
,......................................................................• ,.......................................................................
PMOUHAM HMF!t t II'\IPUT et>UT..-UT J
COMMON /AcJC./ HLDIUieNUMLLfeN.!.lfCEeCCCtPHI

5UflUOUTIItf. F55ofR
(UH•"Uif /.lf]C/ H(Oil211fiiVI~[LTtN:)liCEtCCCtPtif

COM1>40~ /Off/ ILJitTLYt(LXt(L'ttCRJte(RYtTRltTAY
(Oio\.--tQN /CaHI I XC • YC eNAOtX I N.JL tY I NTL tX I NTNtY INTRtAt.IC.L[ tAR( tOANO ~3~~:e~ ~e~,) ~ !t: ;t~~A&~: i ~~~ !~7~;t~: ik~~: ~~~TAtAhGLE tAICtDA"O
,......................................................................• ,.......................................................................
CIJ•4MUN IJ..,LI XXI ~001 tYYC 'OOt tSfMtS..SI,OOt)l tXMAX.VHAX COMMON IJ'-LI AXI~OUitYYf ~UII~fR[_..,niJWtllt.lMAhYMA.
(UHJ<o;UN l~ttUI .:.J(,I.)It.UitteftJtOBt•ltCCt•I•~U,..[Lf61 CVM•'lOt. /MNIJ/ ~lUI )JIAAC,.tltltttbt•t tC(C•I tNIJMt.t.t•f
,........................................... ,............................
OIM~N!.ION XSI 1v011YL11001
,........................................................................
C MEAD AlotO .,MINT (",t;.OHtTIIIYI MAftNUI. lllltOP(ItT'f At.IO ELI!M!friiT DATA
C l"lliA~IlC
100 lft.AO lOll..,., HLUtr-..UM(l.ftNCIMCtN5\.IC(
ME""' lU t .. ' f LA • YL YtCt.X t(LY tCIU 1(1CY, TRill 1 TMY 1CTA tCCC ,PH ltXMAJttVMAl PRINT 101JI)
HlALI lU .h1 • I H tAll NJ 'YY f NJ tl ::.TNE~·I NtMI tM•ltl I tN•ltNUMEL Tl OCV 1•2 tLI*C(C•CO~ I Pit II I lltO•S INI PHI I I
IF tCTR ,[tJ, o.~J GO TO 31)0 DE.V,•,:,o•:.dNIVttt f/tl,O•!>INIPHI I I
OU 1.uv N• leNVMf.L T SLICE•It5<UCl
NNtNIN..SM(l T OAP•U•A"t(,li./SLtCr
XII: IN"- f •aJU Nl+l,v•l CTR•IOI.IIU I M'IIGo•A~I Nf t YC•Y I NTL I IRAOI
YYINNI•VYOH ll~C J)•XIt\11'L
!:tlHt:.,::.Udh II•SUH.S.~INt1) 'I'll li•YINfL
,..................... ··················································
51'R[$!:t I NNtll• ;,Hi£SSIN1ll T •NV• T ANC•JII(f • f AUT •5t TAL (VT •0,0
lUO .:.lHI:.::.~fNN•JJ•~.,IHES.JINt)l
,.•••.............. ~····················································
fiiUMELT•Z•rtUM[lf C C.OMYUft. :,LICt. l.I(O."'t.lH'ft THlN t.VALUATL o~TAL~S. :.TAT(
JUO PRINT zou,~, H[OifLX.TLYtClXICLY'tCRXtCRYtTlltXtTRYtPHitCCC
PH1r.l1' 1.1..11'-' 00 "vv NCOur~T•ltN~LICE
PlUtH 10 Jw, I~ 1IIIXUO tYY I Nl t I S.JJIE.S!dHtHI tM•1• 3) 1N•ltNUMlLT I J•t\ICOV..,f+l
,.......................................................................
