HS-Small Constitutive Model for Innovative Geomaterials: Effectiveness and Limits
Publication: International Journal of Geomechanics
Volume 24, Issue 7
Abstract
Worldwide, an increasingly huge number of end-of-life tires (ELTs) are disposed of in landfills, illegally dumped, or otherwise unaccounted for, which causes significant environmental and socioeconomic issues. Finding sustainable engineering solutions to recycle and reuse ELTs, which transform them from unwanted waste into useful resources, has become a priority. In geotechnical engineering, researchers have performed laboratory and field tests to determine the mechanical properties of innovative geomaterials that consist of soil–rubber mixtures (SRMs) [i.e., gravel–rubber mixtures (GRMs)] that are obtained using recycled ELT-derived granulated rubber aggregates. Suitable engineering properties and low installation cost encourage the use of GRMs and SRMs in many applications, such as in free-draining energy-adsorption backfill material for retaining walls, underground layers for liquefaction mitigation and geotechnical seismic isolation systems for structures and infrastructures. However, due to the heterogeneity of SRMs, their ultimate adoption as geomaterials must be supported by constitutive relationships that can accurately describe their mechanical behavior under typical field loading conditions. The aim of the paper is to evaluate the effectiveness and limits of the hardening soil model with small strain stiffness (HS-small), which is present in many finite-element (FE) codes, to model the behavior of GRMs in geotechnical engineering applications. An extensive finite-element method simulation of drained triaxial tests was performed.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
All data and models that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Acknowledgments
This study was performed in the framework of the Research Agreement between “L&R Laboratori e Ricerche s.r.l. (Catania)” and the University of Catania – Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture: “Analysis of seismic geotechnical hazard for the study of level 3 seismic microzonation (MS3) and the limit condition for emergency (CLE) in the municipalities of the island with ag > 0.125g in which MS1 studies financed by OPCM 3907/2010 have already been carried out (excluding Catania included in another line of intervention). Lotto B (CIG 735384480A) - CUP G69D17001510009 - for some typical cases and/or macro areas,” and in the framework of the DPC/ReLUIS 2022–24 Research Project, funded by the Civil Protection Department.
Notation
The following symbols are used in this paper:
- c′
- effective cohesion;
- D50,G
- mean grain size of the gravel;
- D50,R
- mean grain size of the granulated rubber;
- Dr
- relative density;
- d
- grain size;
- E50
- secant stiffness of the soil at 50% of the maximum strength;
- Eoed
- initial oedometer modulus;
- secant stiffness referred to pref;
- tangent stiffness for oedometer loading condition referred to pref;
- Eur
- elastic unloading/reloading stiffness modulus;
- elastic unloading/reloading stiffness modulus referred to pref;
- eGRM
- void ratio for the gravel–rubber mixture;
- emax
- maximum void ratio;
- emin
- minimum void ratio;
- G0
- shear modulus at small strain;
- initial shear modulus referred to pref;
- Gs,G
- specific gravity of gravel;
- Gs,R
- specific gravity of granulated rubber;
- Gsec
- secant shear modulus;
- earth pressure at rest coefficient for normal consolidation state;
- m
- HS model parameter: power exponent that defines the strain dependence value of the stress state;
- p′
- effective mean stress;
- pref
- reference confining pressure;
- q
- deviatoric stress;
- qa
- damage asymptotic value of the soil strength;
- qf
- damage soil strength;
- Rf
- failure ratio;
- Uc,G
- uniformity coefficient of the gravel;
- Uc,R
- uniformity coefficient of the granulated rubber;
- y
- horizontal axis;
- z
- vertical axis;
- γ
- shear strain;
- γ0.7
- threshold shear strain at which the Gs is equivalent to 70% of G0;
- ɛa
- axial strain;
- ɛv
- volumetric strain;
- ϕ′
- effective shear strength angle;
- νur
- unloading/reloading Poisson’s ratio;
- major principal effective stress;
- minor principal effective stress; and
- ψ
- dilatancy angle.
References
Abate, G., C. Caruso, M. R. Massimino, and M. Maugeri. 2007. “Validation of a new soil constitutive model for cyclic loading by fem analysis.” Solid Mech. Appl. 146: 759–768. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6146-2_55.
Abate, G., C. Caruso, M. R. Massimino, and M. Maugeri. 2008. “Evaluation of shallow foundation settlements by an elasto-plastic kinematic-isotropic hardening numerical model for granular soil.” Geomech. Geoeng. 3 (1): 27–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/17486020701862174.
