CODE_BRIGHT-GiD

Sebastià Olivella
Jean Vaunat, Alfonso Rodriguez-Dono
Escola de Camins, UPC BarcelonaTECH
 Outline

 Introduction
 Brief Description of CODE_BRIGHT
 Tutorial Development
 Recent developments
 Applications
 Final comments
 CODE_BRIGHT: Balance Equations

MASS BALANCE OF WATER. Unknown: Pl

∂ w
∂t
(θl Sl φ + θ wg S g φ) + ∇ ⋅ (jlw + jwg ) = f w

MASS BALANCE OF AIR. Unknown: Pg

∂ a
∂t
( ) ( )
θl Sl φ + θ ag S g φ + ∇ ⋅ jla + jag = f a

INTERNAL ENERGY BALANCE FOR THE MEDIUM. Unknown: T

∂
∂t
( Es ρ s (1 − φ ) + El ρl Slφ + Eg ρ g S gφ ) + ∇ ⋅ (i c + jEs + jEl + jEg ) = f Q

MOMENTUM BALANCE FOR THE MEDIUM. Unknown: u

∇⋅σ +b = 0
SPECIES MASS BALANCE . Unknown: c
∂
(φSl ρl c) + ∇ ⋅ js = 0
∂t
 CODE_BRIGHT: Numerical approach

 THM analysis in geological media

Compositional approach for mass balance equations
Stress equilibrium (small strain, updated lagrangian method)
 Finite Element in space
Different types of elements available (1D, 2D and 3D)
Element-wise, modified cell-wise and node-wise variables
Secant method for non - advective terms (a)
 Finite Difference in time
Storage terms: mass conservative approach (secant) (b)
Implicit scheme (various intermediate times)
Newton-Raphson method to solve nonlinearities
Only first derivatives of nonlinear functions (due to a,b)
 Solution of linear system in CODE_BRIGHT
Iterative solver, sparse storage
Direct solver, band storage
CODE_BRIGHT: Problem Type

jgw = ( ωwg ) jg0 + ( ωwg ) γ g ( Pg0 − Pg ) + β g

0 0
((ρ ω ) − (ρ ω
g
w 0
g g
w
g
 Outline

 Introduction
 Brief Description of CODE_BRIGHT
 Tutorial Development
 Recent developments
 Applications
 Final comments
 Tutorials

 Tutorials in CB Detailed description of:

- Geometry; Boundary conditions
- Materials, Mesh, Post-process
Type of analysis: Linear, uncoupled
Examples:
Beginners users - Foundation (M problem)
- Heat flow problem (T problem)
- Drainage around a trench (H problem)
- Conservative contaminant migration (H-W problem)
- Gas Injection Problem (H problem)
- CO2 injection in a sample and in an aquifer (H problem)
Basic description of:
- Geometry; Boundary conditions
- Materials, Mesh; Post-process
Type of analysis: Non-linear, coupled
Examples:
- Dam (H-M problem)
Advanced users - Mock-up test (T-H-M problem)
- CO2 injection in an aquifer-caprock system (H-M problem)
- Sequential Excavation method (H-M problem)
- Consolidation of a porous medium with a vertical joint (H-M problem)
- Hydraulic shear test with a horizontal joint (H-M problem)
- BExM tutorial (H-M problem)
- Atmospheric tutorial (T-H-M problem)
 Code_Bright

 Code_Bright in social networks (Rodriguez-Dono, 2015)

Social

Youtube channel with videos

 Outline

 Introduction
 Brief Description of CODE_BRIGHT
 Tutorial Development
 Recent developments
 Applications
 Final comments
 Developments

• Additional FEM features (types of elements)

• New Mechanical Constitutive models: for instance combination of EP
and CREEP
• New Hydraulic Constitutive models: for instance intrinsic
permeability as a function of internal variables
• New Options for time integration: error control at global or local
level, second order approximations, etc
• New Options for data tables used at boundary conditions
 Code_Bright new elements

 Quadratic tetrahedrons

• N1=(2L1-1)*L1
• N2=(2L2-1)*L2
• N3=(2L3-1)*L3
• N4=(2L4-1)*L4
• N5=4L1*L2
• N6=4L2*L3
• N7=4L3*L1
• N8=4L1*L4
• N9=4L2*L4
• N10=4L3*L4