c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
( ANALY~E
EACH !.t.IJ.I CINCLE 1'0 ITS FACTOM W' $A,ETYFl~O
TA~C..•TAN<i+OANU
XM JJ •li:C-HAIJ•COS.I ANG+UNCi I
YL.I J I •YC.-HAO*JI N f At\IC.HANG I
PHI•PHII!J 1 ,l'l) 17Y~1 5LAHC•HAD 1 UANU
00 4..JJ"'4•11NC INC TARC•TAI-IC+5LAHC
CALL ~ECO~O (fiM£11 C TNANC.•AIIIC,+ TANU-u. ,*OAHU
R[AO l01Ut XCtYC ALF•A TAt\11 fYL I J 1-YLI J•ll tl f .1$f.JI•JI$ I ..t-111 t
CALL CINCLE XC T~•JIIC-HAO•CVSI CTRANG I
CALL f'~$TR YC TlhYC•MAO•!i IN ICTAA .. GI
CALL .SECOND IT IME21 c
T IME•T I MEl-TIME 1 C CUMPUTE E~UIVALENT f[H ~TRESSES IXtYtXYI ON BAH 01' SLIC[
•ou PAIIH Z020t TIME c
c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
1000 FOIIMAT f lZA6 I lUI
POJNT•U•U
CALL ~t:ARCII IXCTRtYCTRtPOINTf
1010 FORMAT 18F10t0 I ~FlO,Ol JF IPUINT ,(u, v,OJ GO TO ISO
JOJO FORMAT ll10t5FlU,JI NUM•NUMEll1 I
ZOCJO FORMAT 1lH61/lZA6 I l l UH ••• [MOAN~C;fo4£NT COORDihATtS ••• I I 00 llU 1•1•1
1 UH TOE LEFT X • no,) t5Xt 4H Y • flO,) I NUMEL f l+li•,.U""ELC 11
Z 1dH CREST LEFT X • FlO,) ,, ... 4H Y • 'tO,J I UO SIGII t•STRESSIPIUHtll
J Uti CA[~T RIGHT X • "O•l t~Xt ,.., '( • FlO,J I GO TO )OV
ll UH JC • F10•J , , .. , .H 'f • Fto.J Ill
TOE RIGHT Ito co 1,"' tt•le'J
, ZIH ••• MATtNIAL PNOPERTIE$ ••• II oo zao 1•1••
6 17H FNICTIQN ANGLE • PlOtJ I 1TH COHESION • ,10•1 CCfii•U,U
lOhl FORMAT I , .. H1 [LEM[Nf ll•ORO V•ORD SIGMA•X SIGMA•Yt
1 lvH TAU•XY 1J ~~;~~:~~~~~Sf ll'tKl
c·············································••o••·····················
lOlO FORMAT I UH- TIME ISECONDSI • ll'lOeJ I
GO TO 100
[ND
AAf ltU•l•U
AAflt21••XIIII
AAI ltl I•Y'YII I I
100 AAII••I•XXCIII•YYIJII
lOOE•O
!1UUHOVTit\IE CIRCLE
c••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• f~l~K~~:E .l~~ 'Sf'•G~'t&"l\~ •0£ r llOO£ t
,...................................................................•...
COMMON IDEF/ ILli:ITLY•CLXtC:LYtCIUtCRYefA~tTRY PRfkT _)..Ql.""·' .UTH.t.Y..(fR!.{N.UM£.t..U-!-e-!~.t«.J
CO/o4Jio\Oirrt /UHI I XC 1 YC tMAO•X I NTL1 Y I Jrt lL •.Ill N lH 1'1 llrrtTRtANGL[ tARCtOANG STOP
ItO ~IGIK I •CC I li+CCC ZJ *XC fR+CC I J r•vc TR•CCI• t*ICTfi 1 YCTlll
,............... ·····················································•··
C LOCATE L[Ff INT[RSECTION c
C CllfoWUTE MVOILilEO ~TN[$~(~ ANO ~TNEHC.TH OH BAS£ W' SLI(£t T~[N , ,
RAO•YC•TLY c
lOEANU•Al ANI I C\. Y-Tl Y I lfCI.X•TLX I I 100 DO•SJNf2tU*AlFI
AA!'»E•XC-TLX E[•COSI z,u•ALF I
S JU(•SUR T t RAO*RAU+.1ASE•DASE t ~~U~•I u, !1*1.:.1 U12 .. ~IGt llll+t V•Si•t U61 l J-::.16tlf l*l£1•15161 J)•OCII
tU::,A~U•A f ANIMAOIIll\ ~.r t -TOEAirrtC. T AU• I U•!J* IS IG 121-S IGtl I 1*001+ I Sf Gl] l *Ell
"'f
$LPANU•l• 1ft1 S92&-A!'» 1 SIDE •!.IN I BASAt.IG)INAOJ
!,LPHT•!II L>E•CUS f UASANUI+NAO*COS I 5LPAHC.I
T AUh r AUT • TAtJ*.:.lAAC
FF'•U.NIPHII
,.......................................................................
