See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297469920

Prediction of Triaxial Stress-Strain Behaviour of

Winnipeg CIay Using an Anisotropic ElasticPlastic Model
CONFERENCE PAPER OCTOBER 1989

READS

4 AUTHORS, INCLUDING:
James Graham

David Muir Wood

University of Manitoba

University of Bristol

108 PUBLICATIONS 2,341 CITATIONS

128 PUBLICATIONS 2,258 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,

letting you access and read them immediately.

SEE PROFILE

Available from: James Graham

Retrieved on: 29 March 2016

Graham,J.,Wood, D.l'vl.,
Yin,J. H. arrd Azizi,F. t989.
Predictionof triaxialstressstrainbehaviourof Winnipeg
clayusingan anisotropic
elasticplasticmodei. Proc.42nd
CanadianGeotech.Conference,
WinnipegMB, 280-288.

Pr e di cti o n o f T ri a xi a l S tr ess- Str ainBehaviour of W innipeg CIay

U si n g a n A n i sotr opic Elastic- PlasticM odel

by J. Grahaml,D.M. Wood2,J.-H. Yinl and F. Azizil

Departmentof Civil Engineering,University of Manitoba
Winnipeg, Manitoba,CANADA R3T 2N2
Departmentof Civil Engineering,Rankine Building
The Universityof Glasgow,Gl2 8LT, SCOTLAND

42ndCanadian
Geotechnical
Conference
Winnipeg,MB
October.1989
SYNOPSIS
An anisotropicelastic-plasricmodel has been usedto examinemeasuredpropertiesof plastic [:ke Agassizclay from Winnioep.
Anisouopy produccslinear (elastic)undrainedbchaviour,even in normally consolidatcdspecimeri-s.
Como'arisons
rre niaJe
betweenprcdictedand measuredvaluesof Au/Ap and Av/Al in rheelastibrange. It is shoivn that rhe shapis of vield loci and
4..g1*tpgq.dPg p',V.-tocescan.begeneratedassuming(l) an elliptical normalizedstateboundarysurtace,and (1) anisotropic
elasucity- Differences-be
rween t]ris model and modiFredCam-Clay lie in tre anisotropyof the elasiicity, and nor in rhe shape'of
the staleboundarysurface.

INTRODUCTION

ELASTIC-PLASTIC

ln rccent years, laboratory and field tests have produced a

clearcr understandingof how soils behave under controlled
conditions of stress and strain. At the same time, the
increasing power of geotechnical analysis allows
computation of problems that were previously intractable.
What must then be done is to organize this information in
such a way that it can bc used cffectively to predict soil
behaviour under more complex conditions. This paper
examines the suess-strainbehaviour of Lake Agassiz clay
from Winnipeg using an elastic-plasricsoil model in which
the elasticiry is assumedto be anisotropic. Implications of
this assumprionare compared with experimenul data from
triaxial tests.

E l a s t i c - p l a s t i cs o i l m e c h a n i c sa s s u m e st h a t s o i l s h a v e
initially an elastic responseto loading, and that this is
eventually followed by yieiding and the onset of nonrecoverablestraining. On this basis, strain incrmentsare
divided into,elastic and plastic parts. So, e" = e'" + e!, and
es = e", + et. There ii increasing evidence from both
laboratory and field studiesto supportthis assumption.
It is just as importantto considerchangesin volume of soiis
as it is to considerchangesin effectivesrresses.Thus, Fig.
la relateschangesin p' and q; while the accompanyingFig.
lb relatcs p' with changesin specific volume V flVroth and
Houlsby 1985). These two diagrams can be considered
orthogonal projections of a three-dimensional p', q, Vspacein which the region of elastic srraining is limited by a
state boundary surface (SBS).

