1.

Appendix A

Additional elaborations on Hardening Soil Model

1. Cap parameters and Cap hardening:

For pure isotropic compression; for the cap in this case:

d  v  d  vep  d  vp A.1

If we consider the elastic swelling modulus, Ks and the elastoplastic compression modulus, Kc such
that:

 ep dP '
d  v  K
 c
 A.2
d  e  dP '
 v
Ks

From equation A.2 the plastic volumetric strain increment can be given by:

dP ' dP ' K s  K c
d  vp    dP ' A.3
Kc K s Kc K s

Considering the plastic modulus, H the plastic strain in equation in A.3 can be further written as:

dP '
d  vp  A.4
H

Kc K s
Where H represents .
K s  Kc
 2. The cap yield function

The cap is modified type of cam clay yield function put in an equation form as:

P ' a    Pc'  a   0
q
2 
2
fc 
2
A.5
M

Where q  1    1  2   3 and a = ccot p

3. From plasticity theory (associated flow rule and normality of plastic strains to the plastic
potential function) we have:

g c f
d  vp  d c  d c c  2d c  P ' c  A.6
P ' P '

Comparing equations A.4 and A.6 and holding dp '  dpc' we have:

dPc'  2 H ( P ' a)d c A.7

For a stress dependent modulus H, we may write the Janbu/Ohde stress dependency equation as:

 Pc  a 
m

H  H ref  ref  A.8

  a 

From this equation A.7 can be written as:

m
  3'  a 
dP  2 H
' ref
 ref   P ' a  d c A.9
 P a
c

Here  3' is the minimum eigenvalue of the stress tensor and Pref is the reference confining pressure.
Href is the reference is stiffness at the reference pressure.

4. Consistency condition
In the theory of plasticity, the consistency condition assures the condition that the stress state should
satisfy the yield function, thus:

df  0

df  f d  f   0 A.10
  ij
ij



Where k is the hardening parameter and relates the stress change to certain permanent deformation or
plastic deformation. In this case, plastic volumetric strain is related to the pre-consolidation stress Pc' .
Thus we may further write equation A.10 as (for cap only):

  f 
   d
 f  f 
df c    d  ' dPc  0  dPc    
' '

    Pc f
 Pc'

 f  2( P ' a)
 P '

 f 2q
  2 A.11
 q M
 f
 '  2  Pc  a 
'

 Pc

 f  d  2  P ' a  2q     2( P ' a )dp ' 2q dq
T
dp '
    M  dq 
2
M2



Considering an isotropic loading dq  0 :

 f 
T

  d  2( P ' a)dp ' A.12

  

Accounting the first line and fourth parts of equation A.11, equation A.12 we can have:
 

dpc'  P' ' a dp '
 Pc  a
 m
 ' ref   3  a 
'

dpc  2 H  ref   P ' a  d c A.13

  P a
 dp '
  d c  m
 ref   3  a 
'

 2 H  ref   P ' a 
  P a

For a special case of isotropic loading it is considered that q  0 and thus dp '  dpc'

dpc'
d c  m
A.14
 Pc'  a 
2 H ref  ref   P  a
'

 P a
c

From equation A.7 and A.14 we can have:

 1  Pc'  a 
m

 Pc'  a 
1 1 m 
 v   d  v  ref   ref
p p
 dpc  ref ref
'

H  P  a  1  m 
m
 H  P a
 A.15

m
Pc'  a  P ref  a 
   v  ref
p
  for m < 1
 H 1  m   Pc'  a 
2. Appendix B

Table B.1: Relations for shear modulus G0 for CLEAN SANDS and GRAVELS (Benz, 2007)
 Table B.2: Relations for shear modulus G0 of CLAYS (Benz, 2007)

Table B.3: Proposed relationships for the shear modulus G0 of entire soil groups (Benz, 2007)

3.
 4. Appendix C

Experimental Results on Small Strain Stiffness and influence of related

parameters for some soils

Figure C.1: Effect of shearing rate on the strain-dependent (a) shear modulus and (b) normalized shear
modulus for Orewa residual soil (Ibrahim et al., 2009)
 Figure C.2: the effect of over consolidation ratio on the variation of (a) shear modulus (b) normalized shear
modulus with shearing strain amplitude as measured in torsional resonant column (kaolinite
specimen) (reproduced from M.B. Darendeli, 2001)

Figure C.3: Maximum shear modulus vs. Void ratio for various confining stresses for Toyoura sand
(T. Wichtmann et al., 2004)

From Figure C.3 we can reproduce the following Figure C.4.