756 nodes, 500 elements 525 nodes, 240 elements

 Code_Bright enhancement

 2D triangles for 3D tetrahedral mesh 3 A1+A2+A3=A

 Isoparametric element
A2 A1

A3
1 2

A1 A2 A3
L1 = L2 = L3 =
A A A
 i j k 
2 A1 = mod(v x 2 × v x 3 ) = mod  x2 − x y2 − y [
z2 − z  = mod ai1i + a j1 j + ak1k ]
 x3 − x y3 − y z3 − z 
 ∂aim ∂aim ∂aim 
 
 ∂x ∂y ∂z 
Am
2
aim + a 2jm + akm
2
 ∂Lm ∂Lm ∂Lm   ∂a jm ∂a jm ∂a jm 
Lm = =   =
1
(
aim a jm akm )
 
 ∂x ∂y ∂z  4 AAm  ∂x ∂y ∂z 
A a +a +a
2
i
2
j
2
k  ∂akm ∂akm ∂akm 
 
 ∂x ∂y ∂z 
 Outline

 Introduction
 Brief Description of CODE_BRIGHT
 Tutorial Development
 Recent developments
 Applications
 Final comments
 Reinforced Wall Modelling
 Numerical 3D modelling of pullout tests
 Numerical 3D modelling of MSE walls

Ivan Puig PhD Thesis

Behaviour of reinforced earth walls
  Pullout in lab: Calibrate the numerical model!

750 mm
Pr Finite element mesh:
Hexahedral elements &
structured mesh
(1350 elements & 1652 nodes)

CODE_BRIGHT
 15 mm
5 mm

 Pullout in lab:
10 mm

interface 0.5

Reinforcement element
steel strips (ribbed or smooth),
polymeric strips, steel ladders, etc. Fill-reinforcement interface
  Pullout in lab: 2·10-6 m/s displacement applied at to the head-edge of the reinforcement…
…which generates about 20-cm axial displacement at 11 step

Total displacements with deformed mesh (amplify factor x10)

 60

50

40
Pullout load, Pr (kN)

s = 38º (Base case:

30 Ri = 0.7   = 28.7º)

20

s = 32º (Ri = 0.88   = 28.7º)

10 fixed  { s = 44º (Ri = 0.57   = 28.7º)
s = 32º (Ri = 0.7   = 23.6º)
fixed Ri { s = 44º (Ri = 0.7   = 34.1º)
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Head displacement (mm)

Ri = tanδ/tanφ
 50

40
Pullout load, Pr (kN)

30

20 Es = Ei = 20 MPa (Base case)

Es = Ei = 50 MPa
Ei = 50 MPa & Es = 20 MPa
10 Ei = 20 MPa & Es = 50 MPa

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Head displacement (mm)

 Step 12 (173 mm-Pullout
displacement stage, ΔdPullout )

ΔdPullout

Step 11.33
(ΔdPullout = 58 mm)

Step 11.67
(ΔdPullout = 116 mm)

Step 12
(ΔdPullout = 173 mm)

Step 12 (173 mm-Pullout

displacement stage, ΔdPullout )

ΔdPullout

Step 11.33
(ΔdPullout = 58 mm)

Step 11.67
(ΔdPullout = 116 mm)

Step 12
(ΔdPullout = 173 mm)
 Pullout in lab: Series of tests! STEEL LADDERS

50

45 Ei = Es = 30 MPa z = 10.625 m (F* = 0.23)

Ei = 30 MPa & z = 3.10 m (F* = 0.50)
40
Es = 10 MPa
35
Pullout load, Pr (kN)

30
z = 0.375 m (F* = 60)

25

20
3D Model Equivalent
(best fit) E soil (Es=) Measured depth
15
30 MPa (=Ei ) z = 0.375 m
10 30 MPa (=Ei )
10 MPa (≠ Ei ) } z = 3.10 m

5 30 MPa (=Ei ) z = 10.625 m

0
0 5 10 15

Head displacement (mm)

 Pullout in lab: Series of tests! POLYMERIC STRIP

10
z = 7.0 m (F* = 0.40

8 ci = 14 kPa)
Pullout load, Pr (kN)

