0 views

Uploaded by Chan Dara Koem

2018-Analytical Displacement Solution for Statically Determanaite Beam Based on Trilinear Moment-curvature Model

- Torsion Bar
- lcf
- Simulation Instructor WB 2011 ENG
- Lecture 07-08 - Solid Mechanics
- An Elastoplastic Model Based on the Shakedown Concepts for Flexible Pavements
- 2 axial loading
- Paper-Anchorage of Steel Building to Concrete
- ME2113-2010SEM1 Past year paper
- 3 Torsion
- Adyn Composite
- Update 2014
- P690
- Mechanical Characterization of Aggregates(1)
- Unit 1 Forces on Materials
- Axisymmetric Analysis of Ground Reinforcing in Tunnelling Design
- IS 3935
- Elastomeric Bearings
- TQM
- The Stress Calculation in the Frictionally Slipping Contact Between a Rigid Cylinder and a Half Plane
- stress3d

You are on page 1of 14

DOI: 10.1002/suco.201700150

TECHNICAL PAPER

beams based on a trilinear moment–curvature model

Yiming Yao1 | Karan Aswani2 | Xinmeng Wang3 | Barzin Mobasher4

1

Key Laboratory of Concrete and Prestressed

Concrete Structures of Ministry of Education, A standard approach is presented to obtain analytical solutions for deflection field

School of Civil Engineering, Southeast University, of determinate beams subjected to conventional loading patterns. The solutions

Nanjing, China

are based on a trilinear moment–curvature response using a deflection hardening

2

PK Associates, Scottsdale, Arizona

behavior characterized by flexural crack initiation, inelastic response due to crack

3

DiGioia Gray & Associates, Tempe, Arizona

extension, and full plastic hinge formation. Methodology for full span deflection

4

Arizona State University, School of Sustainable

and rotation distributions are presented for multiple cases that include three- and

Engineering and Built Environment, Tempe,

Arizona four-point bending, uniform load, concentrated moment, and cantilever beams.

Correspondence The proposed approach provides analytical expressions for the curvature, rotation,

Barzin Mobasher, School of Sustainable and deflection at any point along the beam, and correlated to stress or strain distri-

Engineering and Built Environment, Arizona State bution. The procedure can therefore be integrated into a serviceability-based

University, Tempe, AZ.

Email: barzin@asu.edu

design approach. A parametric study of the effects of model parameters on the

stages of the response is addressed. Several case studies involving steel fiber rein-

forced concrete (SFRC), textile reinforced concrete (TRC) and ultra-high perfor-

mance concrete (UHPC) are conducted and the simulated load-deflection

responses are verified against the experimental data from several published experi-

ments. Size effect on the serviceability limits of beams with spans ranging from

0.22 to 8.6 m is studied by tracking the full-range moment–curvature and load-

deflection responses.

KEYWORDS

load-deflection response, moment–curvature, serviceability-based design, size

effect, stress–strain

bars.7,8 As common tools to simulate the flexural response,

To simulate the load-deflection responses of flexural mem- analytical, or empirical moment–curvature (or rotation) rela-

bers such as reinforced concrete (RC), steel, and composite tionships have been used in modeling of load-deflection,

sections, one needs to address the interaction of a range of moment capacity, and ductility of structures.9–11

reinforcing systems and failure mechanisms such as brittle Applications of cross section’s moment–curvature

fracture, plasticity, strain hardening, and strain-softening. responses for structural members include beams and

General formulations to these responses have been dis- columns,12,13 composite plates and slabs,14 steel bridge

cussed on RC,1 prestressed concrete,2,3 structural steel,4 girders,15 and shear tab connections.16 The common feature

fiber reinforced concrete (FRC),5 textile reinforced concrete of many experimental studies is to capture the deflection of

a beam at one or selected points, which is used to develop

Discussion on this paper must be submitted within two months of the print

publication. The discussion will then be published in print, along with the

load vs. center-line deformation response. Recent studies,

authors' closure, if any, approximately nine months after the print publication. however, have expanded to measure the full displacement

Structural Concrete. 2018;1–14. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/suco © 2018 fib. International Federation for Structural Concrete 1