The data arc presentedusing the pafilmeters

t1l

p ' = ( o ;+ 2 o ' , ) R ,
e,=(e"+2e.),

q = q'= (ol - oi)

q=2(e.-e')R

where the subscripts "a" and "r" define axial and radial
directions for the principal effective stresses "o"' and the
principal strains
(Wood 1984). The two stress
quantities p' and q are forms of fint and secondinvariants
of the effective stress tensor. The definition of the
voiumetric srrain tv and the shearstrain es in Ill permits
the energy suppliedto the specimenduring stressingto be
s e p a r a t e dp r o p e r l y i n t o i t s v o l u m e t r i c a n d d i s t o r t i o n a l
components.

SOIL MECHANICS

The most commonly used elastic-plastic

modei is modified
Cam-Clay (Roscoeand Burland 1968). It was developed
from test data obtained from isotropically consolidated
s p e c i m e n sa n d a s s u m e st h a t t h e e l a s t i c i r y i s i s o t r o p i c .
Howevermost naturalclays arc anisotropicallyconsolidated
(oi, < oi) and the elasticity is transverselyanisotropic(or
c r o s s - a n i s o t r o p i c )r a t h e r t h a n i s o r r o p i c ( C r a h a m a n d
H o u l s b y 1 9 8 3 ) . T h i s p a p e rd i s c u s s e ism p l i c a r i o n so f t h i s
anisouopicelasticity on severalaspectsof clay behaviour,
and especiallyhow it affectselastic-plasric
modelling.
T h e r n o d i f i e dC a m - C l a y m o d e l s h o w n d i a g r a m a t i c a l l iyn

F i g . I a s s u m e sr h a t ( I ) t h e y i e i d l o c u s f o r a s i v e n
preconsolidationpressureis elliptical in p', q_strcssslpace,
and straigh.t(wirh slope x) in ln(p'), V-space, (2) the
plastic hardeninglarv is straight (wiih slope' 1,) in'ln(p'),
V-space, (3) that sready-statefaiiure (dp'/dt = de"/de,-b'j
the so-calledCrirical State - is deflned by a stiaight
Coulomb-Mohr line with slope M = 6sin0'/(:-sinq,yin-p',
q-spaceand slope l, in ln(p'), V-spaqe; arrd (4) plasiic
strain incremenr vectors (siope ae!/aef in Fig. li) are
normal to the local yield locus. That is, the soil obeys an
Associated Flow Rule. In less formal terrns, normal
compressionof a soil is assumedto leaveit with an elliptical
yield locus yl1 for examplein Fig. 1a,of size controlledby
the maximum isotropicsrress pj .

(o)

t h e n y l 3 i n . F i g .1 ) . T h e s h a p e so f s u c c e s s i vye, i e l dl o c i w i i l
be
similar. Thesenew yield Ioci ntap as rhe
.geometrically
jines url2 and url3 in Fies. lb
unload-reload
and lc. here
is nothingvery specialaboutthe ellipticil shapesof the yield
loci assumedin Fig. I - they havea ionuenienrsimpliciry.
In a conventionaldrained test on a normally consolidated
specimen srartingwirh p' = p; in Fig. ta, me effective
stresspath risesfrom A with a gradient
fu/6p'= 3 and rhe
yield locus in p', q-spacehas to expandstiua-ityas lhe resr
proceeds. The path ABC will thereforelie in rhe srate
boundary surface referred to earlier. Significant non_
recoverable,non-linear volume strains witl be observed.
The specimenfails when the stresspath ABC reachesrhe
C r i t i c a l S t a t eL i n e ( s i o p e M = 6 s i n Q ' / ( 3 - s i n 6 ' ) )A
. t this
point, dei/d{ = rc and continuingplasticdeformationsrake
place at constant qr, p and Vr.

L J T

.iL

n 19
tr-s

P L A S T I CS T R A I N
I N C R EM E N T
,'
O I R E C T I O N. S
n' rP
l

'

Considerationof the equal and oppositeelasticand plastic

volumetric strainsthat accompanyundrainedshearing (f,
= ei, + el = 0) will show that effective stressparhs from
undrainedtestscan not coincidewith the shapeof the yield
Iocus (Grahamand Houlsby 1983) in isotropicspecimens.
T h e y a r e h o w e v e r g e o m e t r i c a l l ys i m i l a r r o c o n r o u r so f
constant specific volume deduced from conventional
d r a i n e d t r i a x i a l c o m p r e s s i o nt e s t s . T h i s w a s s h o w n
experimentallyby Rendulic(1937) and proposedbv him as
a fundamentalprincipie of rhe mechanicsof ctay beiaviour.
Similar resultswere obrainedby Henkel (1960) from lesrs
on normally consoiidatedisotropic Weaid clay.

