MIDAS Information Technology Co., Ltd.

a new paradigm for Integrated Geotechnical Solutions

Verifcation Summary
01
About MIDAS
midas GTS
3 Dimensional geotechnical
analysis modules
Soil
+
(CTC in Japan)
SoilWorks
2 Dimensional geotechnical
analysis modules
Introducing geotechnical finite element programs
a New Paradigm for
Geotechnical Engineering Solutions, all in one package
a new paradigm for Integrated Geotechnical Solutions
A LEADING GLOBAL Engineering Solutions Provider
KOZO KEIKAKU ENGINEERING
ITOCHU Techno-Solutions
JIP Techno Science
CREA-TEC
Cybernet Systems
Vietnam
Malaysia
Chennai
Indonesia
Singapore
Philippines
Shanghai
Shenyang
Taiwan
Thailand
Guangzhou
Chengdu
USA
(New York)
China
(Beijing)
India
(Mumbai)
Japan
(Tokyo)
Venezuela
Colombia
Bolivia
Chile
Brazil
Ecuador
Mexico
Puerto Rico
Seattle
Italy
Turkey
Spain
Algeria
Nigeria
Port Harcourt
Tanzania
Egypt
Greece
Lithuania
Russia
Saint Petersburg
Netherlands
Slovenia
MIDAS IT
(Seoul)
Sales Offices
Headquarters
Branch Offices
Czech
UK
Being the largest developer of structural and geotechnical engineering software
with extensive research in leading technologies in the world,
MIDAS has garnered global recognition through its continuous passion
and devotion towards the Advancement in Civil Engineering.
a total of over 30,000 MIDAS software licenses used worldwide in over 120 countries
a global network of engineering software distribution and technical support
over 450 engineers and professionals develop and distribute engineering software
02
Geotechnical Solutions For Practical Design
SoilWorks
Slope Seepage Soft Ground Foundation Ground Dynamic
SoilWorks
Concept
SoilWorks
Development
Motive
About SoilWorks
In the practice of geotechnical design, 2-dimensional analysis is a very practical approach. However, the design
process by and large involves repetitions of simple and complex tasks. SoilWorks has been developed to
address such time-consuming and tedious tasks to drastically improve the efficiency of the design process.
Also SoilWorks has been developed to handle practically all types of geotechnical problems Tunnels,
Slopes, Soft Grounds, Foundations, Seepage and Dynamic Analysis. Each module has been implemented to
meet the needs of and comply with the design process used by the practicing engineers.
Geotechnical analysis software programs available today generally handle specific types of geotechnical
problems with varying degrees of limitations in functionality. SoilWorks is designed to handle any geotechnical
problems encountered in the practice of soil / rock mechanics.
SoilWorks is designed for structural engineers with a background in geotechnical engineering and geotechnical
engineers with a background in finite elements.
http://en.midasuser.com
[Unit Model]
[Real Model] [Comparison of Results]
[Stresses in X-direction]
Radius of yield zone: Salencon (1969) theoretical method
[Comparison of Solutions]
03
Verification for Tunnel Finite Element Analysis
a new paradigm for Integrated Geotechnical Solutions
Static nonlinear analysis for tunnel construction stages
Ground material model: Mohr-Coulomb
No. of construction stages: 8
Ground
Theoretical Verification
Analysis Type
Element
Boundary
Condition
Static Nonlinear Analysis
Initial compressive stress of 300MPa is applied to
the right and top sides
4-Node Quadrilateral Plain Stress Element
Left Side
Base
X-Dir. Restrained
Y-Dir. Restrained
Loading
Condition Radius of yield zone 1.735 1.750 0.86
Value Difference (%)
Theoretical
SoilWorks
Tunnel displacement (mm)
Avg. difference (%)
Crown displacement (mm)
Construction Stage Results
0.446
-
-0.590
SoilWorks
0.503
9.36
-0.625
FLAC
0.463
6.57
-0.645
PLAXIS
SoilWorks Verifcation Summary
Real Model Verification
C
r
o
w
n

d
is
p
la
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
m
)
T
u
n
n
e
l
d
is
p
la
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
m
)
Construction stage Construction stage
04
Difference (%) - 1.91 0.92
Tunnel Displacement (mm) 0.311 0.304 0.307
Crown Displacement (mm) -0.897 -0.911 -0.902
Construction Stage Results SoilWorks FLAC PLAXIS
[Real Model] [Comparison of Results]
Static nonlinear analysis for tunnel construction stages
Ground material model: Mohr-Coulomb
No. of construction stages: 11
Verification for Tunnel Finite Element Analysis