2 YAO ET AL.

field throughout the stages of cracking and localization, as compatibility analysis can then be conducted to obtain

deflection distribution is important in health monitoring and closed-form moment–curvature relationships. The analytical

maintenance of structures such as bridges.17 Full-field methods reduce the computational time to obtain the load

deformation is also of great interest in mechanics of com- history as well as the distribution of stresses, strains, and

posite materials due to their heterogeneities at different deformations.5 The full-range and full-field load-deflection

scales.18 Experimental techniques such as digital image responses provide all parameters such as moment, rotation,

correlation (DIC), which measure full-field displacements curvature, deflection, strain and stress distributions at any

easily,19,20 create the demand for solutions to support model level of deformation. Serviceability-based design can then

verification in nonlinear materials. By tracking strain and be specified as the load capacity of a cracked section based

curvature distributions, analysis and design procedures can on imposed deformation limit. The present approach is

be conducted allowing every aspect of deflection, crack based on the premise that by representing the moment–

width, or stiffness at serviceability limit states. Full-field curvature relationship as a piecewise linear distribution, its

displacement at various load stages is possible through integration over the specimen length yields the rotation and

finite element modeling (FEM), which may be, however, deflection profiles.12

quite tedious and time consuming.5 A procedure for development of analytical load-

The objective is to present full-field analytical load- deflection solutions is proposed based on a two-step

deflection response of a flexural member using closed- parameterized trilinear moment–curvature response. The

form moment–curvature solutions of the cross section. load-deflection response of a beam under statically determi-

Algorithms expressed with closed-form solutions are nor- nate loading such as three-, four-point bending (3, 4 PB),

mally more computational efficient and easier for imple- distributed, or cantilever loading are derived. Subsequently,

mentation into computer programs or hand calculations in the deformation field throughout the entire loading range is

comparison with the numerical methods such as FEM. In compared with experimental results for common structural

addition, closed-form solutions are presented as symbolic sections. Results are verified for a variety of different mate-

math expressions, which offer a clear view into how dif- rials, loading conditions and specimen sizes.

ferent variables interact with each other and affect the

results, especially under various loading and material char-

acteristics. Parametric studies can be conducted readily to 2 | D E R I VA T I ON O F M O M E NT –

investigate the role of critical parameters such as rein- CU RV AT UR E R EL ATIONSHIP

forcement ratio, concrete strength, and tensile residual

strength. Optimization algorithms can also be easily imple- 2.1 | Modeling assumptions

mented as the number of function evaluations are drasti-

The modeling framework includes a prismatic rectangular

cally reduced.

beam of homogeneous material with or without reinforce-

The first task is to express material properties as piece-

ment, small deformation theory, and negligible shear defor-

wise linear models as used by Soranakom and Mobasher,21

mations. After cracking the gross flexural modulus (EIg)

Taheri et al,22, and van Zijl and Mbewe.23 The strain-

reduces to an effective cracked section stiffness (EIcr), and

the load-deflection response is computed up to the ultimate

flexural strength that is treated as a yield hinge with a pre-

defined localization length.

Analytical moment–curvature solutions were introduced by

authors for FRC21 and hybrid reinforced concrete (HRC)

using a combination of fibers, rebars, or FRP.24 The starting

point is a set of parameterized compressive and tensile

stress–strain models that describe the brittle matrix or strain

softening/hardening FRC, as well as steel or FRP rebars, as

shown in Figure 1. The variables are represented as parame-

terized functions of tensile stiffness E and tensile cracking

strain εcr, which are marked red. An elastic perfectly plastic

model is used to describe the compressive behavior, which

FIGURE 1 Material models for hybrid reinforced concrete (HRC) design is specified by the compressive modulus Ec = γE, yielding

(a) compression model; (b) tension model; (c) steel model; (d) beam cross stress σ cy = ωγEεcr and strain εcy = ωεcr, and ultimate com-

section24 pressive strain εcu = λuεcr (Figure 1a). The trilinear tension

YAO ET AL. 3

model shown in Figure 1b consists of linear elastic stage; two control points (φcr, Mcr) and (φp, Mp). The linear elastic

softening/hardening stage with a cracked stiffness Ecr = χE range is characterized by the slope of EIg and extends up to

and transition strain εtrn = αεcr; and residual stage with con- the first control point as flexural cracking (φcr, Mcr). The

stant strength σ cst = μεcrE and ultimate tensile strain εtu = postcrack region has a reduced stiffness EIcr and extends to

βtuεcr. The trilinear tension model is applicable to a wide the second control point of ultimate flexural capacity (φp,

range of materials such as FRC and SFRC with low-fiber Mp), as defined in Equation (2). The response beyond this

content (strain softening), TRC and UHPC (strain hardening), point is modeled by a constant plastic moment. To include

or plain concrete using the linear elastic stage only. The steel structural ductility limits, one can terminate the computation

model is characterized by elastic modulus Es = nE and the at specified curvature, tensile or compressive strain, or user

yield strain εsy = ψεcr, while a constant yield stress of fsy = defined limit-state criterion. The perfectly plastic stage is