 Figure C.3: Shows (a) maximum shear stiffness vs. sigma3 (b) normalized shear modulus vs.
normalized sigma3 (reproduced from T. Wichtmann et al., 2004)

Figure C.4: Gmax/f (e) vs. normalized mean stress relationship of air –dry Toyoura sand (reproduced from
Iwasaki et al., 1978)
 Figure C.5: Relationship of normalized shear modulus vs. normalized mean principal stress for
saturated Toyoura sand (Iwasaki et al., 1978)

Figure C.6: (a) Normalized modulus vs. Shear strain amplitude at different stress levels (b) gamma 0.7 vs.
normalized mean stress ([Link] et al., 2004)
 Figure C.7: variation in empirical normalized modulus reduction curves, (a): EPRI (1993c), (b) Idris
(1990) for different types of soils

5. Appendix D

A) Flow chart for the numerical implementation of the proposed HP

model in PLAXIS
 ˆ T
T; ˆ * ; a; F; D;e; ed; ec;
ei; fe; fd; fb

Compose L and N :

 
L 
fb f e
tr Tˆ 2

F 2 I  a 2 Tˆ  Tˆ 
f f f Fa ˆ ˆ 
N  b e d2 T T  
tr Tˆ 

Intergranular
Compose intergranular
strain concept
strain tensor :
included (m R > 2)?
h; h ; hˆ

Compose :
 
L : hˆ  hˆ and N  hˆ

Compose tangent
stiffness M

hˆ : D > 0 ?    mT  1     mR  L     mR  mT  L : hh
ˆˆ
 

   mT  1     mR  L    1  mT  L : hh
ˆ ˆ    Nhˆ
 

Compose exponent
r :

stress
dependent r  r 0
strain ?

Compose exponent
r :
k
 P ref 
r  r 0  
 P' 

Calculate objective stress rate

and intergranular strain rate
T  M ; D; h

Updatestate var iables

T 't t  T't  Tt; ht t  ht  ht; e = 1  e  tr (D)

B) Calibration results

1. Calibration results for Berlin excavation-2

Layer 20-40m: Figures D.1 shows calibration results of this layer

 Figure D.1: calibrated results of HP-model from given HSS-model parameters (layer 20-40m)

Layer below 40m: Figures D.2 shows calibration results of this layer
 Figure D.2: calibrated results of HP-model from given HSS-model parameters (layer below 40m)

2. Calibration results for the tunnel excavation

The calibration results of the various layers of the NATM tunnel excavated in Steinhaldenfeld
are given in Figures D.3 to D.6 below.
Figure D.3: calibrated results of HP-model from given HSS-model parameters (fill)
Figure D.4: calibrated results of HP-model from given HSS-model parameters (upper marble)
 Figure D.5: calibrated results of HP-model from given HSS-model parameters (lower marble)

For the limestone layer given in Figure D.6, the calibration result was complex and it is only
the calibration trial included here. This calibration is difficult, because the limestone layer is a
rock; hence this layer is considered as a rock with elastic material properties.
Figure D.6: calibration trial results of HP-model from given HSS-model parameters (limestone)
Figure D.5: calibrated results of HP-model from given HSS-model parameters (lower marble)
 6. Appendix E
PLAXIS Results

Figure E.1: Excavation in Berlin sand: 2D mesh (left) and detail geometry (right) (Benz, 2007)

Figure E.2: Deformed mesh of Berlin excavation-2 using the original and updated HSS models
Figure E.2: Deformed mesh of Berlin excavation-2 using the original and updated HP models
 7. Appendix F

Material Parameters
Table F.1: existing hypoplastic model parameters for model comparison

Soil type φc [0] hs [kPa] n[-] ed0[-] ec0[-] ei0[-] α[-] β[-] e0[-]
Hostun 32 3800000 0.29 0.61 0.91 1.09 0.134 1.35 0.65
sand
Berlin 30 5800000 0.28 0.53 0.84 1.0 0.13 1.0 0.608
sand
Parameters for intergranular strain concept
Soil type mR mT Rmax βr χ
Hostun 5 2 0.00006 0.5 2
sand
Berlin 5.0 2.0 0.00002 0.5 2.0
sand

Table F.2: existing HS-Small model parameters for Berlin sand for model comparison

Soil type E50ref[kPa] Eoedref[kPa] Eurref[kPa] m[-] cref[kPa] φ [0] ψ [0] γ0.7ref [-] G0ref [kPa] vur[-] e0[-]