Abate, G., A. Fiamingo, and M. R. Massimino. 2023a. “An eco-sustainable innovative geotechnical technology for the structures seismic isolation, investigated by FEM parametric analyses.” Bull. Earthquake Eng. 21 (10): 4851–4875. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-023-01719-6.
Abate, G., A. Fiamingo, M. R. Massimino, and D. Pitilakis. 2023b. “FEM investigation of full-scale tests on DSSI, including gravel-rubber mixtures as geotechnical seismic isolation.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 172: 108033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2023.108033.
Anastasiadis, A., K. Senetakis, K. Pitilakis, C. Gargala, and I. Karakasi. 2012. “Dynamic behavior of sand/rubber mixtures. Part I: Effect of rubber content and duration of confinement on small-strain shear modulus and damping ratio.” J. ASTM Int. 9 (2): 103680. https://doi.org/10.1520/JAI103680.
Balaji, P., S. Dashti, and A. B. Liel. 2020. “In-Ground gravel–rubber panel walls to mitigate and base isolate shallow-founded structures on liquefiable ground.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 146: 04020087. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002310.
Banasiak, L., G. Chiaro, A. Palermo, and G. Granello. 2019. “Recycling of end-of-life tyres in civil engineering applications: Environmental implications.” In Proc., Waste MINZ 2019 Conf., 1–15. Hamilton, New Zealand: Waste Management Institute of New Zealand (WasteMINZ).
Banasiak, L., G. Chiaro, A. Palermo, and G. Granello. 2021. “Environmental implications of the recycling of end-of-life tires in seismic isolation foundation systems.” Lect. Notes Civ. Eng. 144: 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0077-7_5.
Benz, T. 2006. “Small-strain stiffness of soil sand its numerical consequences.” Ph.D. thesis, Institut für Geotechnik, Univ. of Stuttgart.
Benz, T., P. A. Vermeer, and R. Schwab. 2009. “A small-strain overlay model.” Int. J. Numer. Anal. Methods Geomech. 33: 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.701.
Brunet, S., J. C. de la Llera, and E. Kausel. 2016. “Non-linear modeling of seismic isolation systems made of recycled tire-rubber.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 85: 134–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.03.019.
Chew, K., G. Chiaro, J. S. Vinod, A. Tasalloti, and K. Allulakshmi. 2022. “Direct shear behavior of gravel-rubber mixtures: Discrete element modeling and microscopic investigations.” Soils Found. 62 (3): 101156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2022.101156.
Chiaro, G., B. Indraratna, and S. M. A. Tasalloti. 2015. “Predicting the behaviour of coal wash and steel slag mixtures under triaxial conditions.” Can. Geotech. J. 52 (3): 367–373. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2013-0476.
Chiaro, G., A. Palermo, L. Banasiak, A. Tasalloti, G. Granello, and E. Hernandez. 2022a. “Seismic response of low-rise buildings with eco-rubber geotechnical seismic isolation (ERGSI) foundation system: Numerical investigation.” Bull. Earthquake Eng. 21: 3797–3821. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-022-01584-9.
Chiaro, G., A. Tasalloti, A. Palermo, and L. Banasiak. 2022b. “Small-strain shear stiffness and strain-dependent dynamic properties of gravel-rubber mixtures.” In Proc., 17th Symp. Earth Engineering, 467–477. Roorkee, India: Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH.
Dangerfield, E. 2018. “Cause of Massive North Canterbury Tyre Fire “Unknown,” Investigation to Begin.” The Press. Accessed July 8, 2021. https://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/101790124/hundreds-of-tyres-on-fire-in-north-canterbury.
Dhanya, J. S., A. Boominathan, and S. Banerjee. 2020. “Response of low-rise building with geotechnical seismic isolation system.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 136: 106187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106187.
Duncan, J. M., and C.-Y. Chang. 1970. “Nonlinear analysis of stress and strain in soils.” J. Soil Mech. Found. Div. 96 (5): 1629–1653. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSFEAQ.0001458.
Fiamingo, A., M. Bosco, and M. R. Massimino. 2023. “The role of soil in structure response of a building damaged by the 26 December 2018 earthquake in Italy.” J. Rock Mech. Geotech. Eng. 15 (4): 937–953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2022.06.010.
Fonseca, J., A. Riaz, J. Bernal-Sanchez, D. Barreto, J. McDougall, M. Miranda-Manzanares, A. Marinelli, and V. Dimitriadi. 2019. “Particle–scale interactions and energy dissipation mechanisms in sand–rubber mixtures.” Géotechnique Lett. 9: 263–268. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgele.18.00221.