ANISOTROPY AND YIELD LOCI

Figure 1. Conventionaldrained triaxial comprcssiontest on

isotropic (a) in effectivc stress space, (b), (c) in
comprcssionspace.

All effective stresssrateslying within this yield locus can by

definition be attainedwith fully recoverabledeformations.
With &e assumptionof isotropic elasticity (such as that
exprcssedby t2l), changesin q produce no change in V.
Thus, all effective stressstates wirhin the yield locus map on
"vertical"
to the
surface represented by the unloadingrcloadinglinc urll in Fig. lb or Fig. lc.

tzt

'l
f6p,l IK o fs.,t

looJ=Lorolto.,i

This is true also of points lying on the yield locus,

reprcsentingthe limir of elastic bchaviour.
Stressstateslying outsidethe initial yield locus are assumed
to causeplasric hardeningassociatedwi*r non-recoverable
volumetric strains. This leads to an increasein the size of
tie region in which elastic strainingcan occur (to yl2 and

It will be rememberedthat the specimensused to form rhe

modified Cam-Clay model in Fig. I were consolidared
isotropically, whereasnaural soils (and spccimensin many
modern test programs) are consolidatedanisorropicallv.
When yield loci for undisturbednatural clays are found
l:ir-rg appropriatetriaxial tests,rheir shapesire distinctly
different from rhe ellipses assurnedin rhe Cam-Clay model
(Grahamet al. 1988). Most of the test programsthat have
been reported, identified yield loci in p', q-spacebur did not
identify the corrcspondingtracesof the lbci in p', V-space.
An exception is the complete state boundary surfacl for
natural Winnipeg clay presentedby Graham et al. (19g3)
(Fig- 2). ln *ris case,when the tracesof rhe yield loci in p,,
q diagrams are examined also in p', V diagrams thiy
p_rcsent"hooked" shapes that differ markedly from rhl
Cam-Clay url's in Fig. 1. Similar results have been
obtained recently by Moulin (1988) for pornic clay from
Westem France.
These deviations of the yield loci from ellipses and the
fooked shapesof the url's have frequentlybeen raken to
invalidate the modified Cam-Clay model, and by
i m p l i c a t i o n , t h e a p p l i c a b i l i t y o f e l a s t i c - p i a s t i cs o i l
mechanics to real soils. This paper will strow that rhe
conccpt of a stateboundary surfaceseparatinga region of
elasticstrainingfrom an elastic-plasric
region is stilt useful.
The differencesthat have been identifiedcan be relatedro
eiasticitythat is anisotropicratherthan isorropic.

CONSTANT - V
I dAgL)

q ( k P o )t o o

p (Kl'oJ

Figure 2. Yield loci and unload-reload lines for natural

plastic clay from Winnipeg (Grahamet ai. 1983).

STATE BOUNDARY
THE
ANISOTROPIC ELASTICITY

SURFACE

F i g u r e3 . S t a t e b o u n d a r y s u r f a c e f o r W i n n i p e g c i a y
(Crahamet al. 1988).