Berlin 25000 28000 100000 0.55 1 380 0 0.00008 88000 0.25 0.608
sand
Hostun 30000 30000 90000 0.55 0 42 16 0.0002 108000 0.25 0.65
sand

Table F.3: reference Hp parameters of Berlin sand-Excavation-1

Wolffersdorff’s model parameters

layer φc [0] hs [kPa] n[-] ed0[-] ec0[-] ei0[-] α[-] β[-] e0[-]
1(loose) 30 5800000 0.28 0.53 0.84 1.0 0.13 1.0 0.716
2(dense) 30 5800000 0.28 0.53 0.84 1.0 0.13 1.0 0.608
Additional parameters of extended HP
layer mR mT Rmax βr χ
1(loose) 5.0 2.0 0.00002 0.5 2.0
2(dense) 5.0 2.0 0.00002 0.5 2.0

Table F.4: calibrated HS-Small parameters for the Berlin sand- Excavation-2

layer E50ref[kPa] Eoedref[kPa] Eurref[kPa] m[-] cref[kPa] φ [0] ψ [0] γ0.7ref [-] G0ref [kPa] vur[-] e0[-]

1(loose) 22500 23000 78960 0.6 1.0 340 0 0.00008 73000 0.25 0.716
4
2(dense) 25000 28000 100000 0.5 1 380 0 0.00008 88000 0.25 0.608
5
 Table F.5: Berlin sand parameters of the reference HS-Small model-excavation 2

User defined parameters

Parameter Symbol Unit Sand layer-1 Sand layer- Sand layer-3

2
Reference shear modulus Gref [kN/m2] 75000 125000 131300

Triaxial secant stiffness E50ref [kN/m2] 45000 75000 105000

Oedometer tangent stiffness Eoedref [kN/m2] 45000 75000 105000

Unloading/reloading stiffness Eurref [kN/m2] 180000 300000 315000

Effective friction angle φ [o] 35 38 38

Cohesion(effective) C [kN/m2] 1 1 1

Dilatancy angle ψ (o ) 5 6 6

Power of stress dependency m [-] 0.55 055 0.55

Reference stress for stiffness Pref [kN/m2] 100 100 100

Failure ratio Rf [-] 0.9 0.9 0.9

K0-value K0nc [-] 0.43 .38 0.38

Poisson’s ratio νur [-] 0.2 0.2 0.2

Tensile strength σtension [kN/m2] 0 0

0

Threshold shear strain γ0.7 [-] 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002

Small strain stiffness Eoref [kN/m2] 405000 675000 675000

Ratio of G0 by Gur Gfac [-] 2.25 2.25 2.25

Skempton B-parameter [-] 0.987 0.987 0.987

Power for stress dependency m [-] 0.5 0.5 0.5

of G0

Power for stress dependency m [-] 0.5 0.5 0.5

of γ0.7
Internal parameters

Initial secant stiffness Eiref [kN/m2] 96662 154447 208642

Cap parameter (steepness) α=m [-] 1.48 1.87 1.88

Initial secant shear ftiffness G0i [kN/m2] 40280 64350 86900

Cap parameter (stiffness ratio) Ks/Kc [-] 2.15 2.07 1.59

Table F.6: calibrated HP- model parameters for Berlin sand in table F.5-Excavation-2
 Parameter Unit Sand layer-1 Sand layer-2 Sand layer-3
Critical friction [0] 31.5 32.5 31
angle, φc
Granulate [kPa] 5000000 10000000 14000000
hardness, hs
Exponent, n [-] 0.35 0.32 0.32
Critical void ratio, [-] 0.84 0.88 0.92
ec0
Minimum void [-] 0.54 0.5 0.4
ratio, ed0
Maximum void [-] 1.1 1.38 1.41
ratio, ei0
Exponent, α [-] 0.22 0.2 0.2
Exponent, β [-] 2.2 2.2 2.2
Initial void ratio,e0 [-] 0.75 0.72 0.68
or e
Additional parameters for modeling the intergranular strain
Intergranular 0.00006 0.00006 0.00007
radius, R [-]
Exponent, χ [-] 2 2 2
Factor, mR [-] 4 4 4
Factor, mT [-] 2 2 2
Exponent, k [-] 0.5 0.5 0.5
Parameter, βr0 [-] 1 1 1

Table F.7: Updated HP-model parameters of dense Hostun sand for element test

Wolffersdorff’s model parameters

φc (deg) φc [ ]
0
hs n[-] ed0[-] ec0[-] ei0[-] α[-] β[-]
[kPa]
33 3800000 0.29 0.61 0.91 1.09 0.134 1.35 0.65
Additional parameters of extended HP
mR mT Rmax r0 χ K Pcut
5.0 2.0 0.00006 0.5 2.0 1 1.0

