Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T23:21:30.623Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Exploring the Evolution of Lateral Earth Pressure using the Distinct Element Method

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 November 2013

M.-C. Weng ,
C.-C. Cheng  and
J.-S. Chiou
M.-C. Weng*
Affiliation:
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, National University of Kaohsiung, Kaohsiung, Taiwan 81148, R.O.C.
C.-C. Cheng
Affiliation:
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, National University of Kaohsiung, Kaohsiung, Taiwan 81148, R.O.C.
J.-S. Chiou
Affiliation:
National Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering, Taipei, Taiwan 10668, R.O.C.
*
[email protected]
Get access

Abstract

This study adopted the distinct element method (DEM) to explore the key influencing factors on the variations of lateral earth pressure, including packing type, interior friction angle, particle stiffness and particle size. The reference parameters for the DEM model were retrieved from direct shear tests of a rod assembly. Based on the reference parameters, the evolution of lateral earth pressure is further simulated, and a parametric study was conducted. The results showed that: (1) the analysis model could effectively capture the variation of lateral earth pressure under both active and passive conditions, and the simulated failure patterns were consistent with those from the sandbox tests; (2) the greater interior friction angle ϕinterior decreased the active coefficient Ka and increased the passive coefficient Kp; (3) increasing particle stiffness decreased the active coefficient Ka and increased the passive coefficient Kp; (4) larger particle sizes led to a larger active coefficient Ka and a smaller passive coefficient Kp; and (5) when the particle assembly was arranged in order, its lateral pressure was much larger than that of the randomly packed assembly.

Keywords

Distinct element methodPFC2DLateral earth pressure
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Mechanics , Volume 30 , Issue 1 , February 2014 , pp. 77 - 86
Copyright
Copyright © The Society of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, R.O.C. 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Das, B. M., Principles of Geotechnical Engineering, Brooks/Cole Publishing Company (2010).Google Scholar
2.Coulomb, C. A., “Essai Sur Une Application Des Regles De Maximis a Quelques Problems De Statique,” Relatifs a l'Architecture. Mémoires de Marhématique de l'Académie Royale des Sciences, Paris, p. 3 (1776).Google Scholar
3.Mackey, R. D. and Kirk, D. P., “At Rest, Active and Passive Earth Pressure,” Proc. South East Asian Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Foundations Engineering, Bangkok, pp. 187–199 (1967).Google Scholar
4.Naraun, J., Saran, S., Nandakumaran, P., “Model Study of Passive Pressure in Sand,” Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundations Engineering, ASCE, 95, pp. 969–983 (1969).Google Scholar
5.Hung, C. C., Menq, F. Y. and Chou, Y. C., “The Effect of the Bending Rigidity of a Wall on Lateral Pressure Distribution,” Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 36, pp. 1039–1055 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Fang, Y. S., Ho, Y. C., Chen, T. J., “Passive Earth Pressure with Critical State Concept,” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 128, pp. 651–659 (2002).Google Scholar
7.Matsuzawa, H. and Hazarika, H., “Analyses of Active Earth Pressure Against Rigid Retaining Wall Subjected to Different Modes of Movement,” Soils and Foundations, 36, pp. 51–65 (1996).Google Scholar
8.Cundall, P. A., “A Computer Model for Simulating Progressive, Large Scale Movement in Blocky Rock Systems,” Proceedings of the symposium of international society of rock mechanics, Nancy, France, 2, pp. 129–136 (1971).Google Scholar
9.Cundall, P. A. and Strack, O. D. L., “A Discrete Numerical Model for Granular Assemblies,” Ge-otechnique, 29, pp. 47–65 (1979).Google Scholar
10. PFC2D (Particle Flow Code in 2 Dimension). Version 4.0., Minneapolis: Itasca Cons Group (2004).Google Scholar
11.Calvetti, F. and Emeriault, F., “Interparticle Forces Distribution in Granular Materials: Link with the Macroscopic Behaviour,” Mechanics of Cohesive-Frictional Materials, 4, pp. 247–279 (1999).Google Scholar
12.Potyondy, D. O. and Cundall, P. A., “A Bonded-Particle Model for Rock,” International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Science, 41, pp. 1329–1364 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Cui, L. and O'Sullivan, C., “Exploring the Macro-and Micro-Scale Response of an Idealised Granular Material in the Direct Shear Apparatus,” Geotechnique, 56, pp. 455–468 (2006).Google Scholar
14.Cho, N., Martin, C. D. and Sego, D. C., “A Clumped Particle Model for Rock,” International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Science, 44, pp. 997–1010 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Wang, Y. H. and Leung, S. C., “A Particulate-Scale Investigation of Cemented Sand Behaviour,” Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 45, pp. 29–44 (2008).Google Scholar
16.Hsieh, Y. M., Li, H. H., Huang, T. H. and Jeng, F. S., “Interpretations on How the Macroscopic Mechanical Behavior of Sandstone Affected by Microscopic Properties-Revealed by Bonded-Particle Model,” Engineering Geology, 99, pp. 1–10 (2008).Google Scholar
17.Schopfer, M. P. J., Abe, S., Childs, C. and Walsh, J. J., “The Impact of Porosity and Crack Density on the Elasticity, Strength and Friction of Cohesive Granular Materials: Insights from DEM Modeling,” International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Science, 46, pp. 250–261 (2009).Google Scholar
18.Hentz, S., Daudeville, L. and Donze, F., “Identification and Validation of a Discrete Element Model for Concrete,” Journal of Engineering and Mechanics, 130, pp. 709–719 (2004).Google Scholar
19.Utili, S. and Nova, R., “DEM Analysis of Bonded Granular Geomaterials,” International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 32, pp. 1997–2031 (2008).Google Scholar
20.Sitharam, T. G., Vinod, J. S. and Ravishankar, B. V., “Evaluation of Undrained Response from Drained Triaxial Shear Tests: DEM Simulations and Experiments,” Geotechnique, 58, pp. 605–608 (2008).Google Scholar
21.Chang, K. J. and Taboada, A., “Discrete Element Simulation of the Jiufengershan Rock-And-Soil Avalanche Triggered by the 1999 Chi-Chi Earthquake, Taiwan,” Journal of Geophysical Research, 114, F03003, doi: 10.1029/2008JF001075 (2009).Google Scholar
22.Lanier, J. and Jean, M., “Experiments and Numerical Simulations with 2D Disks Assembly,” Powder Technology, 109, pp. 206–221 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.O'Sullivan, C., Bray, J. D. and Riemer, M. F., “Influence of Particle Shape and Surface Friction Variability on Response of Rod-Shaped Particulate Media,” Journal of Engineering Mechanics, 128, pp. 1182–1192 (2002).Google Scholar
24.Ibraim, E., Lanier, J., Wood, M. D. and Viggiani, G., “Strain Path Controlled Shear Tests on an Analogue Granular Material,” Geotechnique, 60, pp. 545–559 (2010).Google Scholar