# COMPUTATIONAL MECHANICS New Trends and Applications S. Idelsohn, E. Oñate and E. Dvorkin (Eds.

ANALYSIS OF REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURES USING ANSYS NONLINEAR CONCRETE MODEL
Antonio F. Barbosa and Gabriel O. Ribeiro
Federal University of Minas Gerais Department of Structural Engineering Avenida do Contorno, 842 – 2o andar 30110-060 – Belo Horizonte - MG - Brazil e-mail: gabriel@dees.ufmg.br

Key words: Reinforced Concrete, Nonlinear Analysis, Finite Element Analysis. Abstract. This paper considers the practical application of nonlinear models in the analysis of reinforced concrete structures. The results of some analyses performed using the reinforced concrete model of the general purpose finite element code Ansys are presented and discussed. The differences observed in the response of the same reinforced concrete beam as some variations are made in a material model that is always basically the same are emphasyzed. The consequences of small changes in modelling are discussed and it is shown that satisfactory results may be obtained from relatively simple and limited models.

1

capable of tension and compression only. which depends on five material parameters. proper modelling of such structures is a challenging task. Cracking and crushing are determined by a failure surface. the wide dissemination of computers and the development of the finite element method have provided means for analysis of much more complex systems in a much more realistic way. an unique and complete constitutive model for reinforced concrete is still lacking. However. concrete cracks if any principal stress is tensile while crushing occurs if all principal stresses are compressive. Unless plastic deformation is taken into account. one for open cracks and other for closed ones. Three different uniaxial materials. there is no strain softening neither in compression nor in tension. each one in any direction. the material behaviour is linear elastic until failure. exploring different aspects of material modelling. are used to consider the retention of shear stiffness in cracked concrete. a tension cutoff. Plastic behaviour and creep can be considered in the reinforcing bars too. Ribeiro 1 INTRODUCTION Reinforced concrete structures are largely employed in engineering practice in a variety of situations and applications. has been used. applied to a threedimensional solid element in which reinforcing bars may be included. among others. Due mainly to the complexity of the composite nature of the material. Its reinforced concrete model consists of a material model to predict the failure of brittle materials. The main obstacle to finite element analysis of reinforced concrete structures is the difficulty in characterizing the material properties. 2 . Although traditional empirical methods remain adequate for ordinary design of reinforced concrete members. an investigation of the capabilities of such codes seems to be of much concern. Once general purpose computer codes are supposed to be more likely used as a design tool. Once the failure surface is surpassed. In most cases these structures are designed following simplified procedures based on experimental data. version 5. 2 THE MATERIAL MODEL The finite element code Ansys. It can also undergo plastic deformation and creep. When the failure surface is reached stresses in that direction have a sudden drop to zero. The objective of this paper is to discuss the possibilities of different reinforced concrete models in practical use. The material is capable of cracking in tension and crushing in compression. Many times specifically developed computer programs are used in finite element analyses of reinforced concrete structures. Two shear transfer coefficients.3. Tensile failure consists of a maximum tensile stress criterion. A series of analysis of the same structure has been performed. Barbosa and Gabriel O. may be used as a smeared reinforcement.Antonio F. Despite the great advances achieved in the fields of plasticity. many general purpose codes commercially available provide some kind of material model intended to be employed in the analysis of concrete structures. It reports the results of some analyses performed using the reinforced concrete model of the general purpose finite element code Ansys. Much effort has been spent in search of a realistic model to predict the behaviour of reinforced concrete structures. damage theory and fracture mechanics. The failure surface for compressive stresses is based on WillamWarnke failure criterion.

Only the longitudinal reinforcement has been considered. b) with smeared reinforcement. Figure 2 . In fact. Solid elements have been used in beam modelling for they are the only ones that support the concrete model in Ansys. and the other composed uniquely of solid elements. two kinds of models have been used (figure 2): one adopting truss bars as discrete reinforcement connecting solid elements nodes.Antonio F. Figure 1 . Ribeiro 3 ANALYSES PERFORMED A simply supported reinforced concrete beam subjected to uniformly distributed loading has been analyzed (figure 1).The beam analyzed. Barbosa and Gabriel O.Finite element meshes: a) with discrete reinforcement. Due to transversal and longitudinal symmetry. some of which containing a smeared reinforcement. a quarter of the beam has been discretized. this seems to be the only major limitation to practical application of Ansys in reinforced concrete analysis. Regarding meshes. 3 .

