Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Guided By
Dr. M. G. Shaikh
CONTENT
Introduction
Objectives
Literature survey
System Development
Performance Analysis
References
Introduction
Constitutive modeling of concrete.
Theory of Plasticity
Yield criteria
Hardening rule
Flow rule
Objective
To study the elastoplastic behavior of concrete
under different loading conditions and to simulate
the same by computational model.
Literature survey
Han
and Chen (1985)
In this work, the five-parameter model of Willam-Warnke, and
the four-parameter model of Hsieh-Ting-Chen was adopted.
where, are material constants, and the constants satisfy the condition
For the Hsieh-Ting-Chen four-parameter model
Here
a Drucker-Prager type of plastic potential function is assumed
where = constant, represents the plastic dilatation factor
The incremental elastic-plastic constitutive relation is given by
where the plastic stiffness tensor has the form
in which
Han
and Chen (1987):
In this paper constitutive model include Willam-Warnke fiveparameter or Hsieh-Ting-Chen four-parameter failure surface,
the non uniform hardening rule, the nonassociated flow rule.
The failure surface can be expressed in a general form as
For the Willam-Warnke five-parameter model
AFWL Data
Strain
Softening
The constitutive equation is given by
Figure 2.10Load-Deflection
Curve
Hsuam-Teh Hu et al. (1989) :
In this paper an elastic strain-hardening plastic model is proposed.
Yield functions is define as
The failure surface for biaxial tension in this investigation is defined
as
where
= the maximum compressive strength of concrete.
= mean normal stress.
= octahedral shear stress.
and = principal stresses, with
When concrete is subjected to a combined tension-compression stress
state, the yield function is defined as
Where
For biaxial compression, the yield function is defined as
where
where
Figure
2.14. Comparison of model with biaxial
compression test (a) = -1/-0.52
Imran et al.(2001):
Iswandi
(1995)
such
limitations
as
neglecting
buckling
of
Peter
Grassl et al. (2002):
The aim of authours is to model the load resistance and the
deformation capacity in uniaxial, biaxial and triaxial compression.
A three-parameter yield surface is used which is given by
where m is defined as
and the elliptic function as
Figure
2.18 The yield surface in Figure 2.19 The shape of the yield
the plane.
Figure 2.22 Triaxial compression tests from Imran (1994) compared to the constitutive
model
The author concluded that the model predicts the load resistance and
the deformation capacity of plain concrete in uniaxial, biaxial and
triaxial compression.
Experimental results for strength and deformation behaviour were
found to be in good agreement with the model prediction.
Andrzej
Litewka et al.(2002) :
The generalized stress strain relations for anisotropic elastic solids
where is the strain tensor, is the stress tensor and is the material
constants of orthotropically damaged solid
substituting the value of in the above stress strain
relation the following tensor function was obtained
of the brittle rock-like materials due to load
Deterioration
Peter
Grassl and Milan Jirasek (2005)
The general stressstrain relation for this model is
where
=stress
=damage variable
=isotropic elastic stiffness
= effective stress
The damage variable w is a function of the internal variable ; i.e.
Three-point
bending test
The material parameters are E=20 GPa; = 0:2;
ft =2.4 MPa; fc = 24 MPa; =0.001025 and As = 2 and R =25 mm and
m=1
Figure 2.25,2.26 Geometry, loading set-up and finite element mesh for the three-point bending
test. Comparison of the analysis of the test on the fine mesh with the experimental bounds
Figure 2.27 Comparison of the analyses of the three-point bending test on three
different meshes
Vassilis
K. Papanikolaou et al.(2007) :
Aim to describe the strength and deformational behaviour of both
normal and high-strength concrete under multiaxial compression.
A three-parameter hydrostatic-pressure- sensitive loading surface
was selected
A
softening function (c) is assumed to have following form
lateral directions
Figure 2.30 Comparison between analytical and experimental results (Imran, 1994) for
normal concrete under triaxial compression and various confinement levels
Qiang
Xu et al. (2013) :
In this study, a four-parameter yield function proposed by Hsieh
et al. (1983) is adopted.
Figure 2.34 Damage factor contour map of the slice of dam using the damage model
proposed in software Abaqus
Figure 2.35 Comparison of horizontal displacement (a) and vertical displacement (b)
of the slice of dam head
The author concluded that the model reduce the limitation and lacuna
of the traditional damage constitutive models for concrete.
The model reflect different strength characteristics of concrete in
tension and compression.
model can also be applied in concrete gravity dam.
System Development
Experiment Procedure:Nineteen standard cubical specimens of the ordinary concrete C20
split into three group as Group 1(four specimens), Group 2(seven
specimens) and Group 3(eight specimens), were uni-axially tested.
Specimen of Group 1,were subjected to compressive stress in main
configuration as shown in Figure 3.1.
The loading programme for Group 2 and Group 3 specimens
consisted of four cycles.
cycle 1, the compressive load in the direction of the x2 axis.
cycle 2 ,the compressive load in the direction of the x3 axis above
the point of initial cracking of the concrete.
cycle 3, the compressive load in the direction of the x2 axis.
Cycle 4,compressive load applied in the direction of the x3 axis
increasing from zero up to material failure.