AND

Familiarity with the corrunon way of prcsnting anisotropic

yield loci in p', q-space(for example, Fig. ?a) may crcatea
misleading impression of the true shape of the state
boundary surface. Therc is often a sensethat close to the
"tucks
"
p'-axis, the surface
in again below the maximum
value of p' which occurs in Fig. 2a at about 1 = q/p'= 0.3.
This is sometimestaken to be associatedwith K6 but is in
part, at least, influenced by the mapping procedureswhich
arc used (Graham et al. 1988). It should be noted however
that the yield loci are not parallel to the p', q-plane,nor are
they straight and uniformly inclined to the p', q-plane as in
Fig. lc. Starting from the isotropic NCL on the p',V plane
with 11= 0, V first decreasesand then increasesas Tl
incrcases.
Graham et al. (1988) showed how a better impressionof the
real shapc of the SBS can be obuined either graphically
Gig. 3) or by normalization with respect to the equivalent
prcssurc pl on thc l-D normal consolidation linc (Fig. 4).
Fig. 4 also shows the normalized shapefor Pornic clay that
can be obtained from the markedly asymmetricalyield loci
l-D
measured by Moulin (1988), and results for
consolidatedillite measuredby Graham and Lau (1988).
The two latter curves have been newly developed from
original data. ln each case the original yield loci were
asymmeuic about the p'-axis. However, the stateboundary
surfaces (expressedby the p'lpl,q/pi-plots) in Fig. 4 are
approximately elliptical and symrnetrical about the p'-axis.
Further work will te required to determine whetherthis is a
generai frrding or whether it is restrictedonly to thesethree
iather different clays. Careful altention must be paid in
fururc testingprog.amsto finding the specificvolumes Vt
at yielding as well as the yield stressesp, *d 9v.

ILLITE
a (MoULlN.r986)l
P O RH I C
WIRNIPEG

A S S U H OE L L l P S E
IWINNIPG)

o.o

o.o

pe

Figure 4. Normalizedyield loci ard stateboundary surfacc

in p'ipj, q'p,i-spacefor illite, Winnipcg and
Pomic clav.

Transversely anisotropic elastic materials require five

independentelastic parameters. However, Graham and
Houlsby (1983) showed that with the limited possibilitiesfor
exploring strcssspacein the triaxial appararus,at most three
independentelastic parameterscan be determined with
normal instrumentation. Anisotropy implies lhat
recoverablevolume changescan no longer bc associated
only with changesin mean effective stress p' - deviator
s t r e s s e sp r o d u c ee l a s t i c v o l u m e s t r a i n sa s w e l l a s e l a s t i c
s h e a r s t r a i n s . U s i n g w h a t a p p e a r st o b e a r e a s o n a b l e
a s s u m p t i o n ,G r a h a m a n d H o u l s b y w r o t e t h e f o l l o r v i n g

stiffnessand compliancerelationships.

t3l

[ o p| '=l lI K J II I[ a *
lsql Lr 3c_lsd

l'-o

f .

t4l

c I

(loe"I>

- /|

IOO

-JI f6p'I
t: l I 3G

l r - c l - D l
lwr

.J

'.lt"J

wherc D = 3KG - J2. Note the minus sign with the J-terms
in [ ]. This is a correctionof the original equation given by
Graham and Houlsby in their 1983 paper.
ln these equations, K and G are modified bulk and shear
moduli, and J is a pararncterindicating the coupling
between volumetric and distortional effects. For an
isotropic elastic soil, J = 0 and there is no such coupling.
Elastic propcrtiescan be expectedto change in step with thc
preconsoiidationpressure,and thus Graham and Houlsby
(1983) reported IVo.). = 14.5,G/ol" = 8.5 and J/o"" = -5.5
inside the yieid loci for Winnipeg ciay shown in Fig. 2.
They deduced a ratio of horizontal to vertical stiffness of
a b o u t1 . 8 .
The question can then be asked whether the processcan be
reversedmathematicallyand can yield loci similar to those
shown in Fig. 2 for Winnipeg Clay be constructed simply
from an assumedeiliptical approximation to the normalized
state boundary surface, and anisotropic elasticity
representedby [3] and [4]. That is, by themselves,can a
symmetricai SBS plus anisotropic elasticity produce
asymmetrical yield loci such as those in Fig. 2a. Resultsof
calculationsto examinethis question are shown in Fig. 5.
The calcuiations required iterative proceduresand werc at
times numerically unstable. The yield loci in the Figure
werc obtained using IQoi" = = 14.5, G/oi" = = 8.5 and
Ilo',"= -9.0. (fhe coupling modulus J had to be incrcased
above its measuredvalue to get the level of agreement
shown. Subsetsof the original data produced values of
J/ou" between -2.8 and -8.0 so there is some uncertainty
about the vaiue of J/{). It is consideredsignificant thacthe
strongly asymmetric yield loci in Fig. 5a and the hooked
unload-rcload lines in Fig. 5b can be produced simply from
an elliptical stateboundary surfaceand the assumptionthat
the elasriciryis anisorropic.

