A Cyclic Constitutive Model for

Earthquake Response Analysis

Kangwon National University
KIM, Yong-Seong
1. Introduction
The 1995 Hyogo-ken Nambu Earthquake
The 1995 Hyogo-ken Nambu Earthquake
Railway
Wharf Facilities
sand
clay
clay
sand
liquefaction ?
amplification or damping
of earthquake motion?
earthquake
The 1995 Hyogo-ken Nambu Earthquake
Up to now
sand layer :
elasto-plastic model
clay layer :
elastic model
Cyclic Viscoelasto-viscoplastic model for clay
besed on non-linear kinematic hardening rule

time dependent characteristics of clay in wide range of strain
Cyclic Model for Earthquake Response Analysis
1964 Niigata Earthquake
Three elements viscoelastic model

(Voigt model + linear elastic spring)
Kondner and Ho (1965) : dynamic behavior of clay
Hori (1974) : Wave propagation test for sandy soil and clay
Murayama (1983) : Distribution of relaxation time
di Benedetto and Tatsuoka (1997) : Sand, soft rock
2. Review of Previous Studies
Viscoelastic - Viscoplastic Model
Small
viscoelastic
viscoplastic
Strain level
Large
cyclic
viscoplastic
model
viscoelastic
3 parameter
model
G1
G2
m
Infinitesimal
3. Cyclic Viscoelastic-Viscoplstic Model
Elastic Component
3 Elements Viscoelastic Component
Voigt Viscoelastic Component
Formulation of Viscoplastic Component
Overconsolidation Boundary Surface
Static Yield Function
Evolutional Law of
*
ij

Plastic Potential Function

Flow Rule
A Proposed Cyclic Viscoelastic and
Viscoplastic Constitutive Model
Three elements viscoelastic model
+
Cyclic viscoplastic model
Cyclic Triaxial Deformation Tests
0
4
8
12
16
20
Experiment(damping ratio)
Single amplitude axial strain, (
a
)
SA
(%)

H
y
s
t
e
r
e
t
i
c

d
a
m
p
i
n
g

r
a
t
i
o
,

h

1E-3 0.01 0.1

0
40
80
120
160
200
Experiment(Young's modulus)
E
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t

Y
o
u
n
g
'
s

m
o
d
u
l
u
s
,

E
e
q
(
M
P
a
)
T-4, f=0.05(Hz)
Viscoelastic-viscoplastic Model

Elastic-viscoplastic Model

The results of the Cyclic Triaxial Deformation Test
-10 -5 0 5
-100
-50
0
50
100
-10 -5 0 5
-100
-50
0
50
100
0 5 10 15
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
-15 -10 -5 0 5
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
0 50 100 150 200 250
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
-5 0 5 10 15
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
0 50 100 150 200 250
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
-15 -10 -5 0 5
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
0 50 100 150 200 250
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
0 50 100 150 200 250
-100
-50
0
50
100
0 50 100 150 200 250
-100
-50
0
50
100
0 50 100 150 200 250
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
Nc : 22
Simulation
D
e
v
i
a
t
o
r

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

q
(
k
P
a
)
Axial strain,
a
(%)
No. of cycle : 22
Experiment


D
e
v
i
a
t
o
r

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

q
(
k
P
a
)
Axial strain,
a
(%)
Nc : 23
Experiment


D
e
v
i
a
t
o
r

s
t
r
e
s
s
,
q
(
k
P
a
)
Axial strain,
a
(%)
Nc : 5
Experiment
D
e
v
i
a
t
o
r

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

q
(
k
P
a
)
Axial strain,
a
(%)
Nc : 5
Experiment
D
e
v
i
a
t
o
r

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

q
(
k
P
a
)
Mean effective stress, p
'
(kPa)
Nc : 23
Simulation
D
e
v
i
a
t
o
r

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

q
(
k
P
a
)
Axial strain,
a
(%)
Nc : 23
Simulation
D
e
v
i
a
t
o
r

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

q
(
k
P
a
)
Mean effective stress, p
'
(kPa)
Nc : 5
Simulation
D
e
v
i
a
t
o
r

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

q
(
k
P
a
)
Axial strain,
a
(%)
(b) Effective stess path
(b) Effective stess path
(b) Effective stess path
(a) Stress-strain relation
(a) Stress-strain relation
(a) Stress-strain relation
Nc : 5
Simulation
D
e
v
i
a
t
o
r