ψεcrnE is used in plastic stage. In the case of FRP bars, lin- defined by a constant moment level, Mp, which extends up

ear elastic behavior can be applied without plasticity. to the limiting curvature φmax:

By using a linear strain distribution across the depth and

M ðφÞ = EIg φ 0 ≤ φ < φcr

ignoring shear deformations, stress distributions at three

Mp −Mcr

ranges of imposed tensile strain: 0 ≤ β ≤ 1, 1 < β ≤ α, and M ðφ Þ = ðφ −φcr Þ + Mcr φcr ≤ φ < φp ð2Þ

φp −φcr

α < β ≤ βtu are obtained. Since the force components are

M ðφÞ = Mp φp ≤ φ < φmax :

computed as quadratic functions, the equilibrium equation

can be solved analytically to obtain neutral axis ratio k, nor-

malized moment m, and normalized curvature κ, for full In order to get generalized closed-form solutions that

combinations of tensile, compressive and steel failure cri- are free of unit system and applicable to different

teria.21,25 The closed-form solutions for FRC and HRC sec- section sizes and materials, the variables in Figure 2b, and

tions are summarized in Tables A1 and A2, respectively, in Equation (2) are normalized using Mcr and φcr, see Equa-

Appendix S1 (Supporting Information). Since β is used as tion (3). In this study, the first cracking coordinates or con-

the independent variable to incrementally impose the flex- trol point is (1.1) at the end of Stage 1 and coordinates (κ p,

ural responses, the moment Mi and curvature φi at each mp) represent the second control point and transition from

increment step i of βι are represented as functions of first Stages 2 to 3. The three stages are expressed by normalized

crack parameters and geometrical beam width (b) and variables m and κ in Equation (4).

depth (h):

M ðφ Þ φ Mp φp

m ðκ Þ = , κ= , mp = , κp = : ð3Þ

1 Mcr φcr Mcr φcr

Mi = mðβ, k,ω, μÞMcr , Mcr = bh2 Eεcr ;

6

2εcr

φi = κ i ðβ, k, ω, μÞφcr , φcr = : ð1Þ m ðκ Þ = κ 0<κ≤1

h mp −1

m ðκ Þ = ðκ − 1Þ + 1 1 ≤ κ ≤ κp ð4Þ

Users may choose to define customized sections, circular κ p −1

sections, T-sections, or composite sections with desired rebar m ðκ Þ = m p κp ≤ κ ≤ κ max :

configuration. In these cases, the moment–curvature relation- With normalized equations, parametric studies can be

ship may be alternatively obtained using SAP2000,26 SE:: readily conducted to reveal the sensitivity of specific param-

MC by Structure Express,27 Cross Section Analysis & eters by excluding the actual geometries and material prop-

Design,28 OpenSees,29 XTRACT,30 KSU_RC31, erties. Design charts addressing ultimate and serviceability

INSTRUCT32, etc. These programs apply a numerical rou- limit state can be generated and used for design guidelines

tine to construct the moment–curvature response by combin- for a variety of fiber reinforced systems.

ing multi-layer analysis, numerical integration, and strain

compatibility approach. User defined or integrated material

models address unconfined and confined concrete and steel

stress–strain curves. In the present study, analytical 3 | L O AD -D EFL EC TI ON S O LU TI O N F OR

moment–curvature developed by authors21,24 are used for S T A T I CA L L Y D E T E RM I N AT E SY S T E M S

computational efficiency in comparison to abovementioned

programs. Figure 3 presents the elastic and cracked regions of a simply

supported beam under 4 PB loading condition. While the

entire beam starts as elastic before cracking, as the load

2.3 | Trilinear moment–curvature relationship increases and the section undergoes distributed cracking that

Figure 2 presents the idealized parametric moment– initiates from the maximum moment point. The zone

curvature response as a trilinear function that includes elas- defined by the length parameter Lcr specifies the cracked

tic, postcrack, and fully plastic range referred to as Stages region where the applied bending moment exceeds the

1, 2, and 3, respectively. The trilinear model is defined by cracking moment (m(κ) > 1 and κ > 1). The transition point

4 YAO ET AL.

moment–curvature relationship: trilinear

representation; (b) dimensionless moment–

curvature curve represented as variables (κ, m)

between the cracked and elastic region is defined by the correspond to the Regions I or II (in terms of location

length parameter Le such that m = 1 and κ = 1 at x = Le. along the length), respectively. Length of Region I,

defined as Le is determined using similar triangles

applied to moment distribution, such that M(x = Le) =

3.1 | Three-point bending

Mcr. The distribution of curvature within the two regions

Figure 4 illustrates the moment and curvature distribu- along the beam is expressed as:

tions for a three-point bending (3 PB) prismatic beam.

