Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-w5hgh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T07:52:28.805Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A constitutive law for snow taking into account the compressibility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 September 2017

Aloke Mishra
Affiliation:
Snow and Avalanche Study Establishment, Manali 175 103, Himachal Pradesh, India
Puneet Mahajan
Affiliation:
Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016, India E-mail: mahajan@am.iitd.ernet.in
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A constitutive law for snow derived from a complementary power potential is proposed. The total deformation of snow is divided into elastic and creep parts. A hereditary integral using Norton’s power law is employed to describe primary creep. The concept of effective stress, which takes compressibility of snow into account, is used to calculate creep deformation. The hereditary integral is approximated by a non-linear spring–dashpot model. Results from uniaxial compression experiments (stress range 15– 45 kPa) on sieved snow of density range 180–470 kgm-3 were used to determine the constants appearing in the constitutive equation. The response of snow to constant strain rate (7.4×10-6 s-1 to 2.2×10-5 s-1) under bilaterally confined conditions was found with an iterative scheme employing the proposed constitutive law. The simulated results agree well with the measured axial stresses and volumetric changes.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) [year] 2004
Figure 0

Fig. 1.A non-linear spring–dashpot model for primary creep.

Figure 1

Fig. 2.Concept of t0 shown graphically on a typical creep curve.

Figure 2

Fig. 3.Concept of t1 shown on a strain-rate υs time plot.

Figure 3

Fig. 4.Comparison of actual and simulated creep deformation for high-density snow.

Figure 4

Fig. 5.Comparison of actual and simulated creep deformation for high-density snow.

Figure 5

Fig. 6.Comparison of actual and simulated deformation for low-density snow.

Figure 6

Table 1.Values and units of the constants determined

Figure 7

Fig. 7.Simulated developed axial stress, compared with triaxial test result.

Figure 8

Fig. 8.Simulated volume change is slightly less than the actual one.