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

q
(
k
P
a
)
Mean effective stress, p
'
(kPa)
Nc : 22
Experiment
D
e
v
i
a
t
o
r

s
t
r
e
s
s
,
q
(
k
P
a
)
Mean effective stress, p
'
(kPa)
Nc : 22
Simulation
D
e
v
i
a
t
o
r

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

q
(
k
P
a
)
Mean effective stress, p
'
(kPa)
Nc : 23
Experiment


D
e
v
i
a
t
o
r

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

q
(
k
P
a
)
Mean effective stress, p
'
(kPa)
T-1 (s
d
/2s
c
=0.268)

T-2 (s
d
/2s
c
=0.332)

T-3 (s
d
/2s
c
=0.324)

4. Earthquake Response Analysis
LIQCA-2D(VE-VP)
Effective stress analysis
based on infinitesimal strain theory
u-p formulation
FEM and FDM for the spatial discretization
Newmarks b method for the time discretization
A cyclic elasto-plastic model for sand
A cyclic viscoelastic-viscoplastic model for clay
Port Island 1995/01/18
Liquefied Area
Kyoto
Kobe
Osaka
Port Island
Rokko Island
Soil profile
Finite element meshes
Observed records during main shock at Port Island
(a) G.L. 0.0m (b) G.L. -83.0m
Input seismic wave
Governing Equations Using u-p Formulation
0 5 10 15 20
-400
0
400
-400
0
400
Time (sec)
A
c
c
e
l
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
g
a
l
)
VE-VP Model NS 32.0m Acc. Max. -437(gal)
Observed Record NS 32.0m Acc. Max. 543.594(gal)
E-VP Model NS 32.0m Acc. Max. -389(gal)


(c) Acceleration vs. time relations at 32.0m sand layer
0 5 10 15 20
-400
0
400
-400
0
400
P
VE-VP Model NS 16.0m Acc. Max. -340(gal)
P
Time (sec)
A
c
c
e
l
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
g
a
l
)
Observed Record NS 16.0m Acc. Max. 564.875(gal)
E-VP Model NS 16.0m Acc. Max. -351(gal)

(b) Acceleration vs. time relations at 16.0m sand layer
0 5 10 15 20
-400
-200
0
200
400
-400
-200
0
200
400
A
c
c
e
l
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
g
a
l
)
Time (sec)

VE-VP Model NS 0.0m Acc. Max. -242(gal)


Observed Record NS 0.0m Acc. Max. -341.219(gal)
E-VP Model NS 0.0m Acc. Max. -244(gal)
(a) Acceleration vs. time relations at 0.0m sand layer
Maximum Value Distributions of
Earthquake Response Analysis
Excess Pore Water Pressure Ratio
vs. Depth Relations
Acceleration Response Calculated by E-VP and VE-VP Model
1995/01/17 05:53
After-Shock
G.L 0.0m sand layer
G.L -16.0m sand layer
G.L -32.0m sand layer
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0
-40
0
40
-40
0
40
NS component
VE-VP Model; Max. 59.9(gal)
Time (sec)
A
c
c
e
l
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
g
a
l
)
NS component
Obtained record; Max. 63.625(gal)
Obtained record; Max. 63.625(gal)
E-VP Model; Max. 60.7(gal)


(c) Acceleration vs. time relations at 32.0m sand layer
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0
-30
0
30
-30
0
30
NS component
VE-VP Model; Max.-38.4(gal)
NS component
Obtained record; Max.-45.5(gal)
A
c
c
e
l
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
g
a
l
)
Time (sec)
Obtained record; Max.-45.5(gal)
E-VP Model; Max.-51.5(gal)

(b) Acceleration vs. time relations at 16.0m sand layer
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0
-60
0
60
-60
0
60
NS component
VE-VP Model; Max. 63.7(gal)
A
c
c
e
l
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
g
a
l
)
Time (sec)
NS component
Obtained record; Max. 79.188(gal)
Obtained record; Max. 79.188(gal)
E-VP Model; Max. 85.5(gal)
(a) Acceleration vs. time relations at 0.0m sand layer

A Cyclic viscoelastic-viscoplastic model
based on the non-linear kinematic hardening
rule and three parameter theory was proposed.

The viscoelastic behavior of clay at the small
strain range is an important characteristic
during dynamic motion and the proposed
model very well describes the viscoelastic
behavior characteristics of cohesive soils in
element simulations.
5. Conclusions
The accelerations calculated from the
proposed model were in close agreement
with the recorded accelerations on the Port
Island down-hole array.

This study reveals that the viscoelastic-
viscoplastic model can describe the damping
characteristics of clay accurately at small
strain levels, whereas the elastic-viscoplastic
model cannot do so.