You are on page 1of 30

AHSANULLAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE

AND TECHNOLOGY (AUST)

PAPER ID: SEE 051

FINITE ELEMENT MODELING, ANALYSIS AND VALIDATION OF THE


FLEXURAL CAPACITY OF RC BEAMS MADE OF STEEL FIBER REINFORCED
CONCRETE (SFRC)

Presented by
Sadia Mannan Mitu Co-Authors:
Md. Mashfiqul Islam
Department of Civil Engineering
Mohammed Shakib Rahman
Ahsanullah University of Science
Md. Serajus Salekin
and Technology (AUST),
Md. Rakibul Islam
Dhaka 1208, Bangladesh
CONTENTS

 Introduction of SFRC
 Experimental program and strategy

 FE modeling and analysis

 Evaluation of FE reults

 Conclusion
WHAT IS SFRC?

STEEL

FIBRE
SFRC
REINFORCED

CONCRETE
COMPONENT OF SFRC

Constituents of
portland cement

SFRC

Dispersion of
Fine agg. & short
Coarse agg. Descrete
Steel Fibre
ADVANTAGES OF SFRC
Enhancement of
ductility and
energy
absorption
capacity
Shock Improve internal
resistance as tensile strength
well as of the concrete
toughness of due to bonding
concrete SFRC force.
ADVANTAGES

Increase the
flexural
Enhance shear
strength , direct
and torsional
tensile strength
strength
and fatigue
strength.
PC(REINFORCED) VS SFRC
PC
SFRC
(Reinforced)
MECHANISM OF SFRC
• When steel fibers are
added to a concrete mix :

Fibers distribute
randomly and act
as crack arrestors.

changing concrete from a


brittle material to a Mechanism of fiber in flexure
ductile one, in addition
(a) Free area of stress.
to improving toughness
and rigidity (b) Fiber bridging area.
(c) Micro-crack area.
(d) Undamaged area.
Increases the
ductility by arresting
crack and prevents
the propagation of
cracks by bridging
fibers.
OBJECTIVE

Select
suitable &
available Above all to
type of steel
fiber provide the
construction
industry of
Investigate various
shear capacity Bangladesh with
enhancements reliable
of concretes
using the SF experimental data
and validated FE
modeling about
Observe this engineering
Failure material.
patterns
Construct FE
models for PC
and SFRC
with ANSYS
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM AND STRATEGY
Experimental strategy

Experimental program

Specimen preparation

Testing and data acquisition

Investigation of failure pattern

FE modeling through optimizing the basic


engineering properties

FE analysis applying experimental loading environment and


displacement boundary conditions

Validation of FE models and analyses with experimental


results and failure modes
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM AND STRATEGY
Typical Steel Fibers
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM AND STRATEGY
m)

Diameter=0.04in (1.18mm)
0m
(1

Circular
in

120° cross
0.4

section
Effective length=1.85in (47.2mm)
Original length=2.65in (67.2mm)
Steel fiber aspect ratio 40
m)
0m
(1
in

120°
0.4

Effective length=2.8in (70.8mm)


Original length=3.57in (90.8mm)
Steel fiber aspect ratio 60
m)
0m
(1
in

120°
0.4

Effective length=3.7in (94.4mm)


Original length=4.5in (114.4mm)
Steel fiber aspect ratio 80
(b)
(a)

Figure 3: (a) Size and geometry of steel fibers (b) image of fibers
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM AND STRATEGY

(a) (b)

Figure 4 : (a) Preparation of steel fibers (b) steel fibers of different


aspect ratio.
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM AND STRATEGY
Aggregates
Crushed stone is used as aggregate in this research.
Different types of aggregate are shown in Figure 5.

(a) (b)

Figure 5: (a) Stone aggregate (CA) and (b) Sand (FA)


EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM AND STRATEGY

5"

6"

10mm
@2.5" c/c
Clear span = 2.5'

Beam length = 3'

Figure 2: Experimental strategy on


flexural beams.

Figure 1: Stirrup strategy.


EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM AND STRATEGY

Figure 7: Horizontal data acquisition


system via DICT.

Figure 6: Experimental setup for shear


critical beam in the UTM.
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM AND STRATEGY
Images of Experimental Testing of Simply Supported RC Beam
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM AND STRATEGY
5000 35
CSCCON 1400 9.8
CSC40 CSTCON
CSC60 CST40
CSC80 1200 CST60 8.4
4000 28 CST80

Compressive stress (MPa)


Compressive stress (psi)

1000 7.0

Tensile stress (MPa)


Tensile stress (psi)
3000 21
800 5.6

2000 14 600 4.2

400 2.8
1000 7
200 1.4

0 0 0 0
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
Compressive strain Tensile strain
(a) (b)
Fig. 2: Experimental results of plain concrete and SFRC (a) compression (b)
splitting tension
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM AND STRATEGY
Mid point deflection (mm)
0 12.7 25.4 38.1 50.8
8 35.2
CSBFCCON
CSBFC40 31
7
CSBFC60
CSBFC80
6 26.4

5 22.0
Load (kip)

Load (kN)
4 17.6

3 13.2

2 8.8

1 4.4

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Mid point deflection (in)