Gajo, A., and D. Muir Wood. 1999. “Severn–trent sand: A kinematic hardening constitutive model: The q–p formulation.” Géotechnique 49 (5): 595–614. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1999.49.5.595.
Govindasamy, D., M. A. Mohamad Ismail, M. F. Mohammad Zaki, and M. H. Zainal Abidin. 2019. “Calibration of stiffness parameters for Hardening Soil Model in residual soil from Kenny Hill Formation.” Bull. Geol. Soc. Malays. 67: 119–125.
Hazarika, H., S. M. K. Pasha, I. Ishibashi, N. Yoshimoto, T. Kinoshita, S. Endo, A. K. Karmokar, and T. Hitosugi. 2020. “Tire-Chip reinforced foundation as liquefaction countermeasure for residential buildings.” Soils Found. 60: 315–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2019.12.013.
Hernández, E., A. Palermo, G. Granello, G. Chiaro, and L. J. Banasiak. 2020. “Eco-rubber seismic-isolation foundation systems: A sustainable solution for the New Zealand context.” Struct. Eng. Int. 30 (2): 192–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/10168664.2019.1702487.
Jaky, J. 1944. “The coefficient of earth pressure at rest.” J. Soc. Hung. Archit. Eng. 78: 355–388.
JGS (Japanese Geotechnical Society). 2009. Method of classification of geomaterials for engineering purposes. JGS 0051-2009. Tokyo: JGS.
Ladd, R. S. 1978. “Preparing test specimens using undercompaction.” Geotech. Test. J. 1 (1): 16–23. https://doi.org/10.1520/GTJ10364J.
Lee, C., H. Shin, and J.-S. Lee. 2014. “Behavior of sand-rubber particle mixtures: Experimental observations and numerical simulations.” Int. J. Numer. Anal. Methods Geomech. 38: 1651–1663. https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.2264.
Lynch, P., et al. 2017. Guidance for storage and stockpiling end of life tyres for local government. Rep. No. 5629. Hamilton, New Zealand: Waikato Regional Council.
Mashiri, M. S., J. S. Vinod, M. N. Sheikh, and H.-H. Tsang. 2015. “Shear strength and dilatancy behaviour of sand-tyre chip mixtures.” Soils Found. 55: 517–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2015.04.004.
Massimino, M. R., G. Abate, S. Corsico, and R. Louarn. 2019. “Comparison between two approaches for non-linear FEM modelling of the seismic behaviour of a coupled soil–structure system.” Geotech. Geol. Eng. 37 (3): 1957–1975. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-018-0737-y.
MIDAS FEA NX. 2022. CSPFEA—Engineering solutions (v.1.1). Este, Italy: MIDAS.
Obrzud, R. F. 2018. “The hardening soil model – a practical guidebook.” In Z Soil.PC 100701 Tech. Rep. Accessed April 18, 2023. https://www.zsoil.com/zsoil_manual_2018/Rep-HS-model.pdf.
Pasha, S. M. K., H. Hazarika, and N. Yoshimoto. 2019. “Physical and mechanical properties of Gravel-Tire Chips Mixture (GTCM).” Geosynth. Int. 26 (1): 92–110. https://doi.org/10.1680/jgein.18.00041.
Pauselli, D., D. Salciarini, and F. Ubertini. 2022. “Three-Dimensional modeling of soil-structure interaction for a bridge founded on caissons under seismic conditions.” Appl. Sci. 12 (21): 10904. https://doi.org/10.3390/app122110904.
Pistolas, G. A., A. Anastasiadis, and K. Pitilakis. 2017. “Dynamic behaviour of granular soil materials mixed with granulated rubber: Effect of rubber content and granularity on the small-strain shear modulus and damping ratio.” Geotech. Geol. Eng. 36 (2): 1267–1281. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10706-017-0391-9.
Pitilakis, D., A. Anastasiadis, A. Vratsikidis, A. Kapouniaris, M. R. Massimino, G. Abate, and S. Corsico. 2021. “Large-scale field testing of geotechnical seismic isolation of structures using gravel-rubber mixtures.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 50 (10): 2712–2731. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3468.
Pitilakis, K., S. Karapetrou, and K. Tsagdi. 2015. “Numerical investigation of the seismic response of RC buildings on soil replaced with rubber–sand mixtures.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 79: 237–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.09.018.
Qi, Y., B. Indraratna, A. Heitor, and J. S. Vinod. 2019. “The influence of rubber crumbs on the energy absorbing property of waste mixtures.” In Geotechnics for transportation infrastructure, edited by R. Sundaram, J. Shahu, and V. Havanagi, 271–281. Singapore: Springer. Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering.