Table F.8: Updated HS-Small model parameters of dense Hostun sand for element test
 User defined parameters

Parameter Symbol Unit Dense sand

Reference shear modulus Gref [kN/m2] 36000

Triaxial secant stiffness E50ref [kN/m2] 30000

Oedometer tangent stiffness Eoedref [kN/m2] 30000

Unloading/reloading stiffness Eurref [kN/m2] 90000

Effective friction angle φ [o] 42

Cohesion(effective) C [kN/m2] 0

Dilatancy angle ψ (o ) 16

Power of stress dependency m [-] 0.55

Reference stress for stiffness Pref [kN/m2] 100

Failure ratio Rf [-] 0.9

K0-value (normal consolidation) K0nc [-] 0.4

Poisson’s ratio νur [-] 0.25

Tensile strength σtension [kN/m2] 0.00

Threshold shear strain γ0.7 [-] 0.0002

Small strain stiffness Eoref [kN/m2] 270000

Ratio of G0 by Gur Gfac [-] 3

Skempton B-parameter [-] 0.987

Power for stress dependency of G0 m [-] 0.5

Power for stress dependency of γ0.7 m [-] 0.5

Internal parameters

Initial secant stiffness Eiref [kN/m2] 65488

Cap parameter (steepness) α [-] 1.47

Initial secant shear ftiffness G0i [kN/m2] 26195

Cap parameter (stiffness ratio) Ks/Kc [-] 1.84

Table F.9: HSS- model material parameters for the all layers of the NATM tunnel
 User defined parameters

Parameter Symbol Unit Fill Upper Lower Limestone

marble marble
Reference shear modulus Gref [kN/m2] 12500 41666.67 20000 239583.33

Triaxial secant stiffness E50ref [kN/m2] 10000 33000 16000 190000

Oedometer tangent stiffness Eoedref [kN/m2] 10000 33000 16000 190000

Unloading/reloading Eurref [kN/m2] 30000 100000 48000 575000

stiffness

Effective friction angle φ [o] 25 25 25 35

Cohesion(effective) C [kN/m2] 10 25 25 200

Dilatancy angle ψ (o) 0 0 0 0

Power of stress dependency m [-] 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3

Reference stress for stiffness Pref [kN/m2] 100 100 100 100

Failure ratio Rf [-] 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9

K0-value) K0nc [-] 0.58 0.58 0.58 0.43

Poisson’s ratio νur [-] 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

Tensile strength σtension [kN/m2] 0 0 0 0

Threshold shear strain γ0.7 [-] 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.00005

Small strain stiffness Eoref [kN/m2] 405000 675000 675000 2400000

Ratio of G0 by Gur Gfac [-] 4 4 4 4.17

Skempton B-parameter [-] 0.98 0.987 0.987 0.987

7
Exponent for G0 m [-] 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Exponent for γ0.7 m [-] 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Initial secant stiffness Eiref [kN/m2] 96662 154447 208642 415649

Cap parameter (steepness) α=m [-] 0.8 0.83 0.83 1.52

Initial secant shear ftiffness G0i [kN/m2] 10085.8 33840 16397 173187

Cap parameter (stiffness Ks/Kc [-] 1.62 1.72 1.71 1.95

ratio)
 Table F.10: HP- model material parameters for the all layers of the NATM tunnel

Parameter Unit Fill Upper marble Lower marble Limestone

0
Critical friction [] 29 31 31 37
angle, φc
Granulate [kPa] 30900 52800 33800 15380000
hardness, hs
Exponent, n [-] 0.68 0.8 0.71 0.4
Critical void ratio, [-] 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45
ec0
Minimum void [-] 0.65 0.69 0.68 1
ratio, ed0
Maximum void [-] 0,8 0.96 0.96 1.1
ratio, ei0
Exponent, α [-] 0.2 0.2 0.18 0.24
Exponent, β [-] 1.1 1.3 1.1 2.2
Initial void ratio,e0 [-] 0.7 0.69 0.68 0.65
or e
Additional parameters for m8odeling the intergranular strain
Intergranular 0.0001 0.00005 0.00015 0.00015
radius, R [-]
Exponent, χ [-] 2 2 2 1
Factor, mR [-] 8 8 8 8
Factor, mT [-] 2 2 2 2
Exponent, k [-] 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Parameter, βr0 [-] 1 1 1 1
pcut 1 1 1 1
[kPa]