IMPLICATIONS
SOME
ELASTICITY

OF

ANISOTROPIC

Fig.6 shows a yieid locus yl (Fig. 2a) and a constanrvolume cv section(Fig. 3) for Winnipeg clay. Point B is
wbcrc the yield locus and the consrant-volumesectionagain
meet. The graphicalconstructionfor Fig. 3 involves thc
intersection of rather flatly inclined lines and is somewhat
insensitive at high q-values. Movemenl from A to B in
Fig. 6 along thc yieid locus (6e? = 0) initially requires
elasticcompressions(6; > 0) associared
with the increases

\\
-\*-5
-=ils=-5

-----

CALCLLATE]
vAsuREO

Figure 5. Comparisonof calculatedand measuredyield loci

and unload-reloadlines for Winnipeeclav.

in p' and q through the K and J moduli in [4]. Deviator

stresschangesfu produceelasticchangesin V through the
" term and the J-modulus. These compressionsmust
subsequentlybe followed by elasticexpansions(6ei < O)
associatedwith decreasing p' and increasing q. In rhis
contextit shouldbe rememberedthat yl is nor simply a line
in p', V-space,but definesthe limit of the inclinedsurface
shown shadedin Fig. 6 that containsall staresrhe specimen
can rcach by purely elastic straining.
It is also possiblein principle ro move directly from A to B
in Fig. 6 along the anisotropicelasticiine ae. Since there is
no net volume changefrom A to B, the condition 6el = 0
implies 6q/6p'= 3G/J in [4]. Grahamand Houlsby (1983)
showed that the slope 5q/6p' should be 4.6 in Winnipeg
clay. The actualslope AB in Fig.6 is 6qi6p'= -1.8 and is
thus ralher flatter than the line predicted from rhe
anisotropicmoduli. Information about the geometry of rhe
yield locus could be insertedinto the optimizationprocedure
for finding K, G and J to improve rhe agreement.
What behaviourmight we then expect to measurein an
undrained,constant-volumecompressiontest on a normally
consolidatedspecimenar A in Fig. 6?
@ut anisotropically)
There are two possibilities. One, we might observenonlinear plasticbehavioursimilar to that impliedby Fig. I for
isotropicallyconsolidatedclay (Grahamand Houlsby 1983).
In this case the anisotropic specimen would follow rhe
p l a s t i c c o n s t a n t - v o l u m ec u r v e c v . A l t e m a t i v e i y , t h e
specimencould srrainelasticallyaiong ae,balancingelasric
voiume strainscoming from 6q and the J-modulusagainst
thosecoming irom 6p' and the K modulus. Staning irom

A wirh the elasticconstan!volume condition Ei = 0 would

send the specimenalong an elastic stresspath 6g/6p; = 4.6
(or -1.8, perhaps,dependingon which values is chosenfor
3GlJ).

(o ) WINNIPEG

C 4

\U

o.6

_ o
t

o.4

o.o

o.2

o.4

0.6

0.8

i.o

/ \ . , r . , ^; < . ,
Y U

r PORNTC
( M O U L t Nt 9 8 8 )
O I L L I T E ( G R A H A ML. A U )
o.o

\,,
t

Figure 6. Yield locus (y1), consrantvolume section tfuough

state boundary surface (cv), and anisotropic
elastic consrantvolume parh (ae) for Winnipeg
clay.

