Finite Element Analysis Using the Crack Strain Separation Model for Reinforced Concrete Membrane
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Research Significance
3. Crack Opening Path Model
4. Crack Strain Separated (CSS) Bi-Directional Shear Friction Model
5. CSS Stress–Strain Formulations
5.1. Shearing Stress throughout the Crack during Periods of Compression and Tension
5.2. Formulation of Secant Stiffness Matrix: Net Shearing Strain
5.2.1. Case One: Crack Direction 1 (Active)
5.2.2. Case Two: Crack Direction 2 (Active)
5.2.3. Active Crack Criteria
6. Results and Discussion
7. Comparison of MCFT and βG Models with CSS Results
8. Conclusions
- Formulation of CSS of the Bi-directional shear friction model had the ability to capture essential shear friction behaviors. Strains were successfully separated by the model because of the uncracked concrete and the cracks, thus resulting in increased accuracy in the overall model. The model can also handle various crack orientations.
- Comparing the CSS Model with other models such as the Modified Compression Field Model and basic βG models indicate that the level of inconsistency is very high. Predicted displacements and shear stresses varied greatly for the three models when compared. It was evident that every model showed varying interactions between the steel and the concrete because of the differences in the cracked concrete’s predicted stiffness.
- There are some elements that were examined using the three models. They were also subjected to horizontal shear and vertical compression. They had previously developed diagonal cracks. Reinforced concrete membrane loading can directly be applied to shear wall design and behavioral prediction.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
a | a parameter that defines the slope of the crack opening path |
γtotal | the total shear strain |
γ12 | the shear strain |
γcr | the cracking shear strain |
γc | the concrete shear strain |
γcrold | the previous converged value of locked-in crack slip |
γn | the net shearing strain |
γn(1 or 2) | the net shearing strain in the first or second direction |
γ12old | the previous converged value of shear strain |
eε | the effective concrete crack strain |
eε1 or 2 | the effective concrete crack strain in the first or second direction |
ε1 or 2 | the concrete crack strain in the first or second direction |
μup | the friction coefficient defined relative to the crack surface in the uphill direction |
μdown | the friction coefficient defined relative to the crack surface in the downhill direction |
σ1 | the concrete stress in the first direction |
σ2 | the concrete stress in the second direction |
τ12 | the shear stress |
τa12 | the minimum shear stress |
τb12 | the outside upper limit shear stress |
τc12 | the maximum shear stress |
fcr | the concrete crack stress |
Ec | the modulus of elasticity of concrete |
E1 or 2 | the secant modulus of concrete in the first or second direction |
G | the concrete shear modulus |
β′ | the dowel action shear retention factor |
β | a random factor that is between 0 and 1 |
V and P | the applied forces |
T and N | the normal forces |
References
- So, M. Total-Strain Based Bond/Slip and Shear/Friction Membrane Model for Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced Concrete. Ph.D. Thesis, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, R.R.H.; Hsu, T.T.C.; Lee, J.Y. Rational Shear Modulus for Smeared-Crack Analysis for Reinforced Concrete. ACI Struct. J. 2001, 98, 443–450. [Google Scholar]
- Vecchio, F.J.; Collins, M.P. The Modified Compression-Field Theory for Reinforced Concrete Elements Subjected to Shear. ACI Struct. J. 1986, 83, 219–231. [Google Scholar]
- Vecchio, F.J. Reinforced Concrete Membrane Element Formulations. J. Struct. Eng. 1990, 116, 730–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walraven, J.C. Rough Cracks Subjected to Earthquake Loading. J. Struct. Eng. 1994, 120, 1510–1524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palermo, D.; Vecchio, F.J. Simulation of Cyclically Loaded Concrete Structures Based on the Finite-Element Method. J. Struct. Eng. 2007, 133, 728–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Stevens, N.J.; Uzumeri, S.M.; Collins, M.P.; Will, G.T. Constitutive Model for Reinforced Concrete finite Element Analysis. ACI Struct. J. 1991, 88, 49–59. [Google Scholar]
- Pang, X.B.; Hsu, T.T.C. Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Membrane Elements in Shear. ACI Struct. J. 1995, 92, 665–677. [Google Scholar]
- Mitchell, P.J.; Cho, B.Y.; Kim, Y.J. Analytical Model of Two-Directional Cracking Shear-Friction Membrane for Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced Concrete. Materials 2021, 14, 1460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mitchell, P.J. Two-direction Cracking Shear-Friction Membrane Model for Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced concrete. Master’s Thesis, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Harmon, T.G.; Ramakrishnan, S.; Wang, E.H. Confined Concrete Subjected to Uniaxial Monotonic Loading. J. Eng. Mech. 1998, 124, 1303–1309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, Y.J.; You, B.; Sriraman, V.; Kotwal, A. Confined Concrete with Variable Crack Angle-Part I: Analytical Model. Mag. Concr. Res. 2014, 66, 1075–1083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, Y.J.; Sriraman, V.; Kotwal, A.; You, B. Confined Concrete with Variable Crack Angle-Part II: Shear Friction Model. Mag. Concr. Res. 2014, 66, 967–974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chorzepa, M.; Kim, Y.J.; Yun, G.J.; Harmon, G.T.; Dyke, S. Cyclic Shear-Friction Constitutive Model for Finite Element. ACI Struct. J. 2011, 108, 324–331. [Google Scholar]
- Mattock, A.H.; Hawkins, N.M. Shear Transfer in Reinforced Concrete−Recent Research. PCI J. 1972, 17, 55–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ACI 318-08; Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary. American Concrete Institute: Farmington Slopes, MI, USA, 2005.
Crack Surface Slipping down a Hill | Crack Surface Does Not Slip | Crack Slipping up a Hill | |
---|---|---|---|
positive total shearing strain (γ12 > 0) | , , | , , | |
negative total shearing strain (γ12 < 0) | , , | , , |
Tense Crack Surface in Crack Direction 1 | Tense Crack Surface in Crack Direction 2 | |
---|---|---|
positive total shearing strain (γ12 > 0) | ||
negative total shearing strain (γ12 < 0) |
Crack Surface Slipping down a Hill | Crack Surface Does Not Slip | Crack Slipping up a Hill | |
---|---|---|---|
positive total shear in strain (γ12 > 0) | , , | , , | |
negative total shearing strain (γ12 < 0) | , , | , , |
Crack Surface Slipping down a Hill | Crack Surface Does Not Slip | Crack Slipping up a Hill | |
---|---|---|---|
positive total shearing strain (γ12 > 0) | , , | , , | |
negative total shearing strain (γ12 < 0) | , , | , , |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Mitchell, J.P.; Chae, S.-U.; Kim, Y.-J.; Abaza, M.E. Finite Element Analysis Using the Crack Strain Separation Model for Reinforced Concrete Membrane. Buildings 2023, 13, 1896. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13081896
Mitchell JP, Chae S-U, Kim Y-J, Abaza ME. Finite Element Analysis Using the Crack Strain Separation Model for Reinforced Concrete Membrane. Buildings. 2023; 13(8):1896. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13081896
Chicago/Turabian StyleMitchell, Jeffrey P., Seung-Un Chae, Yoo-Jae Kim, and Mohamed E. Abaza. 2023. "Finite Element Analysis Using the Crack Strain Separation Model for Reinforced Concrete Membrane" Buildings 13, no. 8: 1896. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13081896