2002
DOI: 10.1016/s0045-7949(02)00057-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modelling triaxial compression using the Microplane formulation for low confinement

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The coefficient #(r V ), in Eqs. (20) and (21), was absent from the original model M4 and has been recently introduced in order to achieve a more realistic response when transverse compressive stresses are applied during tensile softening or when the triaxial compression under low confinement is considered (see also Ghazi et al, 2002).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The coefficient #(r V ), in Eqs. (20) and (21), was absent from the original model M4 and has been recently introduced in order to achieve a more realistic response when transverse compressive stresses are applied during tensile softening or when the triaxial compression under low confinement is considered (see also Ghazi et al, 2002).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ghazi et al (2002) observed that the microstructure coefficients of the M4 model do not suitably predict the behaviour of concrete with different uniaxial compressive strengths and different confinement levels. To provide better simulations for an axially loaded FRP-wrapped concrete column using the microplane theory, Ghazi et al (2002) proposed a new formula for the adjustable micromechanics variables ( 1 k to 4 k ) and for the fixed micromechanics constant ( 10 c ) as a function of the level of the confinement lateral pressure (Ghazi et al, 2002). They introduced the factors affecting the post-peak steepness and the stress and strain at the peak of the stress-strain curve of confined concrete as functions of the concrete strength and confinement levels to give a better fit between analytical results and experimental data.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…However it has been concluded, through several numerical simulations, that the microplane theory has inconsistent predictions for the concrete behaviour when applying low confinement lateral pressures, as is the case of FRP-wrapped concrete cylinders (Ghazi et al, 2002). Ghazi et al (2002) observed that the microstructure coefficients of the M4 model do not suitably predict the behaviour of concrete with different uniaxial compressive strengths and different confinement levels.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%