6
z = 3.5 m (F* = 0.50
ci = 9.4 kPa)
rear front
4
{
Measured:
z = 7.0 m
z = 3.5 m
z = 1.0 m
z = 1.0 m (F* = 0.56
2
3D Model: ci = 1 kPa)
rear
front
0
0 5 10 15

Displacement (mm)
Reinforced Wall Modelling
 Numerical 3D modelling of pullout tests
 Numerical 3D modelling of MSE walls

MSE: Mechanically Stabilized Earth

3D Models Natural Soil (retained fill)

Reinforced fill (heavy compaction)

Reinforced fill (low compaction)

CODE_BRIGHT Precast concrete panels

Foundation
Structured mesh & (natural soil)
Hexahedral elements
• Nº elements: 322008
• Nº nodes: 335748
Numerical modelling of MSE walls

Fill-reinforcement interface material

Fill-panel interface material

Precast concrete panels

Elastomeric joint
material (bearing pads)

Strip footing
 Numerical modelling of MSE walls

3D Models

End-reinforcement detail

3 m-High
Facing
Reinforcement panels

Bearing
material

Reinforcement-to-facing
connection detail
 Numerical modelling of MSE walls

3D Models Boundary
Conditions
60 KPa over the soil surface

73 KPa over the skin panels

 Loading values
The model corresponds to a 3
meters high structure, but the load
is equivalent to 6 meters high.
 Numerical modelling of MSE walls

3D Models
(elastic) Material data Elastic parameters

E
Materials ν
[MPa]
Retained fill and Foundation 10 - 1000 0.3
Soils heavy compaction 10 - 100 0.3
Reinforced fill
low compaction 5 - 50 0.3
Facing panels (precast concrete) 30000 0.2
Elastic
Structures Reinforcement 85000 0.3 behavior

Elastomeric joint (EPDM bearing pads) 5 0.45

Strip footing 25000 0.2
Backfill-facing interface (10) 0.3
Interfaces
Fill-reinforcement interface (10) 0.3
Numerical modelling of MSE walls
Exameple case: E_Backfill = 100 MPa
E_Foundation = 1000 MPa

Total
displacements
with Deformed mesh:
(amplify factor ×200)

[m]
Numerical modelling of MSE walls
Vertical for: E_Backfill = 100 MPa,
E_Foundation = 1000 MPa
displacements
with Original Mesh:
(amplify factor ×1)

[m]
 Numerical modelling of MSE walls

3D Models Facing displacements for: E_Backfill = 100 MPa,

E_Foundation = 1000 MPa

Horizontal displacements Vertical displacements

[m] [m]
 Numerical modelling of MSE walls

3D Models for: E_Backfill = 100 MPa,

E_Foundation = 1000 MPa

Axial stresses at
reinforcing
elements

[MPa]
 Numerical modelling of MSE walls

3D Models
Deformed mesh
(amplify factor: ×1000)
 Outline

 Introduction
 Brief Description of CODE_BRIGHT
 Tutorial Development
 Recent developments
 Applications
 Final comments
SPEND FUEL DISPOSAL

Erdem Toprak thesis

 Vertical emplacement of spent fuel

The spent nuclear fuel elements are disposed of in a repository located deep in the
Olkiluoto bedrock. The release of radionuclides is prevented with a multi-barrier
disposal system consisting of a system of engineered barriers (EBS) and host rock such
that the system effectively isolates the radionuclides from the living environment.
 Buffer and backfill materials

Friedland clay MX-80

Minelco granules

Rod pellets
Pillow pellets
Interpretation of double structure by means of simple models

Water pressure
-25

-20

Liquid pressure (MPa)

-15

-10

-5

0
0 1 2 3

Time (days)

Porosity 0.45

0.4

Porosity
0.35

0.3

0.25
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Time (days)

-2

Stress Mean Stress (MPa)

-1

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Time (days)
 Rod Pellets
Infiltration
test

Oedometer Test
 Filling with water Filling with pellets

30 years

The case with empty-gap leads to earlier closure of the gap, thus producing a
decrease of temperature before 1 year. The peak temperature in the canister is
lower for pellet-gap because its larger thermal conductivity. The peak caused
by gap closure occurs earlier than the peak caused by the power decaying
function, when the filling material is air-water (empty-gap).
 Filling with water Filling with pellets

compression

swelling
swelling

90 years

In the case of empty-gap, fast saturation provokes fast compression of bentonite disc.
Therefore, dry density of bentonite disc increases significantly in first years after
canister emplacement. After this first increment, it starts decreasing and coming to
same level as the case of pellet-gap.
 Filling with water Filling with pellets