Y INTL•!lLPHT*$ I Nt TO(ANG .. fL '( 5TR•CCC+:l-1Ufii•FF
X INTL•.:..LPHl*CU~I 'fO(Itt\IC:d +flJt ~TH T•~ fR T+::. fH*~LAN(
,...................................................................••••
F1•5TRITAU
C LOCATE RIUHJ INTERSECTION F 1•1 $URT IF l*F l+FF•FF l•fF Ill SORT lleO+FF*F'F I•FF I
VfRhMAU-1 JtC.-TLl I •T ANt TO lANG I ~i~~!~:~-~~t~~I; ~L ?~1 ~ ~~~;~gy~; r~• Grz ~-~IGta • ••••z t
.SLAhG•A~I Nl \t(HT*:JI NC l• ~ 70l?63•TOEANGt/RAOt .STRLEV•O(Y!'JTR/ f OEY1 +Of.V2•!:. I G) I
~LOIS f •YEN f •co:,t 1•) lOT96l-TOCANG I+MAD*C05C SLANG I S TRLEVT•:, I HLE Y r +$ TALEV*!:!L ARC
TUI !,T • .. 1..01 .,~T+ II HAO-VlM T I/!» IN I TU£ANCd f F)el,u/~lRLEV
X INTR• TOI !loT •CVJI TOCANG I • TLX fltOO PHINf ht.z..,, j'4(UVHTIACIIhYChhiHIJ ... t.LIII•I•l••l•l!tJC:,IIOt.:O•ll)lt~IW.t
Y I filM• fOhT•!.II Nl TOf ANG I +TL Y 1 TAVtF11F l•:i I 6h0[Y;., lRt., lNLl " ' ' l
,.......................................................................
IF IYINTH elE• (LVI C.O TO 10('1 c•••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
C AFTER ALL .SLICE~t CO~PUT[ OV[RALL F,Se
\'[RhYC-CLV
X tNlH•IIC+~YFCT I IIU,IJ•HAI>-V(H T *VERf l TAUAV•UUTIUHC
Yll'flR•CLY . F,.l•!iUCTirAUT
IF IXIIrrtTM •Lt.•
CIUI (•0 TO lnt'l ft 2•1-Jtnl r I H l*H l+H'H f -H f II.JoiJNl I l•U•H•H I•F'F I
c S flfLAV•!:tlNLEV fIT ARC
,.......................................................................