as cracking capability has always been kept on. The differences between the models appear soon after service load. but it has not been considered important to the structure being analyzed. load-deflection curves show very close results at the early stages of load history for all analyses conducted. prevents the occurrence of the other. crushing has been associated to the multilinear stress-strain curve in order to compose the fourth compressive model for concrete. The models containing smeared steel presented a smoother transition in this phase of stiffness degradation. Associated flow rules have been used in all elastoplastic analyses. The initially linear relation experiments a small jump. cracking in linear elastic phase should govern tensile failure in all analyses. yielding or crushing. the reinforcement has always been treated as elastic perfectly plastic.Summary of models analyzed. the former capable of cracking in tension and crushing in compression. A multilinear uniaxial stress-strain relation. when cracking in concrete begins. This fact causes a certain incompatibility with the failure criterion for both are linear elastic and the phenomenon that occurs earlier. The analyses performed are summarized in Table 1. Linear elastic models 4 . with a sudden loss of stiffness. Barbosa and Gabriel O.Antonio F. has represented concrete compressive behaviour in the third model. Due to isotropy. according to four different material models. Linear elastic behaviour for both concrete and steel. once all models are quite similar. Analysis Case 2f Case 2m Case 2k Case 2L Case 3m Case 3n Case 3p Case 3o Tension Cracking Cracking Cracking Cracking Cracking Cracking Cracking Cracking Concrete Model Compression Linear elastic + crushing Elastic perfectly plastic (Drucker-Prager) Multilinear work hardening (von Mises) Multilinear work hardening + crushing Linear elastic + crushing Elastic perfectly plastic (Drucker-Prager) Multilinear work hardening (von Mises) Multilinear work hardening + crushing Reinforcing steel model Representation Material model Discrete Linear elastic Discrete Elastic perfectly plastic Discrete Elastic perfectly plastic Discrete Elastic perfectly plastic Smeared Linear elastic Smeared Elastic perfectly plastic Smeared Elastic perfectly plastic Smeared Elastic perfectly plastic Table 1 . In the second model crushing of compressed concrete has been disabled and an elastic perfectly plastic model based on Drucker-Prager yield criterion has been used instead. The elastoplastic model with multilinear work hardening uniaxial stress-strain curve adopted a von Mises yielding criterion. concrete model for tensile stresses has been the same as that of compressive one when this plastic model was adopted but. so that it could not include the effect of hydrostatic pressure. followed by a nearly linear curve. 4 RESULTS As expected. Finally. simulating a parabolic curve. has provided the first model. Except those models in which concrete has been considered linear elastic and so has been the steel. Drucker-Prager yield criterion has been considered associated to an elastic perfectly plastic behaviour for there is no other way it can be used in Ansys. Ribeiro Each mesh has been analyzed four times.

The ultimate load of this model was much smaller than that of the structure.50E-02 3.Load-deflection curves for models with discrete reinforcement. as it should due to reinforcement ratio.50E-02 Deflection (m) Figure 3 . Barbosa and Gabriel O. the model in which crushing of concrete has been disabled (Case 2k) has been able to generate a complete loaddeflection diagram.00E-03 1.00E-02 1. However.00E-02 3. As the steel has been assumed to behave linearly. Ribeiro (Case 2f e Case 3m) quickly reach failure in compression zones and cannot converge to a solution anymore. concrete yielding soon after service load. especially the model that followed a multilinear stress-strain relation in concrete compression. So. Case 2L) have provided a longer load history. Models with smeared reinforcement presented essentially the same behaviour. In this case. The best results have come from the elastoplastic models. 90 80 70 60 50 Load (kN/m) 40 30 20 10 0 0. all models have assumed a nearly linear path of smaller stiffness than the initial. Failure should have occurred due to yielding of reinforcement. stresses in the reinforcing bars remained in the elastic range. although the load-deflection relations of the model and of the structure have followed very close paths. failure of these models has occurred as soon as the failure surface has been reached by compressed concrete. Once again the model with crushing associated to plasticity (Case 3o) did not reach loads much greater than service ones. The elastic perfectly plastic model based on Drucker-Prager yield criterion with discrete reinforcement (Case 2m) has exhibited a somewhat similar behaviour. Elastoplastic models with work hardening in compression and discrete reinforcement (Case 2k. The beam ultimate load has not been reached.50E-02 2. On the other hand. considering the amount of steel in the cross section of the beam.00E+00 Case 2f Case 2k Case 2L Case 2m 5.Antonio F. which have been able to reach ultimate loads very close to the expected values.00E-02 2. When crushing has been kept active (Case 2L) the failure of the model has still been premature. the failure of this model has been determined by crushing of compressed concrete. Once the initial phase of crack opening. It has happened because. once concrete in compression is linear until yielding. failure of the model has been determined by yielding of reinforcing steel. it has been able to resist to higher stresses than it would in reality as the nonlinear phase of stress-strain relation started. perfectly plastic (Case 3n) and with work hardening (Case 3p). 5 .

The results of the analyses performed have been compared to a load-deflection curve derived from an analytically determined moment-curvature relationship. 90 80 70 60 50 40 Load (kN/m) 30 20 10 0 0.00E-02 3. Regardless reinforcement representation. discrete or smeared. as well as effects of shear retention factors and transverse reinforcement. plotting of the analytical curve against the 6 . yet to be done.00E+0 5. Meanwhile.50E- 2.00E-03 1.00E-03 1. Ribeiro 100 90 80 70 60 50 Load (kN/m) 40 30 20 10 0 0. Barbosa and Gabriel O. models combining crushing and plasticity have presented a quite early loss of convergence.Load-deflection curves for models with smeared reinforcement.50E-02 3.50E-02 Deflection (m) Figure 5 . This suggests the existence of some kind of incompatibility between yielding and failure in Ansys concrete model.50E-02 2. is the next step in the study. Future studies should also comprise the influence of the amount of reinforcement.50E-02 Deflection (m) Figure 4 . Comparison with experimental data.Antonio F.00E+00 Case 3m Case 3n Case 3o Case 3p 5.00E-02 2.Comparison between load-deflection curves of models with discrete reinforcement and smeared reinforcement.00E-02 3. and despite the good concrete elastoplastic model behaviour.00E-02 2.00EExpected result Case 3p Case 2k 1.50E-02 3.00E-02 1.