SoilWorks Verifcation Summary
Ground
8 Real model
cases
- 6.08 8.29
2.03 - -
FLAC
15 Theoretical
cases
PLAXIS
Difference with
theory (%)
No. of cases
Difference with other program (%)
http://en.midasuser.com
[Axial force] [Shear] [Moment]
Non-prismatic
Section
Selfweight
Program used
Civil
SoilWorks
Civil
SoilWorks
Civil
SoilWorks
Civil
SoilWorks
Civil
SoilWorks
Civil
SoilWorks
Civil
SoilWorks
Min
-1.01E+02
-1.01E+02
-1.16E+02
-1.16E+02
-6.30E+01
-6.30E+01
-2.38E+03
-2.38E+03
-1.51E+03
-1.51E+03
-2.68E+02
-2.68E+02
-1.19E+01
-1.19E+01
Max
-5.89E+01
-3.54E+01
-2.17E+03
-9.46E+02
-2.50E+02
-5.59E+00
-4.41E+01
-4.41E+01
-5.89E+01
-3.54E+01
-2.17E+03
-9.46E+02
-2.50E+02
-5.59E+00
Min
-3.32E+01
-3.32E+01
-3.66E+01
-3.66E+01
-2.61E+01
-2.61E+01
-7.42E+02
-7.42E+02
-9.62E+02
-9.62E+02
-8.29E+01
-8.29E+01
-1.06E+01
-1.06E+01
Max
3.66E+01
2.61E+01
7.42E+02
5.11E+02
8.29E+01
1.06E+01
3.32E+01
3.32E+01
3.66E+01
2.61E+01
7.42E+02
5.11E+02
8.29E+01
1.06E+01
Min
-5.01E+00
-5.01E+00
-6.56E+00
-6.56E+00
-2.67E+01
-2.67E+01
-3.65E+02
-3.65E+02
-1.36E+03
-1.36E+03
-1.51E+01
-1.51E+01
1.79E+01
1.79E+01
Max
4.00E+01
5.30E+00
8.57E+02
5.92E+02
9.19E+01
4.85E+01
3.30E+01
3.30E+01
4.00E+01
5.30E+00
8.57E+02
5.92E+02
9.19E+01
4.85E+01
Beam load (Vert)
Beam load (Horiz)
Point load (Vert)
Point load (Horiz)
Element
temperature load
Temperature
gradient load
Difference (%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Real Model Verification
Real Model Verification
Verification Database
Lining analysis
Change in thickness: 0.3 - 0.5m, B=1m
No. of loading types: 6
Axial force Shear Moment
C
r
o
w
n

d
is
p
la
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
m
)
T
u
n
n
e
l
d
is
p
la
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
m
)
Construction stage Construction stage
[Theoretical Values as per Fellenius]
[SoilWorks]
FOS=24.959/7.810 = 3.1958
[Calculation of Safety Factor as per Fellenius] [Unit Model]
[SoilWorks Safety Factor]
Verification Conditions
Bishop method
Ground water level in rainy season
Number of slices: 30
Slope
Unreinforced Slope (Cut Zone)
Rainy season
Dry season
Factor of Safety
1.05
1.93
SoilWorks
1.05 (0.00)
1.93 (0.00)
Slope/W (Difference)
1.07 (0.02)
1.93 (0.00)
Talren (Difference)
Slice ID dX(m)
Height
(m)
Weight
(kN/m)
1 0.949 1.033
2.533
3.041
2.991
2.699
2.199
1.491
0.541
W Sin(a)
(kN/m)
1.766
4.329
5.474
5.383
4.859
3.959
2.683
0.974
a
(degree)
65.320
44.523
30.224
17.558
5.768
-5.768
-17.558
-30.224
1.604
3.036
2.756
1.624
0.488
-0.398
-0.809
-0.490
7.810 24.959
0.949
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Sum
Shear
(kN/m
2
)
1.187
2.338
3.360
3.825
3.777
3.263
2.408
1.420
Length
(m)
2.274
1.332
1.157
1.049
1.005
1.005
1.049
1.157
Shear
Length
(kN/m)
2.700
3.114
3.888
4.012
3.796
3.279
2.526
1.643
Theoretical SoilWorks Difference
3.1958 3.1957 0.0001
05
Real Model Verification
Theoretical Verification
Limit Equilibrium Analysis Verification for Slopes
SoilWorks Verifcation Summary
[Slope/W] [Talren]
a new paradigm for Integrated Geotechnical Solutions
Limit Equilibrium Analysis Verification for Slopes
SoilWorks Verifcation Summary
[Dry Season] [Rainy Season]
06
Rainy season
Dry season
Factor of Safety
1.36
2.39
SoilWorks
1.34
2.38
0.02
0.01
Talren Difference
Rainy season
Dry season
Factor of Safety
,4,
@@@
SoilWorks
,@@
@@7