φcr

Various stages of trilinear M-φ relationship (see φ 2 , I ðx Þ = x, 0 ≤ x < Le

Le

Figure 2) and regions along a beam (see Figure 3), cre- 2ðκ −1Þðκ −Le Þ L

ate piecewise linear distributions along the length. As φ2, II ðxÞ = φcr +1 , Le ≤ x ≤ ð6Þ

L−2Le 2

shown in Figure 4b, prior to the first flexural crack φðL=2Þ L Mcr L

(0 ≤ M(L/2) ≤ Mcr), the linear curvature and bending where κ = , Le = = :

φcr 2 M ðx = L=2Þ 2mðx = L=2Þ

moment diagrams are obtained. The well-known deriva-

tions of the linear elastic case are obtained by direct The angle of rotation θ2,I(x), θ2,II(x) and deflection

integration.33 For a beam of length L, the deflection pro- δ2, I(x), δ2,II(x) in each region are derived by

integration:

file δ1(x), is normalized as δ*1 ðxÞ with respect to first crack

curvature φcr and expressed as:

3

x xL L

δ1 ðxÞ = φcr

*

− κ, 0<x< , 0<κ<1

3L 4 2 ð5Þ

δ1 ðxÞ = φcr L δ1 ðxÞ:

2 *

2 of loading defined by: (κ > 1, Mcr ≤ M(L/2) ≤ Mp) is

initiated with two distinct regions of elastic (I) and

cracked Regions (II), as shown in Figure 4c. The curva-

ture distributions φ2,I(x) and φ2,II(x) are expressed in

terms of position x along the length of the beam and

characterized by the solid line in Figure 4c. These two

regions are associated with the moment–curvature rela-

tionship, where the subscripts “1” and “2” refer to

Stages (in terms of load), and the numerals “I” or “II”

FIGURE 3 Flexural stiffness regions for four-point loading of a simply FIGURE 4 (a) Schematic drawing of 3 PB; (b) moment and curvature

supported beam distributions in Stage 1; (c) moment and curvature distributions in Stage 2

YAO ET AL. 5

Ð x φcr

θ2, I ðxÞ = 0 xdx + C3 , 0 ≤ x ≤ Le

Ð x Le

δ2, I ðxÞ = 0 θ21 ðxÞdx + C4 , 0 ≤ x ≤ Le

ðx

ÐL φ 2ðκ −1Þðx − Le Þ L ð7Þ

θ2, II ðxÞ = 0 e cr xdx + φcr + 1 dx + C5 , Le ≤ x ≤

Le Le L − 2Le 2

Ðx L

δ2, II = δ21 ðLe Þ −δ21 ð0Þ + Le θ22 ðxÞdx + C6 , Le ≤ x ≤ :

2

Constants C3 through C6 are evaluated by applying con- as shown in Figure 5c. The distributions of curvature φ2,

tinuity of slope and deflection at transition point as I(x), φ2,IIa(x), and φ2,IIb(x) within the three regions along the

C3 = C5 = φcr ð2Le κ4− Lκ − LÞ, C4 = C6 = 0. The deflection coef- beam is expressed as:

ficients are reduced to: φcr

φ2, I ðxÞ = x, 0 ≤ x ≤ Le

Le

x 3

ðL + Lκ −2Le κÞx 3ðκx −κLe −xÞ + L L

δ*2, I = − , 0 ≤ x ≤ Le

6L2 Le 0 4L2 φ2, IIa ðxÞ = φcr , Le ≤ x ≤ ð10Þ

1 L −3 Le 3

ðκ −1Þx3

ðL−2Le κÞx2

1 B 3L2 + L L

2L2 C L φ2, IIb ðxÞ = κφcr , ≤x≤ :

δ2, II =

*

@ A, L e ≤ x ≤ : 3 2

L −2Le xð4Le κ −L −Lκ Þ L2e ðL− 2Le κÞ 2

+ +

4L 6L2 The deflection distribution in each region is obtained by

ð8Þ integration and imposition of boundary conditions:

1 3

δ*2, I = 2

x + xLe ð3Le κ −2Lκ −LÞ , 0 ≤ x ≤ Le

6Le L

3x3 ðκ −1Þ + 3x2 ðL −3Le κÞ −xL2 ð2κ + 1Þ + 9xLLe κ + L2e L−3L3e κ L

δ2, IIa =

*

2 ðL −3L Þ

, Le ≤ x ≤ ð11Þ

6L

e 3

x2 κ xκ 1 3Le 3Le κ L L

δ*2, IIb = 2 − + +1 −1 + κ , ≤x≤ :