o.2

0.4

0.6

n' / r:.-.'
Ivvcr

ln the fint alternative,movement round the plastic constant

volume section cv of the SBS in Fig. 6 requiresreductionin
thc sizc of the yicld locus, and hence plastic volumetric
cxpansion. How does *ris compare with the plastic strains
Arat arc acnraily observed? Fig. 7a shows the directions of
thc plastic strain increment vectors &4 and 6e! measured
by Graham et ai. (1983) for Winnipeg clay. They concluded
that the clay approximately followed an Associated Flow
rule and so 64 at A in Fig. 6 should be comprcssive,not
expansive. Similar conclusions can be drawn for
rcconstiruted illite and Pornic clay in Fig. 7b. This is
incompatible with the need for expansive plastic saains if
sv is followed at low q/p' ratios in Fig. 6.
Thc possibiliry that constantvolume deformation of the soil
(starting from an isotropic strcss state on the yield locus)
wili be associated with plastic deformation cannot be
entertained. The only admissible possibility, therefore, is
the anisotropic elastic effective stress path ae in Fig. 6.
Anisotropic ciay therefore appears to violate Rendulic's
principle - the un&ained effective stresspath is not identical
with contoursof constantspecific volume.
The precedingdiscussionimplies that the undrainedstresss t r a i n b c h a v i o u r a n d p o r e w a t c r p r e s s u r e r e s p o n s eo f
normaily consolidatedanisotropic ciay should be more

0.8

r.o

a
\ vP

Figure 7. Plastic strain increment vector directions for

Winnipeg, iilite and Pornic clay.
linear than is commonly appreciated. This has been
observed in several of the authors' test programs on
normally consolidatedanisotropic specimens. For exampIe,
Fig. 8 shows curves of Au vs. Ap from (a) Wirnipeg clay,
(b) l-D reconstitutedillite, and (c) specimensof l-D
"buffer"
mixtures of sand and bentonite
compacted
proposed for use in the Canadian nuclear fuel waste
managementprogram. The Figure shows that normally
consolidated specimens have an extended initial linear
section (sometimesafter a preliminary period of stabilizing
porcwater pressures)followed by a later stage when the
porewaterpressureincreasesmore rapidly. The Figure also
shows resultsfrom overconsolidatedspecimens(or dilative
specimens in the case of the buffer tests) where the
specimensshow approximately the same slope Au/Ap as in
the normally consolidatedspecimensin the early part of the
tests. However, after the linear section, the porewater
pressuresbegin to decreaserather than increase. In each
case the measuredslopes Au/Ap are greaterthan 1.0,

i n d i c a t i n g a n i s o t r o p yi n t h e s p e c i m e n s ' G r a h a m a n d
H o u l s b y ( 1 9 8 3 ) e x a m i n e d t h e a n i s o t r o p i ce l a s t i c i t y o f
Winnipeg clay. The conditions 6ei = Q
overconsolidated
=
and Au A(p p') suggestthat Au/Ap should have the
value I - IIG = 1.65. This compareswell with the average
value of 1.48 measuredin the test Program. Table I shows
simiiar comparisonsfor reconstirutedillite (Graham and
Lau 1988) and for compacted sand-bentonite buffer
(Graham et al. 1989).

I o c i g e n e r a t e db y p l a s t i c h a r d e n i n g w i l l n o t b e g r e a t l y
modified by small isotropicstresschanges,the plasticstrain
incrementvector directionsrvill be cssentiallyconstantin
the range of stressesbeing considered. So, thereforewill be
the ratio Ae" iAei"' and the post-yield relationshipsare also
linear.

(o ) wINNIPEG
o T40l
a T402

t2
o.6
T7 3 5

o.r?

n d
n

\rJ

)
o.?

/,rk'
//

o .r 5
H '

"

" VC

o.30

o.oG
o.o

it 7i 6l tr :o

o .t 5

0.lo
tr

(o/^\

Ap / dvc

(c) EUFFER

( b ) ILLITE
a r7?7
o T725

t//\

f-\

Figurc 8. Comparisonof
measuredand predictedPorcwater pressurcbehaviour
Au vs. Ap.