Talren Difference
Soil Nail reinforced
Earth Anchor reinforced
Unreinforced
Classification
14
12
24
No. of Test Cases
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
Verification Conditions
Bishop method
Ground water level in rainy season
Number of slices: 100
Verification Conditions
Bishop method
Ground water level in rainy season
Number of slices: 100
Difference in Safety Factors with Other Programs based on the average of absolute differences for all the cases
Slope
Soil Nail Reinforced Slope
Earth Anchor Reinforced Slope
[Dry Season] [Rainy Season]
[Dry Season] [Rainy Season] [Dry Season] [Rainy Season]
[SoilWorks]
[zllyzrz| [Tlrzn|
[Talren]
Real Model Verification
Database of Verifications
Difference with Other Programs
Dry Season Rainy Season
http://en.midasuser.com

Slope
Unreinforced Slope
Reinforced Slope
Rainy season
Dry season
1.06
1.88
SoilWorks
1.03 (0.03)
1.88 (0.00)
FLAC (Difference)
0.96 (0.10)
1.80 (0.08)
PLAXIS (Difference)
Rainy season
Dry season
Factor of Safety
Factor of Safety
1.19
2.06
SoilWorks
1.15 (0.04)
2.07 (0.01)
FLAC (Difference)
1.07 (0.12)
2.04 (0.02)
PLAXIS (Difference)
SoilWorks Verifcation Summary
07 a new paradigm for Integrated Geotechnical Solutions
Overview of Analysis [Zienkiewicz, 1975]
[SoilWorks] [FLAC] [PLAXIS]
[SoilWorks] [FLAC] [PLAXIS]
Factor of Safety (FS) & Strength Reduction Factor (SRF)
Strength reduction factor
Factor of safety
Failure criterion
Classification Constitutive Equations
Cohesion & internal friction angle at failure found while increasing or
varying strength reduction factors
FS=SRF
Analysis performed until numerical non-convergence takes place
Remarks
Strength Reduction Method
Real Model Verification
Finite Element Analysis Verification for Slopes
Strength referencene line
Mohr circle at A
Reduced strength
reference line
Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion assumed
, , : Shear stress in original ground, Cohesion, Internal friction angle
, , : Shear strength at failure, Cohesion, Internal friction angle
08
Maximum displacement
Maximum moment
Maximum shear
Maximum ground reaction
Unit: lbf, in
-5.95e+06
3.13e+04
3.37e+02
-1.69E-01
SoilWorks
-5.97e+06
3.19e+04
3.48e+02
-1.64E-01
Group
0.34
1.92
3.26
2.96
Difference (%)
Maximum displacement
Maximum moment
Maximum shear
Maximum ground reaction
Unit: kN, m
-2.03e+02
-1.31e+02
4.65e+01
6.91E-03
SoilWorks
-1.95e+02
-1.37e+02
4.85e+01
6.68E-03
Group