TQt.ANC..•A fAN I t(NY-TRY »!I TN l•CNX II Ffl•lelll::.tMLAV
::.JOE•I JNX-XCIICO:,t TO(ANG I PRit\IT 1U)..It JAUAYtFFltFFZtSTRLAVIFFJ
HE IUHT •I HU•XC I • f ANI TOEAhGI-YC+ TRV
$LAfiiV•A;, JltfltLI(,ItT•~Hu ' , HoT?f:IJ•TOEANt.l tJHAu• 1000 fORMAT tz1H•••• ~LICE YALU[.!t ••• I I Z6H :.liCE A-ORO Y-oRO •
!~LUI ~f •:.doC• I N.AtJ•co:,c ~.LAkU)+HLJt,Hl •COSC 1, !.1707'16J•TOEANGII l !J4H [LEMtlrrtTSI USCO $J(,•I SIC.-Y TAIJ 1Y $IG•N TAv-Mt
't JNUt•!lo\.01 JT•~ t't f TOE.ANG f + lNY I •BH F~l[1. ,.!tiTlJ !tiG-J !.dUl•l L[\r'(\. f'SITZI /I
X INfR•AU~I.:JLOI !JT•CO!ll TOEANC.I-TRX J 1010 ,URMAT 1311 A•f·1..,tl1~XtlH Y•FlOe]t~lllltHtH lLtM[NTS.••I•ttA•tH lt•t:i•
c••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1010 FONMAT t htZflO•J••I••ll'l•ll
C COMPUf£ Altl.l PNINT CIRCULAR ARC PROP[Rtf£~ 10JO FORMAT t29H•I . . FlftA\. ~AF[TY F ... (TOAS ••• I l l
c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
100 I 'JNTA•Y INTL t *•2+1
LlHGTH•~QNTt HilL t **ZI XINT~t•X
1
2
22H AYG, TAU MOtJILIU.O • fiO•J•!a>Xt.H FS .• Flutl I I
]S,H F~l TOTALt•CALCULATlO FROM AltO\'[ • rtG,J II
ANGLE•ACO!If t 2 ,uiAAD*ilt40-LEMGTH•LCNGTHJit z,oeRAD•AAOI I l Z2tt AYG, ~TR£:t$ LEVEL • f10,J•~X.t.H r1o,s ) rs •
ARC•R:AOIANGLE
PRl~T
lOOut RAOtXCtYC,XINTLtYINTLtXlNTihYINTAtAAC
c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
RETURN
IUUO F~~Al ll'INl••• ~LI"' C)HC.L~ Gt.OM£TW'f ••• I I 9H NADIIJS • 'lO•J I END
1 19N CENft.R POINT l • '1Q,J •'Xt •H 'I' • rlO•J
I l'IH LEFT INTER, llll • '10,1 t~At ltH 'Y • 'lo,J
] 19H RIGHf JNUAt l • '10tJ •'~' 4H "' • nn,J
• lJH ARC LF.NCiTH • F JQ,J I
~[TIJIIN
uo
168
,.......................................................................
StJA~OVTPt( SEAHCH IXCTRtYCTA,POINfl
CUI-4~:vN /AU(./ •"~lOIUltNUM£loftNUICE•CCG•t-'HI

c••••• ~~~~~~!! ~~. ~~:~.!:~: 'e =~: ~~~ :~ !: ~~:~5' ~~!:~~~~ !•• •••••••••••••••••
OIMEN:JION AAINltNZhBRINJt•CCINIJ
,......................................................................•
(IJM"'Uft /J,.i../ .UI~OUIIHI~U\IIt.,HC[o~,l~iJUt)ltAM-.x.YMAJl
U.IM•"'N /M,~U/ o~Jj,IJttiAihllijtiJUI41t(CI~t•NUMlll61
c•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
C M.IN lLJMJ•U JON LOUPt JNfEACHAM6t RO•~
IP hECISSUY
,................................,......................................
