Fracture Response of Reinforced Concrete Deep Beams Finite Element Investigation of Strength and Beam Size

Abstract

This article presents a finite element analysis of reinforced concrete deep beams using nonlinear fracture mechanics. The article describes the development of a numerical model that includes several nonlinear processes such as compression and tension softening of concrete, bond slip between concrete and reinforcement, and the yielding of the longitudinal steel reinforcement. The development also incorporates the Delaunay refinement algorithm to create a triangular topology that is then transformed into a quadrilateral mesh by the quad-morphing algorithm. These two techniques allow automatic remeshing using the discrete crack approach. Nonlinear fracture mechanics is incorporated using the fictitious crack model and the principal tensile strength for crack initiation and propagation. The model has been successful in reproducing the load deflections, cracking patterns and size effects observed in experiments of normal and high-strength concrete deep beams with and without stirrup reinforcement.

A Transdisciplinary Approach for Analyzing Stress Flow Patterns in Biostructures

“…The Abaqus/Standard solver [45] was used to carry out a computational-mechanics experiment on a simply supported concrete beam. The length of the beam was 216 inches, the width was 36 inches, and the thickness was 6 inches.…”

“…The length of the beam was 216 inches, the width was 36 inches, and the thickness was 6 inches. A mass density of 8.67 × 10 −11 slug/in 3 , Young's modulus of 3 × 10 6 psi, and Poisson's ratio of 0.3 were used for the concrete material model [45,46]. The Abaqus mesh consisted of 73,278 quadratic tetrahedral elements comprising 117,709 nodes.…”

“…The dimensions and material of the model used for Problem 2 are identical to the concrete beam used in Problem 1. For this problem, the concrete beam was a simply supported beam with two equal forces applied equidistant from the supports, as shown in Figure 8 [45,46]. The maximum-flow/minimum-cut algorithm was executed in seven scenarios.…”