Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis of Concrete Structures
Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis of Concrete Structures
Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis of Concrete Structures
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
- 112 -<br />
80 mm<br />
Fig. 5.1-1: Configuration <strong>of</strong> panel tested by Peter (1964)<br />
finite element modelling uses two triangular plane stress elements<br />
only. The reinforcement is simulated by means <strong>of</strong> two bars<br />
in each direction. The thickness <strong>of</strong> these bars is determined so<br />
that the employed bar volume corresponds to the given one.<br />
The same concrete mix and storing was applied for all panels.<br />
Even so, testing <strong>of</strong> concrete specimens indicated some scatter<br />
from panel to panel; nowever, to facilitate comparison the mean<br />
parameter values are applied in the analysis. Of the measured<br />
parameters only the uniaxial tensile strength a. = 1.74 MPa<br />
assumed to be equal to the measured Brazilian splitting strength<br />
4<br />
and the initial Young's modulus E. = 2.45*10 MPa are <strong>of</strong> interest.<br />
Poisson's ratio was assumed to be v. = 0.2. The experimentally<br />
determined stress-strain curve for the reinforcement<br />
bars was simulated by a trilinear curve as shown in fig. 2. The<br />
full strength <strong>of</strong> the bars occurs when the strain is ground<br />
80 0/00f due to inhomogenities, etc., in the panels this stress<br />
value is not expected to be reached for all bars in one direction<br />
even at failure load. The approximation employed can be<br />
considered as a reasonable approach to reality.<br />
For a fixed force F = 350 kN let us first consider the horizontal<br />
displacement 6 and vertical displacement 6 as functions<br />
<strong>of</strong> the angle a. This is shown in figs. 3 and 4 both for the ex-