c••••••••••••••••••••••••••••···~··•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
C .;,t,L\.Ll l <.LU,l~f E.LtMt:Nf.!t tO OJLIP '-IMCLL PCJINf UCflhYCTJI:I
NIJM[Uli•J
~~~=~=~
DO l~U K•ltNI'Il
DO UO J•ltZ KPI•KtJ
OIST•lOLIUvUU• L•K
DU lOu h•ltNUM(LT
IF UlJSIU:tfiii ... XCTIIIII ,GE• XMAXI GO TO 100 DO lUv l•r.PI•N
IF IAIISIYYINI ... 't'CTAI ,c,t;;. YMAXI 60 TO 100 IF tAUSIAAIItKH •L[, A8SIAAfltltll GO TO 100
0 I ~fl.,• ... wJt TI I XX IN I •XC TR 1''2+C 't'Y I NJ•VCUC 111 2 t l•l
IF IDI$TN ,<:.£, Otstl GoO fO 100 100 CONII.UF
IF I'll ,f.Oe ~UH£lfltl GO TO 100 IF IL •L£• Kl GO TO lZO
01!"•'-0ISTN DO 110 J•lltN
N14IN•N flMP•AAU tJI
lUU CUk TI N\Jf AAI I( • J I • AA I L t J l
NUM[LIJI•N~IN 110 AAIL,JI•fEMP
IF IXXINHINI ,N£, kCt,_ eORe YYINMIHI efrlte YCTAI GO TO 1,0 TEMP•BRIK. I
POINf•l,v ABII(J•~HHlt
Ml TUQN B~«LI•TEMP
UO (C'"tffi'IUF' DET••DCT
NA•,.,UMlL I l l c
NA•NUM(L f 21 110 PIVOT•AAIIC.tKI
,..................................................................•••..
NUMELI SI•NUM[I..I 1 I DET•OET•PtVOT
NUM[L I 6-t •NUMEL I 21 IF fAU~IPIVOfl •L£, ACCt 60 TO 999
,..................................................................•....
DO 1,(1 I•~PltN
C SELECT 2 CLOSCSI HOMU• ON V(Mt. PTSt TO ABOV[ PT5e FAC•AAIItKJ/PIVOT
AAIItK l•u,u
H IAtt~IIUINAI-lXCNitll •Gft AB~IY\'tNAt•YYCNBttl GO tO 200 00 llu J•KPhN
,.......................................................................
J:CHf.CJ.•Je!I•XMAX IJO AAIItJI•AAf I•JI-FAC'AAIKtJI
'I'CHl(J. •U•l" IV MAX hO HUIII 1 lhH IJ•FAC*UBU.t
,....................................................................•..
GO TO Z~v
lUO XCHlCII.•u,z!J•xMAX C CHECK I..ASl tllMENTt THEN IA(k-SOLYE
YCHECK. •O, '*YMAX
ltO NU'~'l:LIJI•v PIVOT•AAINtNJ
00 HO J•1•" OET•O[ftPIVOT
N'41N•O JF IAUSIPIVOT I el!e ACCt GO TO 999
N~flf•N\JM[ll J-21 CC lfU •CCUU/PIVOT
OIST•loouuoo. I•NMI
00 JOv H• hNVMEL T 100 IPI•I+I
I' IAO~txXINt .. XXCNNPfll tGfe XCH£(11 C.O TO JOO SUM•O,u
IF UU,:,fYfiNI""YVINNNtJ tCITe YCKlCit GO tO )00 00 210 J•IPltN
IF IN ,[u, NA ,()M,
N •E<h fll8t GO TO JOO 110 SU'1•SUM+AAIIeJt•CCIJt
DISTN•!,QR f f I XX IN I-XC YAJI12+1 'fY INI•'fCTA 11121 CCI II• IR9f lt-~UMtiAAt hi I
J' IDISfN oGfo OISfl GO fO )00 1•1•1
I' IN oEOo NUMELIJII GQ fO )00 IF II oCifo Ul GO fQ ZOO
IF f J • [0, J t GO TO 290 REfUAN
NVMELI . . •N t99 ltOOE•l
DO liU JJ•I•" REf !MIN
Jo\•JirtUM[LfJJt !NO
JB•NUM£L I JJ+l t
JC • NUMfi t-.TJ•t:r
p: IXJ.IJAI ,[Q, XXCJOt eANOe XXIJIII e[Oe XXt.J(It GO TO JOO
IF IY't'IJAI ,[Q, YYIJBI •AND• YYIJBI eEOe YYtJCII GO fO 100
281.1' CONTINUE
NU~ELf~I•V
290 DISf•OISfN
NMJH•flf
)00 CONfiNU£
NUMELIJJ•IU4IN
)50 co•fiNV£
JF INUM[LIJt eGTe 0 eANOt HUMElC"t eGTe 01 RETURN

DO fi>OO l•le"
If INUM[LIII eN£1 l1 GO TO ~00 ·
If CNVMELUI e(Q, Ot NOM[LfJI•)