'l/,o
, 6 4u z
!
,/
to
\,/

/i

//

7
4,

I:::;

o.oG0.o

s
;

k'
,lu

.): .'/
^\/
k/

burt

L,9 / C"

Fig. 9 shows anothcr example of predictions which are

possible when the elasticiry of the clay is assumedto be
anisotropic. ln this casethe Figure shows graphsof e" vs.
e1 during isoropic consolidation.Table I showsvaluesof
Ae,/Aer in the elastic range. The test curves in Fig. 9
changedirection when yielding occurs and componentsof
plastic strainingare added. Since the shapesof the new yield

, (%)

F i g u r e9 . C o m p a r i s o n o f m e a s u r e d a n d p r e d i c t e d
betweenvolume strain t" and axial
relationships
s t r a i ng l .

Table l. Comparisonof measuredand predictedvaluesof

(1) m = Au/Ap in undrained triaxial compression,
and (2) Ae,/Aer during isorropic consolidation
(elastic range only).

m = Au/Ap
dd,Ad
lvleasuredPredicted Measured Predicted
WinnipegClay
Illite
Buffer

1.48r
1.28
2.0O

1.65
r.l2
l.8l

1.75-1.90 r.82
2.5
2.71

* from a larger data base than produced m = 1.44 reported

by Graham and Houlsby (1983).

The agrcementsbetween the predicted and measuredvalues

in Table I arc not exact. It is neverthelessintercstingto note
how predictionsfor porewaterpressurebehaviour and the
reiationshipsbetweenthe two componentsAe" and As1 of
the strain tensorciul be expressedwith fair agrcementon the
basisof rathersimpleexpressionsused in anisouopicelastic
plasticmodels.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Computer-controlledtest equipment makes it possibleto
study stress paths that bear closer relationshipsto those
occurring round geotechnical stnrctures than can be
obtained from conventional triaxial compression tests with
63 = corstant. Many of these stresspaths will not initially
causeyielding, even in normally consolidatedanisotropic
clay. In Fig. 2 and 4 for example, any path having Ap' S 0
will initially produceonly elastic deformations. For reasons
given earlier, undrained triaxial compressiontess wiil also
be elastic.
With the insights provided earlier in this paper, it is worth
noring rhat Rendulic's principle shouid now be regardedas
an historical relic which was valuable in its time for
isotropic clay but is incompletewhen the clay is anisouopic.
It may be noted that Gens (1985) has written at length about
the bchaviour of Lower Cromer till, which is a soil with a
completely different geological history from the Winnipeg
clay (or the Pomic ciay of Moulin, 1988) but which also
fails to obey the fundamental principle of Rendulic. Many
aspcctsof thc behaviour of this till are similar to the panems
*rar can be predicted using the anisotropic elastic-plastic
model of soil behaviour that has been described here.
Rendulic's principle was valuablc in its time in
demonstratingthat soil behaviour should bc studiedin terms
of both effective suessesand specific volume, and that therc
should bc some link between the behaviours observed in
drained and undrained tests on specimensof the same soil.
The principle has now been supersededby elastic-plastic
models of soii behaviour which reveal rather morc about the
expectedpanemsof response.
model
that an anisotropicelastic-plastic
It may be suggested