Schanz, T., P. A. Vermeer, and P. G. Bonnier. 1999. “The hardening soil model: Formulation and verification.” In Beyond 2000 in computational geotechnics, edited by B. Ronald and J. Brinkgreve, 281–296. London, UK: Taylor & Francis Group.
Senetakis, K., and A. Anastasiadis. 2015. “Effects of state of test sample, specimen geometry and sample preparation on dynamic properties of rubber–sand mixtures.” Geosynth. Int. 22 (4): 301–310. https://doi.org/10.1680/gein.15.00013.
Senetakis, K., A. Anastasiadis, and K. Pitilakis. 2012. “Dynamic properties of dry sand/rubber (SRM) and gravel/rubber (GRM) mixtures in a wide range of shearing strain amplitudes.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 33: 38–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2011.10.003.
Shabani, M. J., M. Shamsi, and A. Ghanbari. 2021. “Seismic response of RC moment frame including topography-soil-structure interaction.” Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr. 26 (4): 04021046. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)SC.1943-5576.0000625.
Shariatmadari, N., M. Karimpour-Fard, and A. Shargh. 2018. “Undrained monotonic and cyclic behavior of sand-ground rubber mixtures.” Earthquake Eng. Eng. Vibr. 17 (3): 541–553. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-018-0461-x.
Sukkarak, R., S. Likitlersuang, P. Jongpradist, and P. Jamsawang. 2021. “Strength and stiffness parameters for hardening soil model of rockfill materials.” Soils Found. 61 (6): 1597–1614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2021.09.007.
Surarak, C., S. Likitlersuang, D. Wanatowski, A. Balasubramaniam, E. Oh, and H. Guan. 2012. “Stiffness and strength parameters for hardening soil model of soft and stiff Bangkok clays.” Soils Found. 52 (4): 682–697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2012.07.009.
Tasalloti, A., G. Chiaro, L. Banasaik, and A. Palermo. 2021a. “Experimental investigation of the mechanical behaviour of gravel-granulated tyre rubber mixtures.” Constr. Build. Mater. 273: 121749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121749.
Tasalloti, A., G. Chiaro, A. Murali, and L. Banasiak. 2021b. “Physical and mechanical properties of granulated rubber mixed with granular soils—A literature review.” Sustainability 13 (8): 4309. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084309.
Tasalloti, A., G. Chiaro, A. Murali, L. Banasiak, A. Palermo, and G. Granello. 2021c. “Recycling of end-of-life tires (ELTs) for sustainable geotechnical applications: A New Zealand Perspective.” Appl. Sci. 11: 7824. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11177824.
Torretta, V., E. C. Rada, M. Ragazzi, E. Trulli, I. A. Istrate, and L. I. Cioca. 2015. “Treatment and disposal of tyres: Two EU approaches. A review.” Waste Manage. (Oxford) 45: 152–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.04.018.
Tsang, H. H. 2012. “Uses of scrap rubber tires.” In Rubber: Types, properties and uses, edited by G. A. Popa, 477–492. New York: Nova Science.
Tsang, H.-H., S. H. Lo, X. Xu, and M. Neaz Sheikh. 2012. “Seismic isolation for low-to-medium-rise buildings using granulated rubber–soil mixtures: Numerical study.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 41 (14): 2009–2024. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2171.
Tsang, H.-H., D.-P. Tran, and E. F. Gad. 2023. “Serviceability performance of buildings founded on rubber–soil mixtures for geotechnical seismic isolation.” Aust. J. Struct. Eng. 24 (4): 265–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/13287982.2023.2230063.
Tsinaris, A., A. Anastasiadis, and K. Pitilakis. 2018. “Numerical investigation of improving the seismic response of retaining structures by using lightweight mixtures as backfill material.” In Proc., 16th European Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, 215–222. Thessaloniki, Greece: European Association for Earthquake Engineering (EAEE) and Hellenic Society of Earthquake Engineering (HSEE).
Yildiz, Ö. 2021. “Numerical analysis of geotechnical seismic isolation system for high-rise buildings.” NATURENGS MTU J. Eng. Nat. Sci. Malatya Turgut Ozal Univ. 2 (1): 34–43. https://doi.org/ 10.46572/naturengs.872231.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
International Journal of Geomechanics
Volume 24 • Issue 7 • July 2024
Copyright
© 2024 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jun 10, 2023
Accepted: Jan 10, 2024
Published online: Apr 18, 2024
Published in print: Jul 1, 2024
Discussion open until: Sep 18, 2024
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.