Difference (%)
SoilWorks Verifcation Summary
Foundation Module (P-y) Analysis
Foundation
Unit Test Verification
Real Model Verification
Sand - 1
Sand - 2
Sand - 3
Soft rock - 1
http://en.midasuser.com
Moment(kNm) Shear Force(kN)
Deflection(in) Moment(lbs in) Shear Force(lbs)
Layer 1
Layer 2
Layer 3
D
e
p
t
h
(
i
n
)
D
e
p
t
h
(
i
n
)
D
e
p
t
h
(
i
n
)
Deflection(in) Moment(lbs in) Shear Force(lbs)
D
e
p
t
h
(
i
n
)
D
e
p
t
h
(
i
n
)
D
e
p
t
h
(
i
n
)
1-D Consolidation Analysis Verification for Soft Ground
Soft Ground
Classification
X=39.9m
X=39.9m
X=79.0m
X=79.0m
Max difference: 0.19cm / Max convergence error: 0.07cm
Max difference: 0.57cm / Max convergence error: -0.14cm
Po
(t/m
2
)
P
(t/m
2
)
Consolidation Period
(days) U=90%
Hand calculation
SoilWorks
Difference
1.350
1.350
0.000
20.191
20.190
0.001
71.052
71.071
- 0.019
224
224
SoilWorks Verifcation Summary
09 a new paradigm for Integrated Geotechnical Solutions
SoilWorks
5.651m
10.649m
4.0m
Fill embankment (above water level)
Traffic loads
Fill embankment (below water level)
Over-consolidated clay
K-embank
1-D consolidation settlement (cm)
2-D consolidation settlement (cm)
1-D consolidation settlement (cm)
2-D consolidation settlement (cm)
197.194
134.157
255.801
129.762
197.130
134.050
255.940
129.680
0.03
0.08
0.05
0.06
Theoretical Verification
Real Model Verification
Check Location Time - Settlement Time - Difference
Classification SoilWorks K-embank Difference (%)
Total Settlement
(cm)
0
Settlement difference
Settlement difference
Time(day)
Time(day)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
(
c
m
)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
(
c
m
)
Time(day)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
(
c
m
)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
(
c
m
)
Sloped zone Main line zone
10
SoilWorks Verifcation Summary
1-D Consolidation Analysis Verification for Soft Ground
Soft Ground
Smear Effect Well Resistance
Hansbo (1981)
Proposed by Proposed equation
Barron (1948)
Yoshikuni (1979)
Onoue (1988)
considered
considered
unconsidered
unconsidered
considered
considered
considered
unconsidered
Classification CTC = 1.2m
Proposed
Eq.
Hansbo
Barron
Yoshikuni
Onoue
SoilWorks
265.45
202.90
209.81
264.48
Hand calcs Hand calcs Hand calcs
264.95
202.40
209.31
263.98
K-embank
265.44
202.50
209.41
264.48
CTC = 1.6m
SoilWorks
512.06
400.58
412.87
510.25
511.57
400.10
412.38
509.77
K-embank
512.07
400.17
412.44
510.21
CTC = 2.0m
SoilWorks
848.94
674.56
693.75
846.06
848.46
674.08
693.27
845.58
K-embank
848.89
674.09
693.30
846.00
Main Line Zone Cohesion (t/m
2
) Sloped Zone Cohesion (t/m
2
)
Construction
stage
S-1
Original ground
1
st
Banking
2
nd
Banking
3
rd
Banking
SoilWorks
3.350
5.184
6.763
7.617
K-embank
3.350
5.200
6.770
7.620
Difference
-
0.016
0.007
0.003
S-2
SoilWorks
3.350
5.081
5.527
5.663
K-embank
3.350
5.110
5.540
5.680
Difference
-
0.029
0.013
0.017
S-3
SoilWorks
3.800
6.304
7.883
8.655
K-embank
3.800
6.300
7.880
8.660
Difference
-
0.004
0.003
0.005
S-4
SoilWorks
3.800
6.052
6.611
6.798
K-embank
3.800
6.050
6.610
6.800
Difference
-
0.002
0.001
0.002
S-1 Over-consolidated clay
Normally consolidated clay
S-3
S-2 S-4
SoilWorks K-Program
10.0m
20.0m
Fill embankment
Weak layer
PBD method (CTC 1.2m 2.0m)
Drainage Verification
Verification for Increase in Ground Strength
Properties
Time (days) Time (days) Time (days) Time (days)
D
e
g
r
e
e

o
f

c
o
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n

(
%
)
D
e
g
r
e
e

o
f

c
o
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n

(
%
)
D
e
g
r
e
e

o
f

c
o
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n

(
%
)
D
e
g
r
e
e

o
f

c
o
n
s
o
l
i
d
a
t
i
o
n

(
%
)
Theoretical
Theoretical
Theoretical
Theoretical
Theoretical
Theoretical
Theoretical
Theoretical
Theoretical
Theoretical
Theoretical
Theoretical
[Hansbo]
[Increase in ground strength in Main line zone] [Increase in ground strength in Sloped zone]
[Barron] [Yoshikuni] [Onoue]
U=90% Elapsed Time (days)
C
o
h
e
s
i
o
n