IF IHUMELt'l e£0, VI NUME&.UI•)
R(futiN
000 CONfiMU£
P'WINT hhtwt XCT,.eYCTJhiNUMELCJhJ•lt•t
IOOU 'OII"Af UIH ABOIIf IN UAACHt.l• 'lOoh,ltOH Y• PlOoh,lt
l· UH ILl"fNU • OIO I
If~
I liD
169
DISTRIBUTION LIST
No. of
Address Copies
Office, Chief of Engineers

ATTN: ENGCW-ES lt
Library 2
Washington, D. C. 20314
Each Corps of Engineers Division

ATTN: Chief, Geology, Soils, and Materials Branch,
Engineering Division 2 ea
~ach Corps of Engineer.s District

ATT'~: Chie£', Foundation and Materials Brax1ch,
Engineering Division 1 ea
Director, ~uclear Cratering Group 2

1J. S. Army Corps of Engineers
AT'l'R: NCG-ES
I,awrence Radiation Laboratory
P. 0. Box 808
Livermore, Calif. 94550
District Engineer 2
U. S. Army Engineer District, Jacksonville
ATTN: SAJGI
.Jacksonville, Fla. 32201
~ George E~ Bert:cam_
Jvl.r L
L+701 Kenmore Avenue, Apartment 819
Alexandria, Va. 22304
~. Stanley D. Wilson 1
1105 North 38th Street
Seattle, Wash. 98103
Prof. Arthur Casagrande l

Pierce Hall, Harvard University
Cambridge, Mass. 02138
Mr. John Lowe III 1

Tippetts-Abbett-McCarthy-Stratton
375 Park Avenue
New York, N. Y. 10022
Prof. Ralph B. Peck 1

Denartment of Civil Engineering, University of Illinois
Urbana, Ill. 61801
1
No. of
Address Copies
Prof. Steve J. Poulos 1

Pierce Hall, Harvard University
Cambridge, ~;!ass. 02138
Prof. Ronal8 C. Hirschfield l

Room 1-:no
Massachus<ctts Institute of Technology
Cambridg(;, Mass. 02139
Prof. H. Bolton Seed 1

Department o:i' Civil Engineering, University of California
!.~e:>:>keley, Cal2.f. 91-t T"-0
Prof. James !.Cichael Dunca.11 25

Depart'Y'.c:r.t o~· Civil Engineerinp;, Fni vers i -:,y of Cali:!:'ornia
"·c:rkeley, Ca~-::.~n. 94720
Defense Docu~entation Center 20

A'l'TN': .Y~.
:li..eyer Kahn
Cameron Station
AleXaJ1dTia, Va. 22311-t
2
Unclassified
Security Claaairlcatlon
DOCUMENT CONTROL OAT A • R & D
(Securlt)' cl•••lllcatJott of title, body ol •b•tract and Jnd••ln4 ~t~~notatlon muet b4t entered when th• o"r•ll "___~'!?!' I• ctaeellled)
1. ORIGINATING ACTIVITY (CotpOHta.uthOI) Ia. RI£F'ORT SECURITY CLASSI~ICATION
College of Engineering, Office of Research Services Unclassified

University of California, Berkeley, California 2b. GROUP
1. AllPOAT TITLE
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSES OF STRESSES AND MOVEMENTS IN EMBANKMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION
4. DESC.-IPTIYE NO TiltS (T}-pa ol report .nd lnclueiY• dlltea)

Final report
e. AU THORCSJ (Flret tYme, middle lnlllal, laet name)
F. H. Kulhawy
J. M. Duncan
H. 13. Seed
e. REPORT OATE 71J. TOTAL NO. O'F PAGES
17b. ;~OF REFS
November 1969 165
a.. CO,.. TRACT OR <;RANT NO. k. ORIGINATOA"I REPORT NU~ER(S)
DAC'tl3')-68-C -0078
b. PROJECT NO.
