refer it.

http://mceer.buffalo.edu/pdf/report/15-0002.pdf

yes you can use plasticity based model , PDMY2 (PressureDependentMultiYield02) model in Opensees to simulate the liquefaction. Prof Shideh Dashti ( University of Colorado Boulder), did a lot of work on validation of PDMY02 model in SSI problems using OPENSEES

https://www.cee.ucla.edu/events/cee-seminar-dr-shideh-dashti/

Thank you Sadiq. I read their papers regarding numerical simulation related to SSI problems using PDMY02 soil model. With my own experience and if I understand their papers properly, this model has many limitation as far as prediction of settlement is concerned. For problems associated with lateral spreading, probably PDMY02 is a good choice, but for simulation of shear induced deformation, post-liquefaction settlement is hard to capture using PDMY02 model. Any idea about stress density, PM4Sand or Manzari-Dafalias model?

Well I do not have experience of using PM4SAND model as it has so many parameters for the calibration.

Also if that is the case i suggest you to consider PM4SAND in PLAXIS as it is user friendly.

Thanks! PM4Sand model is recently added in Plexis UDSM library and so does in OpenSees. Might be good option to scrounge through the capabilities/limitation of PM4Sand model in Plaxis.

My personal experience is not very good with the OPENSEES, also there are limitation of opensees soil-structure interface, its very tough to converge normal (separation) and tangential (shear, slip) soil-structure interface in opensees during dynamic excitation. So many studies which are done either consider perfect bond (no slip) or only separation (Atik and Sitar (2010)). So please be careful in selection of opensees software.

Thanks for your great insight. Yes you are right. I have been through that stage :)

I recommend reading the following publication and subsequent ones from the same authors that compare the capabilities of different numerical procedure and platforms applicable to liquefaction:

[J33] Ramirez, J., Barrero, A., Chen, L., Dashti, S., Ghofrani, A., Taiebat, M., Arduino, P. (2018). “Site Response in a Layered Liquefiable Deposit: Evaluation of Different Numerical Tools and Methodologies with Centrifuge Experimental Results,” ASCE Journal of Geotechnical and GeoEnvironmental Engineering (Accepted and in press).

For more on SSI on liquefiable ground:

https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Wh8Iz6EAAAAJ&hl=en

Dear Dr. Karimi,

Thank you for your response. May you please send me the copy of paper you suggested?

I have shared my experience in modeling liquefaction and soil-pile structure interaction from different aspects using OpenSees in this paper:

Article A Review on Factors affecting Seismic Pile Response Analysis...

I came to this conclusion that if the parameters of the material are calculated correctly, the accuracy of the opensees models are acceptable.

Regarding the convergence problem, there is an option in opensees to continue the analysis after non-convergence. I used this capability and still got accurate results. You should set the time step small enough (0.002) to get the accurate results even in the case of non-convergence.

The limitation regarding the prediction of settlement is true.

The advantages of opensees is its structural material and element database, which makes it possible to model various pile-supported structures such as Jacket platforms, offshore wind turbine and bridges.

For example see these papers:

Article Probabilistic Seismic Collapse Analysis of Jacket Offshore Platforms

Preprint Effect of foundation behavior on steel jacket offshore platf...