When the gap filling material is air-water, buffer blocks swell considerably.
The generated displacements due to swelling of buffer are two times higher
than in the case of pellet filled gap.
HORIZONTAL SPENT FUEL DISPOSAL

 CANISTER

 BUFFER (in Supercontainers and in Distance blocks)

 HOST ROCK
MODEL GEOMETRY AND COMPONENTS

425 m-
depth

m
20
Rock

m
20
25 m-symmetry
 MODEL GEOMETRY AND COMPONENTS

8th

7th Canisters
6th 5th

Fractures 4th
3rd
2nd
1st
Tunnel
cap
MODEL GEOMETRY AND COMPONENTS

Buffer block: distance blocks

Fracture crossing location

 MODEL GEOMETRY AND COMPONENTS

Gap (Installation state),

otherwise,
Slot (Initial state)
 MODEL GEOMETRY AND COMPONENTS

Gap (Installation state),

otherwise,
Slot (Initial state)
MODEL GEOMETRY AND COMPONENTS

Supercontainer
 MODEL GEOMETRY AND COMPONENTS

Buffer block:
interface

Buffer
block
(ring)

Canister
Supercontainer
 MODEL GEOMETRY AND COMPONENTS

Buffer block:
interface

Buffer
block
(ring)

Canister
Supercontainer

Buffer block
(cylinder) Buffer block:
interface

Buffer
block
Canister (cylinder)
 MODEL GEOMETRY AND COMPONENTS

REAL GEOMETRY (Supercanister cross-section)

Rock Air gaps

Titanium
plate
5.5
47
B.blocks 5.1 Air gap

Canister 927.5
MODEL GEOMETRY AND COMPONENTS

Installation state:

Rock
Gap

45
Buffer blocks

Canister 925.5
MODEL GEOMETRY AND COMPONENTS

Initial state:

Rock
Slot

interface

Buffer blocks

Canister 925.5
MODEL GEOMETRY AND COMPONENTS
Buffer block:
interface

Buffer block
(ring)

Buffer block_interface = Buffer block material in Installation state

Buffer block_interface ≠ Buffer block material in Initial state

Buffer
Buffer block: block
(cylinder)
interface
MATERIAL PROPERTIES:

…so:
Installation and Initial states share
geometry,
but not material properties…
RESULTS: HOST ROCK THICKNESS

8th
6th 20 m
7th 4th
Canister 5th
2nd
s 3rd Host rock
1st
Fracture 20 m (close field)
s
 Host rock
(far field)

Host rock
100 m (far field)
200 m

8th
6th
7th 4th
Canister 5th
2nd
s 3rd Host rock
1st
Fracture Drift (close field)
s Host rock
(close field) cap

Host rock
(far field) 100 m
Host rock
(far field)
Layers and materials
 MATERIAL PROPERTIES

Parameters: Host rock Fractures Buffer blocks Gap / Slot Canister

Porosity
0.005 0.005 (already seen) (already seen) 0.01
[-]
1.52e-19 at close Initial state:
Intrinsic permeability field, k0 = 5.59e-21
1e-15 k0 = 5.59e-21 1e-24
[m2] 1.52e-17 at far Installation:
field 1e-16 (fixed)
Water retention P0 [MPa] 1.5 1.5 31.25 0.05 31.25
curve λ [-] 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.5
Relative permeability
3 3 3 3 3
[n-power]
Dry thermal conductivity Initial: 0.22
2.82 2.82 0.22 390
[W/mK] Installation: 0.02
Saturated thermal Initial: 1.25
2.82 2.82 1.25 390
conductivity [W/mK] Installation: 0.6
Solid unit weight Initial: 2780
2743 - 2780 8930
[kg/m3] Installation: 0
Solid phase specific heat
746 - 830 1000 390
[J/kgK]
Initial liquid pressure
hydrostatic hydrostatic (already seen) (already seen) -20
[MPa]
Initial Temperature
10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 50
[ºC]
 RESULTS: HOST ROCK THICKNESS

Temperature: all canisters evolution

(Initial state)
±20 m host rock ±100 m host rock
(close-field only) (close-field and far-field)