Fig. 2: Experimental results of plain concrete and SFRC load


deflection behaviour of beams.
FINITE ELEMENT MODELING AND ANALYSIS

FE modeling

* Suitable element type


* Adequate mesh size
* Optimized material properties
* Appropriate boundary conditions
* Realistic loading environment
* Proper time stepping
FINITE ELEMENT MODELING AND ANALYSIS
FE element
SOLID65 is used to model the concrete and also SFRC. The solid is capable of
cracking in tension and crushing in compression. The element is defined by eight
nodes having three degrees of freedom at each node; translations in the nodal x, y,
and z directions. The element is capable of plastic deformation, cracking in three
orthogonal directions and crushing.
The shear element reinforcements are modeled using LINK8 element which is a 3D
spar element with three degrees of freedom at each node same to SOLID 65.The
geometry and node locations for this type of element are as follows:

4
P M
J 5 O O,P
6 N
I K,L
M N Rebar
Z 3 J
Z x 2 Prism Option
L Y
Y I
I M,N,O,P
X
Z X K
I K,L
1 J
Y J Tetrahedral Option
X
(not recommended)
20
FINITE ELEMENT MODELING AND ANALYSIS
FE models

(a)

(b)
Figure 13: Typical diagram of FE model of RC beam in ANSYS 11.0 (a)
meshing and boundary condition and (b) deformed shape
FINITE ELEMENT MODELING AND ANALYSIS
FE governing parameters
Modulus of elasticity
Stress-strain relationship
Poisson’s ratio

Willum and Warke (1975) criterion


Shear transfer coefficient for open crack
Shear transfer coefficient for close crack
Tensile strength
Compressive strength
FINITE ELEMENT MODELING AND ANALYSIS
Table 1: FE input data for SOLID65 and LINK8 element

Beam specimen (SOLID65)


Properties for FE CSBFCCON CSBFC40 Rebar
CSBFC60 CSBFC80 (LINK8)
model

Density 2.69g/cm3 2.77g/cm3 2.72g/cm3 2.74g/cm3 7.8g/cm3

Tensile strength 4 Mpa 6 MPa 8 Mpa 6.3 Mpa -

Poisson’s ratio 0.325 0.325 0.325 0.325 0.3


Shear transfer Co- 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 -
efficient: Closed
crack
-
Open crack 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3

Yield stress - - - - 420 Mpa


Evaluation of FE results
10
ANSYS CSBFCCON
ANSYS CSBFC40
ANSYS CSBFC60
ANSYS CSBFC80

6
Load (kip)

0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
Deflection (in)

Figure 9: Load deflection behavior of FE models


Evaluation of FE results
Mid point deflection (mm) Mid point deflection (mm)
0 12.7 25.4 38.1 50.8 0 12.7 25.4 38.1 50.8
8 8 35.2
35.2
ANSYS CSBFCCON ANSYS CSBFC40
CSBFCCON 7 CSBFC40 31
7 31

6 26.4 6 26.4

5 22.0 5 22.0

Load (kip)

Load (kN)
Load (kip)

Load (kN)
4 17.6 4 17.6

3 13.2 3 13.2

2 8.8 2 8.8

1 4.4 1 4.4

0 0 0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Mid point deflection (in) Mid point deflection (in)

(a) (b)
Figure 10: Comparison of test results of (a) CSBFCCON (b) CSBFC40
(c) CSBFC60 (d) CSBFC80 and FE model.
Evaluation of FE results
Mid point deflection (mm) Mid point deflection (mm)
0 12.7 25.4 38.1 50.8 0 12.7 25.4 38.1 50.8
8 35.2 8 35.2
ANSYS CSBFC60 ANSYS CSBFC80
7 CSBFC60 31 7 CSBFC80 31

6 26.4 6 26.4

5 22.0 5 22.0
Load (kip)

Load (kip)
Load (kN)

Load (kN)
4 17.6 4 17.6

3 13.2 3 13.2

2 8.8 2 8.8

1 4.4 1 4.4

0 0 0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Mid point deflection (in) Mid point deflection (in)

(c) (d)
Figure 10: Comparison of test results of (a)CSBFCCON (b) CSBFC40
(c)CSBFC60(d) CSBFC80 and FE model.
Evaluation of failure pattern and failure location for
beams
CSBFCCON

CSBFC40
Evaluation of failure pattern and failure location for
beams
CSBFC60

CSBFC80
Conclusion
1. The compressive strength increases about 17.6%for SFAR 40 with respect to
control specimen & ductility is increased about 5, 3.6 and 3 times for SFAR 40,
60 & 80 respectively.

2. The tensile strength enhanced about 58%, 117.5% & 64.1% & ductility
increased about 15,9.2, & 13 times respectively.

3. The load deflection behavior shows that the flexural strength increased about
50%, 94% & 79% for the SFAR 40, 60 & 80 respectively and ductility enhanced
3.7, 3.125 & 4 times respectively.

4. The FE showed similar results which ensures the validity of the models and the
FE models are successfully capable of predicting the enhanced capacities due to
SFRC.

5. These FE modeling will definitely provide invaluable information of this


engineering material to the construction industry of Bangladesh.

29
THANK YOU