Manuel Pastor

Computational Geomechanics


Скачать книгу

already at hand so that only the interaction has to be taken into account. This type of solution procedure is extensively investigated for the dynamic case by Markert et al. (2010) and, as already mentioned, by Park and Felippa (1983), Park (1983), and Zienkiewicz et al. (1988). A splitting procedure will be used in Section 5.5 both for the dynamic case and consolidation allowing for same interpolation for both u and p. Partitioned solutions are quite common in consolidation and have been extensively treated in Lewis and Schrefler (1998). From the investigation of the iteration convergence within a time step, Turska and Schrefler (1993) found the existence of a lower limit for Δt/h2 which means that it is not always possible to decrease Δt without also decreasing the mesh size h. Such a limit was also found by Murthy et al. (1989) for Poisson‐type equations and by Rank et al. (1983) for transient finite element analyses by invoking the discrete maximum principle.

      3.2.4.3 The Consolidation Equation

      In the standard treatment of consolidation equation (see, for instance, Lewis and Schrefler 1998), the acceleration terms are generally omitted a priori. However, as explained above, there is no disadvantage in writing the full dynamic formulation for solving such a problem. The procedure simply reduces the multiplier of the mass matrix M to a negligible value without influencing in any way the numerical stability, provided, of course, that an implicit integration scheme is used.

      3.2.4.4 Static Problems – Undrained and Fully Drained Behavior

      Steady state (static) conditions will only be reached under the extremes of undrained or fully drained behavior. This can be deduced by rewriting the two, discrete, governing Equations (3.23) and (3.28) omitting terms involving time derivatives. The equations now become:

      and

      with the effective stresses given by (3.27) and are defined incrementally as

      With bold p overbar w determined as

      (3.58)bold p overbar Superscript w Baseline identical-to bold upper H Superscript negative 1 Baseline bold f Superscript left-parenthesis 2 right-parenthesis

      The case of undrained behavior is somewhat more complex. We note that with k = 0, i.e. with totally impermeable behavior

      (3.59)bold upper H equals bold 0 and bold f Superscript left-parenthesis 2 right-parenthesis Baseline equals bold 0

      But on re‐examining Equation (3.28), we find that it becomes

      (3.60)bold upper Q overTilde Superscript normal upper T Baseline ModifyingAbove Above bold u overbar With ampersand c period dotab semicolon plus bold upper S ModifyingAbove Above bold p overbar With ampersand c period dotab semicolon Superscript w Baseline equals 0

      which, on integration, establishes a unique relationship between bold u overbar and bold p overbar w which is not time‐dependent

      assuming that the initial condition of bold u overbar = 0 and bold p overbar w = 0 coincides.

      Solving (3.61) for bold p Superscript w Baseline overbar which can only be done provided that some fluid compressibility is available giving S ≠ 0, then (3.55) and the constitutive