~ 10 years faster
 RESULTS: HOST ROCK THICKNESS

Temperature: tunnel axis distribution

(Initial state)
±20 m host rock ±100 m host rock
(close-field only) (close-field and far-field)
80 80
Time from
canister 3rd
4th 2nd 1st
70 installation: Canister 70 3rd 2nd 1st
8th 5th 8th 4th
1 year Time from Canister
7th 5th
Canister 7th 6th canister Canister 6th
60 10 years
60 installation:
100 years
Temperature (°C)

Temperature (°C)
1 year
1000 years 10 years
50 50
100 years
1000 years
40 40

30 30
End of tunnel End of tunnel

20 20

10 10
120 100 80 60 40 20 0 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
Tunnel axis distance from Cap (m) Tunnel axis distance from Cap (m)
RESULTS
(Initial state)
Temperature: whole domain distribution

10 years
RESULTS
(Initial state)
Temperature: whole domain distribution

100 years
 RESULTS
(Initial state)
Temperature: whole domain distribution

1000 years
 RESULTS: OPEN-GAP EFFECT

Temperature

Installation: 1 year (after canisters placement)

Initial: 1 year (after canisters placement)

7th 5th 3rd 1st canister

8th canister 6th 4th 2nd

 RESULTS: OPEN-GAP EFFECT
Temperature

Installation: 10 years

Initial: 10 years

7th 5th 3rd 1st canister

8th canister 6th 4th 2nd

 RESULTS: OPEN-GAP EFFECT

Temperature

Installation: 100 years

Initial: 100 years

7th 5th 3rd 1st canister

8th canister 6th 4th 2nd

 RESULTS: OPEN-GAP EFFECT

Temperature

Temperature at canisters center:

Installation: Initial:

~ 8 years slower
 RESULTS: OPEN-GAP EFFECT

Temperature

Temperature at 3rd canister:

Installation: Initial:
80 80

70 70

60 60
Temperature (°C)

Temperature (°C)
50 50

40 40

30 3rd Canister centre 3rd Canister centre

30
Buffer center Buffer center
Slot center Slot center
20 20
at 2.0 m from Canister centre at 2.0 m from Canister centre

10 10
0.1 1 10 100 1000 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Time (years) Time (years)

~ 8 years slower
 RESULTS: OPEN-GAP EFFECT

Liquid Pressure
Installation: 1 year (after canisters placement)
e

Initial: 1 year (after canisters placements)

e
 RESULTS: OPEN-GAP EFFECT

Liquid Pressure
Installation: 10 years
e

Initial: 10 years
e
 RESULTS: OPEN-GAP EFFECT

Liquid Pressure
Installation: Initial:

~ 2 years faster

~ 100 years faster

 RESULTS: OPEN-GAP EFFECT

Degree of Saturation
1 year (after canisters placement)
Installation state: Initial state:
 RESULTS: OPEN-GAP EFFECT

Degree of Saturation

Installation: Initial:
~ 4 years faster
1 1

0.9 0.9
Saturation degree, Sr (-)

0.8

Saturation degree, Sr (-)

0.8
Point 1: slot in front Point 1: slot in front
of canister of canister
0.7 Point 2: slot in front 0.7 Point 2: slot in front
of left-fracture of left-fracture
Point 3: slot in front Point 3: slot in front
0.6 of right-fracture 0.6 of right-fracture
Point 4: canister's Point 4: canister's
upper side upper side
0.5 0.5
Point 5: canister's left Point 5: canister's left
cylinder cap cylinder cap
0.4 0.4
0.1 1 10 100 1000 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Time (years) Time (years)
 Outline

 Introduction
 Brief Description of CODE_BRIGHT
 Tutorial Development
 Recent developments
 Applications
 Final comments
 CODE_BRIGHT research collaborations

Worldwide:
Hong Kong
University
AECL Ltd. UL Tongji
NWMO University

Arizona KAERI
State
University MIT

Texas A&M Electric

University Power
Universidad Development
Los Andes Co, Ltd.
UNC ENIT

ITT

USJ

UFPE NU

USP
CONSORTIUM CODE_BRIGHT

SKB (SWEDEN) Coordination

POSIVA (FINLAND)
ANDRA (FRANCE)
GRS (GERMANY)