~E-69-4
e. Db. OTHER REPORT NO(S) (Any othef' num&.re thllt m.y be aaa/Qned
thl• report) U. S. Arcy Engineer "ria terways
d.
Experiment Station Contract Report S-69-8
tO. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
This docwnent has been approved for public release and sale; its distribution is
uxllimited.
11. SUPPL.EMENTARY NOTES 12. SPONSORING MILITARY ACTIVITY
Prepared under contract for U. s. Army Office, Chief of Engineers, u. s. Army

Engineer Waterways Experiment Station Washington, D. c.
Vicksburg, Mississippi
13. ABSTRACT
The objective of this investigation was to develop procedures for conducting
finite element analyses of stresses and movements in emba~~ents during construction.
The procedures developed involve incremental analyses, simulating successive stages
duri~g construction of the emban.~ent, and employ nonlinear stress-strain parameters
determined from the results of laboratory tests. Previous studies of the nonlinear,
stress-dependent stress-strain behavior of soils were extended during this investiga-
tion to include variations of Poisso!1 1 S ratio values as ;rell as modulus values for use
in incremental analyses. In order to examine the suitability of these procedures for
representing the stress-strain characteristics of a wide variety of soils under both
drained and undrained test conditio!ls, the procedures were applied to 46 differe!lt
soils, rang:.ne; from cobble sizes to highly plastic clays, for which stress-strain in-
formation had been published or was available from other sources. In each case it was
found that the simple procedures developed for representing nonlinear, stress-
dependent soil stress-strain behavior were convenient and provided reasonably accurate
representations of the actual soil behavior. A finite element computer program was
developed for incremental analyses of embankment stresses and deformations, incorpo-
rating these nonlinear stress-strain characteristics, and this computer program was
used to conduct a series of analyses of the deformations in Otter Brook Dam during
construction. These analyses showed that the vertical displacements (settlements)
within an embankment during construction are affected very strongly by the value of
soil modulus, and the horizontal displacements are affected very strongly by the value
of Poisson's ratio. The vertical and horizontal displacements calculated using non-
linear stress-strain characteristics were in close agreement with those measured
afi'LACII• DO .. ORM 1471, t JAN ... WHICH 1•
DD .':'!'•• 1473 Unclassified
security Clautiicauon·
Unclassified
... security Clauifl~tlon

LINK A
"'OLE WT
LINK 8
WT
L.INK C
WT
Earth movements
Earth stresses
Embankments
Finite element method
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
iI
I I
I I I
13. ABSTRACT (Continued)
during construction of the dam. Studies of embankment stability shryNed that the
values of stress calculated by the finite element method may be used to define a fac-
tor of sa.fe~y 'Nith respect to either local over:>tress or overall stability. Provided
that the factor of safety with regard to overall stability is defined in a manner co~
sistent with that employed in limit equilibriwn analysis procedures, the value of the
factor of safety calculated '..tsing finite element stresses is nearly identical to that
calculated using the best limit equilibrium procedures of slope stability analysis.
Studies were also conducted to determine the effectiveness of these finite element
analysis procedures for calculating stresses and displacements in zoned da~s. Anal-
yses •Here performed for t•No hypottetical zoned dams which had the same cross-section,
but which differed with regard to the stiffness o:: the core material. These analyses
showed that the settlements of embankments are influenced considerably by the stiff-
ness of the core material, and that the stress conditions are strongly affected by
the relative stiffnesses of the core and shell.
Unclassified
Security ClaaelficaUon ·

Finite Element Analyses of Stresses and Movements in Embankments During Construction. Kulhawy Duncan

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Finite Element Analyses of Stresses and Movements in Embankments During Construction. Kulhawy Duncan

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

[ ', .· i 1 ..

