FEM modelling of the static behaviour of reinforced concrete beams considering the nonlinear behaviour of the concrete
30 wrz 2021
O artykule
Kategoria artykułu: Original Study
Data publikacji: 30 wrz 2021
Zakres stron: 206 - 223
Otrzymano: 17 lut 2021
Przyjęty: 26 kwi 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/sgem-2021-0012
Słowa kluczowe
© 2021 Maciej Pazdan, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Figure 10

Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 14

Figure 15

Figure 16

Figure 17

Figure 18

Figure 19

Figure 20

Figure 21

Figure 22

Figure 23

Figure 24

Figure 25

Design of concrete mix used to make tested cylindrical specimens_
1 | Cement CEM I 42.5R | 365.0 |
2 | Aggregate 2–8 mm | 650.0 |
3 | Aggregate 8–16 mm | 560.0 |
4 | Sand 0–2 mm | 650.0 |
5 | Water | 175.0 |
6 | Superplasticizer (1.2% of cement mass) | 4.5 |
Comparison of beam deflections for constant and variable Young's modulus of concrete_
1 | 40 | 58 | 10.20 | 10.26 | 0.59 |
2 | 45 | 66 | 11.69 | 11.84 | 1.28 |
3 | 50 | 73 | 13.16 | 13.44 | 2.13 |
4 | 55 | 80 | 14.61 | 15.08 | 3.22 |
5 | 60 | 88 | 16.05 | 16.75 | 4.36 |
6 | 65 | 95 | 17.49 | 18.48 | 5.66 |
Comparison of deflections for bar model and FEM model_
1 | 40 | 10.20 | 10.26 | 9.90 | 3.51 |
2 | 45 | 11.69 | 11.84 | 12.09 | 2.11 |
3 | 50 | 13.16 | 13.44 | 14.31 | 6.47 |
4 | 55 | 14.61 | 15.08 | 16.57 | 9.88 |
5 | 60 | 16.05 | 16.75 | 18.88 | 12.72 |
6 | 65 | 17.49 | 18.48 | 21.23 | 14.88 |