based on homotheticailyexpandingyield loci is detlcient

b e c a u s ei t d o e s n o t p e r m i t t h e d e g r e eo f a n i s o r r o p yt o
change,or the shapeof the yield loci ro evolve as rhe srress
history of the soil deveiops. The model shouldbe regarded
as appropriatefor small excursionsbeyond rhe currenr yield
locus - wherethe definition of "small" is deliberatelybeing
left vague. It is to be expected rha[ a srressparh rhar
proceedswell beyond the inirial yield locus will leave the
s o i l w i t h a c u r r e n t y i e l d l o c u s w h i c h r e t - l e c r st h e
immediatelypastpath. On the other hand, ir is clear from
the work of lrwin (1973) and others,thar rhe anisorropy
locked into a clay in its youth whiie rhe specificvolumes are
still high and the particleshave not yer beencompressedinto
particularly intimate contact, is very hard to eradicateor
alter in subsequentloadings.
It seemsthereforethat a model that retainsa constantshape
for the yield loci but relates them to the anisorropichistory
of undisturbednan-rralsoils is likely to be more useful than
one, such as modified Cam-Clay, that links the shapeof the
yield loci wirh the unnatural history of isotropically
consolidatedlaboratorysoils. However rhis is a poinr of
detail, not one of fundamentalprinciple. What is clear, is
that elastic-plasticsoil mechanicsprovides a framework
which describesmany of the important fearuresof soil
behaviour. Real soils are significanrlylinear. They yield.
They have state boundary surfaces. They show'piastic
hardening or_softening,depending on the conditions. They
have ratesof porewaterpressuregenerarionand dissipation
that can be related to their state boundary surface. All of
thesefearuresare inherent in elastic-plasticmodeiling.
This paper has shown that some of the deviations from
classical Cam-Clay that are seen in natural clays do not
f u n d a m e n t a l l yv i o l a t e t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f e l a s i i c - p l a s t i c
modelling, but arise from anisotropyin the elasticrange. A
more significant limirarion in the model is the absenceof
time.,_creep,and strain rate effects. This is currcnrly
receiving attention.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The work has been supported by the Narural Sciencesand
Engineering Rcsearch Councii of Canada, and by the
Chinese Academy of Sciences.

REFERENCES
Gens, A. 1985. A state boundary surfacefor soils nor
obeying Rendulic's principle. Proc. 11th Int. Conf. on
Soil Mechs. and Foundation Engineering, San
Francisco,Calif. 2, 473-476.
Graham,J. and Houlsby,G.T. 1983. Elasticanisotropyof a
naturalclay. Geotechnique33, i65-180.
C r a h a m , J . , N o o n a n ,M . L . a n d L e w , K . V . 1 9 8 3 . Y i e l d
statesand stress-strain
relationships
in a naturalplastic
clay. CanadianCeotechnicalJounral20, 502-516.

C r a h a m ,J . a n d L a u , S . L . - K . 1 9 8 8 . I n f l u e n c eo f s t r e s s r e l e a s e d i s t u r b a n c e ,s t o r a g e a n d r e c o n s o l i d a t i o n
procedures on the shear behaviour of reconstituted
underwaterclay. Geotechnique38, 279-300.
Graham,J., Crooks,J.H.A. and Lau, S.K.-L. 1988. Yield
envelopes: Identification and geometric properties.
Geotechnique.38, 125-134.
Graham,J. Saadat,F., Gray, M.N., Dixon, D.A. and Ztang,
Q.-Y. 1989. Strengthand volume changebehaviourof
a sand-bentonitemixturc. To be published, Canadian
GeotechnicalJoumal 26. No. 2.
Henkel, D.J. 1960. The shear strength of saturated
remouidedclays. Proc. ASCE ResearchConf. on shear
strengthof cohesivesofu, Boulder,Coio., 533-554.
[,ewin, P.l. 1973. The influence of stresshistory on the
plastic potential. Proc. Symp. on Role of Plasticityin
Soil Mechanics.Cambridge,England,96-105.

Moulin, G. 1988. Etar limite d'unearqilc nerurelle:

I'argile de Pornic. Thise de docrorar,E,coleNational
S u p d r i u r ed e M d c a n i q u e ,N a n r e s ,F r a n c e ,p p . l - l 2 l
plus annexes.
Rendulic,L. 1937. Eine Grundgesetzder Tonmechanikund
sein experimentellerBeweis. Bauingenieurlg, 459467.
Roscoe,K.H. and Burland, J.B,, 1968. On rhe seneralized
s t r e s s - s t r a i nb e h a v i o u r o f w e t c l a y s . E - n g i n e e r i n g
Plasticiry, Cambridge University press.
Wood, DJ. 1984. On stresspar:uneters.Geotechnique34,
282-287 W r o t h , C . P . a n d H o u l s b y , G . T . 1 9 8 5 . S o i l m e c h a n i c sp r o p e r t y c h a r a c t e r i z a t i o na n d a n a l y s i s p r o c e d u r e s .
Proc. I lth Int. Conf. Soil Mech. i:dn Engng, San
Francisco,Calif. 3, l-54.