Figure 3.1 Cycles of the loading of Figure 3.2 Cycles of the loading of
the specimens of group 2 and 3
the specimens of group 2 and 3
tested in main configuration
tested in auxiliary configuration
Theoretical Description of Model: stress strain relations for anisotropic elastic solids
where is the strain tensor, is the stress tensor and is
the material constants of orthotropically damaged solid
Substituting the value of in the above stress strain
relation the following tensor function was obtained
The
following non-linear stress strain relations were obtained for
uniaxial compression.
where
Simulation of the Model in MATLAB: Litewka et al.(2002) have conducted analytical and experimental
study of damage induced Anisotropy of concrete as explain above. In
this dissertation work the same model is simulated in MATLAB.
Table 3.1. Material properties and constants for concrete C20 [Litewka
et al.(2002)]
Const
Unit
Group 1
Group 2
Group 3
E0
MPa
20200
19500
19500
V0
0.21
0.20
0.20
fc
MPa
-23.9
-23.9
-23.9
MPa-2
2.244*10^
2.255*10^
2.150*10^-3
-3
-3
6.174*10^
6.195*10^
-4
-4
-1.293*10^-
4.877*10^
3.508*10^
-6
1.352*10^
-6
0.867*10^
1.778*10^-5
-5
-5
ant
B
C
MPa-2
MPa-1
MPa-1
5.101*10^-4
vector for the uniaxial compression case were taken from the
Stress
Table
3. 2. Experimental data and constants for Concrete A and B tested by
Ligeza. [Litewka et al.(2002)]
Constant
Unit
Concrete A
Concrete B
MPa
27900
30800
0.19
0.19
fc
MPa
-14.92
-28.14
MPa-2
4.432*10^-3
1.845*10^-3
MPa-2
3.233*10^-4
2.9791*10^-4
MPa-1
-3.645*10^-6
-1.4575*10^-6
MPa-1
9.338*10^-6
6.2054*10^-6
Stress vector for the Biaxial compression case were taken from the
experiment [concrete A], for longitudinal strain calculation is
=[ 0;-2.0008; -5.1620; -7.9230; -11.0042; -12.6048; -14.2855;
-15.6460; -17.0465; -18.2070].
Longitudinal strain vector obtained as an output of the MATLAB program is
=[ 0; -0.0001; -0.0002; -0.0003; -0.0005; -0.0006; -0.0007; -0.001;
-0.0016; -0.0022].
vector for the Biaxial compression case were taken from the
Stress
Figure 3.5 Normalized stress v/s lateral strain curve for biaxial compression
Performance Analysis
To validate the performance of the model employed in the
MATLAB, simulated results were compared to the
experimental and theoretical results.
Comparison of the stress strain curves obtained by
simulation in MATLAB for the specimens of Group 1,
Group 2 and Group 3 with the theoretical as well as
experimental results for concrete under uniaxial
compression is shown in Figure 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3.
Figure 4.3. Longitudinal and transverse strain for Group 3 of the specimen v/s
longitudinal compressive stress
(a)
(b)
(a)
(b)
References
1. Helmut kupfer. Hubert k. Hilsdorf and hubert rusch,(1969) Behavior of
Concrete Under Biaxial Stresses ACI journal august .
2. Willam, K. J., and Warnke, E. P.,(1974) "Constitutive Model for the Triaxial
Behavior of Concrete," IABSE Seminar on Concrete Structure Subjected to
Triaxial Stresses Paper III-l, Bergamo, Italy, May, 1974
3. D.J. Han and W.F. Chen,(1985) a nonuniform hardening plasticity model for
concrete materials Mechanics of Materials 4 (1985) 283-302.
4. D.J. Han and W.F. Chen,(1987) constitutive modeling in analysis Of
concrete structures Journal of Engineering Mechanics, Vol. 113, No. 4, April,
1987. ASCE.
5. Hsuam-Teh Hu and William C. Schnobrich,(1989) constitutive modeling of
concrete by using nonassociated plasticity Journal of Materials in Civil
Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 4, November, 1989. ASCE,
6. Sheikh, S. A., and Toklucu, M. T. (1993). Reinforced concrete columns confined by
circular spirals and hoops. ACI Struct. J., 90(5), 542553
7. By Iswandi Imran and S. J. Pantazopoulou,(2001) plasticity model for concrete under
triaxial compressionJournal of Engineering Mechanics, Vol. 127, No. 3, March, 2001.
ASCE.
References
8. Peter Grassl , Karin Lundgren, Kent Gylltoft,(2002) Concrete in
compression: a plasticity theory with a novel hardening law
International Journal of Solids and Structures 39 (2002) 52055223.
9. R. Raveendra Babua, Gurmail S. Benipala and Arbind K. Singhb(2005),
constitutive modelling of concrete:An overview asian journal of civil
engineering (building and housing) vol. 6, no. 4 Pages 211-246
10.Peter Grassl and Milan Jira sek,(2006) Plastic model with non-local
damage applied to concrete international journal for numerical and
analytical methods in geomechanics Int. J. Numer. Anal. Meth.
Geomech., 2006; 30:7190.
11. Vassilis K. Papanikolaou , Andreas J. Kappos,(2007) Confinementsensitive plasticity constitutive model for concrete in triaxial
compression International Journal of Solids and Structures 44 (2007)
70217048
Thank you