Evaluation and comparison of concrete constitutive models in numerical simulation of reinforced concrete slabs under blast load

IF 2.1 Q2 ENGINEERING, CIVIL
Hani Mahdavi Talaromi, Farhad Sakhaee
{"title":"Evaluation and comparison of concrete constitutive models in numerical simulation of reinforced concrete slabs under blast load","authors":"Hani Mahdavi Talaromi, Farhad Sakhaee","doi":"10.1177/20414196211048911","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Numerical models have been used recently to analyze concrete structures subjected to high-impulsive loads. A material model that can well capture the mechanical behaviors is crucial to obtain reliable results. Present study, focused on reinforced concrete slab as a major load carrying element of the RC structures under blast loading. By performing several simulations in popular and powerful concrete constitutive models, including concrete damage R3, HJC, CSCM, and Winfrith the accuracy of these models was investigated. Maximum deflections have been compared with each other and expanded further to compare with experiments. Result showed all models have an acceptable accuracy in estimating maximum slab deflection. Concrete Damage R3 presented the highest accuracy. HJC has the second rank and CSCM and Winfrith have the third and the fourth places, respectively. HJC needed the minimum computation time. CSCM had minimum input parameters but includes maximum calculation time. Winfrith had the lowest accuracy, however this model presented very conservative results. Uniaxial compressive and tensile stress-strain curves showed that the models which presented higher values of strength, evaluated lower maximum values of deflection.","PeriodicalId":46272,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Protective Structures","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Protective Structures","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20414196211048911","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Numerical models have been used recently to analyze concrete structures subjected to high-impulsive loads. A material model that can well capture the mechanical behaviors is crucial to obtain reliable results. Present study, focused on reinforced concrete slab as a major load carrying element of the RC structures under blast loading. By performing several simulations in popular and powerful concrete constitutive models, including concrete damage R3, HJC, CSCM, and Winfrith the accuracy of these models was investigated. Maximum deflections have been compared with each other and expanded further to compare with experiments. Result showed all models have an acceptable accuracy in estimating maximum slab deflection. Concrete Damage R3 presented the highest accuracy. HJC has the second rank and CSCM and Winfrith have the third and the fourth places, respectively. HJC needed the minimum computation time. CSCM had minimum input parameters but includes maximum calculation time. Winfrith had the lowest accuracy, however this model presented very conservative results. Uniaxial compressive and tensile stress-strain curves showed that the models which presented higher values of strength, evaluated lower maximum values of deflection.
爆炸荷载作用下钢筋混凝土板数值模拟中混凝土本构模型的评价与比较
数值模型最近被用于分析承受高冲击载荷的混凝土结构。一个能够很好地捕捉力学行为的材料模型对于获得可靠的结果至关重要。目前的研究主要集中在钢筋混凝土板作为钢筋混凝土结构在爆炸荷载作用下的主要承载元件。通过在流行且强大的混凝土本构模型中进行几次模拟,包括混凝土损伤R3、HJC、CSCM和Winfrith,研究了这些模型的准确性。最大挠度已相互比较,并进一步扩展以与实验进行比较。结果表明,所有模型在估计板的最大挠度方面都具有可接受的精度。混凝土损伤R3表现出最高的准确性。HJC排名第二,CSCM和Winfrith分别排名第三和第四。HJC需要最少的计算时间。CSCM具有最小的输入参数,但包括最大的计算时间。温弗里斯的准确度最低,但该模型给出了非常保守的结果。单轴压缩和拉伸应力-应变曲线表明,模型的强度值较高,挠度最大值较低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
25.00%
发文量
48
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信