Click the title below to display the complete page!

On the non-intersection dilemma


The current models of the small strain behaviour of soils, for modelling pre-failure behaviour, specify "translation rules" to avoid the intersection of yield surfaces. This work attempts to clarify the non-intersection dilemma, an issue which has far-reaching implications for the structure of theoretical models for soil behaviour. Using a series of proofs/disproofs, it is shown that the non-intersection condition is necessary only when a bilinear constitutive law must be derived. In some cases, this restriction may fail to describe the behaviour of simple conceptual models. The case argued here is that the intersection of yield surfaces is allowable and, on occasions, may offer advantages. The use of kinematic hardening plasticity with multiple yield surfaces has a history of more than 30 years. It has proved to be a very convenient framework for modelling the pre-failure behaviour of soils, allowing a realistic treatment of issues such as non-linearity at small strain and the effects of recent stress history. The growing interest in modelling of small strain behaviour of soils has recently resulted in development of several so-called 'bubble' models, such as those described by Stallebrass & Taylor (1997), Kavvadas & Amorosi (1998), Rouainia & Muir Wood (1998), Gajo & Muir Wood (1999), Houlsby (1999), Puzrin & Burland (1999), and Puzrin & Kirshenboim (1999).


Puzrin, Alexander and Houlsby, G.T.

Index Terms:

geomechanics; GeomechanicsGroup; Houlsby, G.T.; Puzrin, Alexander

Further Information:

Date published: 2001