(
t
/
m
2
)
C
o
h
e
s
i
o
n

(
t
/
m
2
)
Construction stage
Original ground 1
st
Banking 2
nd
Banking 3
rd
Banking
Construction stage
Original ground 1
st
Banking 2
nd
Banking 3
rd
Banking
http://en.midasuser.com
Verification for Seepage Finite Element Analysis
Seepage
Steady Flow Seepage Analysis
Theoretical
PLAXFLOW SoilWorks
Value Value Difference (%)
Line BC 0.500 0.497 0.60 0.500 0.00
Analysis Type
Analysis
Model
Element
Property
Boundary
Condition
SoilWorks Verifcation Summary
11 a new paradigm for Integrated Geotechnical Solutions
2D Plane Element (Steady Flow)
Total Flux: Line AB: n=s & q
n
= q
s
, q
v
= 0
Line CD: q
x
= k/2, Total fluxQ
x
= k/2 x L
Line AC: q
n
= k x s/2L, Total flux Q
x
= k/2 x L
Line BC: q
s
= k x n/2L, Total flux Q
x
= k/2 x L
Boundary Condition:
3-Node triangle element
Width 2 m
1 m Height
Permeability
coefficient
k = 1.0 m/day
Water level
at dam left
Other nodes
Total water
head 1 m
No flow
[Unit Model]
[Theoretical Solution]
[Real Model]
[Comparison of Seepage Analysis Results]
[Total Water Head]
[Efflux]
m
3
/day/m
m
3
/day/m
zllyzrz zzp]y
Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum
Total water head
Pressure water head
14.000
-1.768
17.900
17.845
14.000 17.900
-1.870 17.841
Minimum Maximum

@77 ,
Unit: m
Theoretical Veification
Real Model Verification
Difference (%)
AC face constant pressure
water head (= constant)
AB face: No normal flow, q
v
=0
CB face: Seepage h=y
[Phreatic Line]
Difference (%)
[Seep/W Pressure Water Head at 14400sec]
12
SoilWorks Verifcation Summary
Verification for Seepage Finite Element Analysis
[Real Model]
[Rain Intensity Function] [Unsaturated Property Function] [Pressure Water Head Results]
[Water Level Drop Function]
[Real Model]
[Water Level Drop Function] [Pressure Water Head Results]
[SoilWorks Pressure Water Head at 14400sec] [Water Head Results at Water Level Drop]
zllyzrz zll +
Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum
Total water head
Pressure water head

-7@
4@1
17@
47@
-7@ 17@
Difference (%)
Minimum Maximum
4,

Unit: m
Unit: m
Seepage
Transient Flow Seepage Analysis - Saturated Soil
Transient Flow Seepage Analysis - Saturated Soil
SoilWorks Seep/W
Min. Max. Min Max
Total water
head
Pressure
water head
17.190
17.117
14.970
-5.311
17.190 14.970
17.114 -5.357
Difference (%)
Min Max
0.00 0.00
0.02 0.87
Real Model Verification
Real Model Verification
Percentage of Volume Water Content(%)
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

H
e
a
d
(
P
)
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

H
e
a
d
(
P
)
P
e
r
m
e
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

c
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t

r
a
t
i
o
(
K
r
)
http://en.midasuser.com
Pressure Head
Permeability coefficient ratio
Time(hr) Time (hr)
R
a
i
n
f
a
l
l
(
m
3
/
h
r
/
m
2
)
H
e
i
g
h
t
(
m
)
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

H
e
a
d
(
m
)
Time(sec) Time(sec)
H
e
i
g
h
t
(
m
)
Time(hr)
13
The user may send any
technical questions to
eSupport@MidasUser.com
Response will be provided
within 24 hours.
SoilWorks eliminates significant efforts to learn various different software programs of different user interfaces to solve a wide range
of geotechnical problems. One user interface is common to all the analysis modules to handle any type of geotechnical problems.
SoilWorks streamlines the technical support and the maintenance of the software, and further, data exchange and management are
consistent because one company has developed all the modules.
SoilWorks is designed to cater to geotechnical engineers as well as structural engineers, which provides the opportunity to expand
the areas of solving geotechnical problems. It also enables the engineers to address soil-structure interaction.
E-mail Technical Support
Upon request of the user,
an arrangement will be made
to guide/instruct/demonstrate
the use of the software online
through a web session.
Online Technical Support
Regularly scheduled webinars
are provided to cover various
subjects of geotechnical and/or
structural problems in interaction.
Recordings will be made available
for those who wish to review
or missed the sessions.
Technical Webinars
Various subjects on technical
materials and tutorials are
provided to help the user become
familiar with technical subjects
and the use of the software.
Technical Materials
e-Learning Webinars & Fast Technical Support
a total satisfaction support system
For any enquiries on the functionality and sales support,
contact: sales@MidasUser.com
a new paradigm for Integrated Geotechnical Solutions
M E M O
Geotechnical Solutions for Practical Design
SoilWorks
Oopyr|ght _ S|nce 1989 MlDAS lnformat|on Techno|ogy Oo, |td A|| r|ghts reserved
http://en.midasuser.com
for detail functionality
esupport@MidasUser.com
www.MidasUser.com
a new paradigm for Integrated Geotechnical Solutions
SoilWorks