CONTRACT REPORT S-69-8

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSES OF STRESSES AND

Report No. 'TE-69-4

T~IS DOCUMENT ~AS BEEN APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE

The general objective of this research, which was begun in June,

The contract was monitored by Mr. D. C. Banks, Chief, Rock Mechanics

The objective of this investigation was to develop procedures for

Previous studies of the nonlinear, stress-dependent stress-strain

A finite element computer program was developed for incremental

Studies of embankment stability showed that the values of stress cal-

Studies were also conducted to determine the effectiveness of these

CHAPTER 2 FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS PROCEDURES 24

CHAPTER 3 NONLINEAR STRESS-DEPENDENT MODULUS RELATIONSHIP 34

CHAPTER 4 NONLINEAR STRESS-DEPENDENT POISSON'S RATIO

CHAPTER 6 COMPARISON OF VARIOUS FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

CHAPTER 7 EVALUATION OF EMBANKMENT STABILITY USING FINITE

CHAPTER 8 FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF ZONED EMBANKMENTS 111

CHAPTER 9 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 126

LITERATURE CITED 129

APPENDIX B DERIVATION OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STRESS LEVEL

APPENDIX C COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR THE FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

APPENDIX D COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR THE INTERPOLATION OF

APPENDIX E COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR THE STABILITY ANALYSIS OF

1 Maximum Heights of Earth and Rock Dams from 1850 to

2 Solutions for Displacements in an Incrementally Loaded,

3 Solutions for Displacements of an Infinitesimally

4 Selected Displacements in Infinitesimal and Finite

5 Correlation of Displacements in Infinitesimal and

6 Hyperbolic Representation of Stress-Strain Curve. 35

7 Transformed Hyperbolic Representation of Stress-Strain

8 Deviations from Ideal Behavior on Transformed Plots. 38

9 Experimental and Hyperbolic Stress-Strain Curves for a

10 Experimental and Hyperbolic Stress-Strain Curves for a

11 Variations of Initial Tangent Modulus with Confining

12 Variation of Nonlinear Modulus Parameters with Relative

13 Variation of Nonlinear Modulus Parameters with Maximum

14 Strength Parameters for Compacted Pittsburg Sandy Clay

15 Nonlinear Modulus Parameters for Compacted Pittsburg

16 Typical Strain Patterns in Soils During Shear. 56

17 Experimental and Hyperbolic Axial Strain-Radial

18 Experimental and Hyperbolic Axial Strain-Radial Strain

19 Variations of Initial Tangent Poisson Ratio with

20 Variation of Nonlinear Poisson Ratio Parameters with

21 Variation of Nonlinear Poisson Ratio Parameters with

22 Nonlinear Poisson Ratio Parameters for Compacted

23 Otter Brook Dam. (After Linell and Shea, 1960) 71

24 Finite Element Mesh for Otter Brook Dam. 72

25 Displacements in Otter Brook Dam Using a Nonlinear

26 Displacements within Otter Brook Dam Using a Nonlinear

27 Principal Stress Contours in Otter Brook Dam Using a

28 Contours of Mobilized Strength in Otter Brook Dam Using

29 Elastic Parameters in Otter Brook Dam. 81

30 Measured and Adjusted Displacements of Bridge Pier in

31 Combinations of Elastic Constants Required for Various

32 Displacements of Bridge Pier in Upstream Face of

33 Displacements of Upstream Face of Otter Brook Dam as

34 Comparisons of Horizontal Displacements in Otter Brook

35 Comparisons of Vertical Displacements in Otter Brook

36 Comparisons of Major Principal Stresses in Otter Brook

37 Comparisons of Minor Principal Stresses in Otter Brook

38 Comparisons of Maximum Shear Stresses in Otter Brook

39 Contours of Major Principal Stress in Otter Brook Dam

40 Contours of Major Principal Stress in Otter Brook Dam