2L 2L 54 L L 3 2

3.2 | Four-point bending These equations provide the complete deflection and rota-

Figure 5 illustrates the moment and curvature distributions tion profiles at any point of a beam. This approach has been

for a four-point bending (4 PB) prismatic beam. Depending extended and applied to a variety of beam types (cantilever,

over-hang) and loading conditions (constant force/moment,

on the moment distribution, two sub-regions “Ia” and “Ib”

are defined to represent the linear and constant moment zones uniform load) with detailed derivations by Wang.33 Results of

whereas “IIa” and “IIb” are used in cracked zones. The distri- analytical expressions for rotation and deflection profiles for

several cases are presented in Tables 1 and 2. These tables can

bution of deflections (normalized with respect to φcrL2) for

two distinct sub-regions Ia and Ib are obtained as: be used in the preliminary or analytical design of any beam.

The approach can also be extended for optimization of a cross

3

x x L section in the context of combined geometrical and material

δ1, Ia ðxÞ = κ

*

− , 0≤x≤

3 properties as response surfaces can be generated.

2L2 3L 3

ð9Þ

x x 1 L L

δ1, Ib ðxÞ = κ

*

− + , ≤ x ≤ :

2L2 2L 54 3 2 3.3 | Deflection envelope

The analytical moment–curvature and neutral axis solutions

As the applied load exceeds the cracking threshold, Stage serve as the link between the parametric tension-

2 of loading (Mcr ≤ M(L/3) ≤ Mp) is initiated where three compression uniaxial models,21,24 and the displacement

regions are defined as elastic Region I (0 ≤ x ≤ Le), function proposed. The deflection or rotation envelopes

Le = L3 M ðxM=crL=3Þ = 3mðx =L L=3Þ, and cracked Region IIa (Le ≤ governed by two primary model variables mp and κ p, are

x ≤ L/3) with linear applied moment distribution, and independent of cross sectional size and shape, but incorpo-

Region IIb (L/3 ≤ x ≤ L/2), constant moment distribution, rate the loading condition and material properties. Figures 6

6 YAO ET AL.

beam at three levels of ultimate curvature (κ p = 2.0, 2.5,

5.0). Due to the symmetry, half of the beam is shown. The

model parameters mp = 2 implies that the ultimate moment

is twice of the cracking moment while an increase in the

ultimate curvature κ p from 2 to 5 indicates a reduction in

postcrack stiffness to accommodate the increased strain

capacity, and results in increasing deflection by as much as

50%. Different regions of I (solid lines) and II (dashed lines)

are differentiated by the parameter Le, which quantifies the

length of Region I as listed in Tables 1 and 2. If the peak

moment mp is held constant, parameter Le is also constant

and equal to 0.25 for mp = 2 (as it is a function of L and

m only). As mp increases, Le decreases indicating that a

larger portion of the beam enters the cracked region with

increasing load (Figure 6c). As a baseline comparison, the

elastic solution at the end of Stage 1, i.e., mp = κp = 1, is

also plotted. As shown in Table 1, mid-span deflection of a

beam under 3 PB at the instant of first cracking (κ = 1) can

be simplified to the classical solution via substitution of

x = L/2:

!

L * L ðL=2Þ3 L=2 φ L2

δ1 = δ1 φcr L =

2

3

− φcr L2 = − cr ,

2 2 3L 4L 12

ð12Þ

FIGURE 5 (a) Schematic drawing of 4 PB; (b) moment and curvature

distributions in Stage 1; (c) moment and curvature distributions in Stage 2 where φcr = Mcr

EI ,and M = PL 4 for 3 PB, thus

L φcr L2 2

PL3

δ1 2 = − 12 = − 12 4EI = − 48EI :

L PL

and 7 show the distributions of the deflection coefficient δ*

with several combinations of mp and κp, correlated through

Figure 7b,c compares the deflection coefficients with

the postcrack stiffness η. The effects of the two parameters

various end-points mp and κp for a 4 PB, including two sub-

on the deflection coefficients are evaluated at various levels

regions IIa and IIb. As the loads are applied at L/3 from the

when mp and κ p ranging from 1.2–2.0 to 2.0–5.0, respec-

support, the length of constant moment Region (IIb) equals

tively. The equations for the nondimensionalized deflection

0.167 L for half of the beam. Note that by decreasing the

coefficient δ* = δ/φcrL2 are directly used from Tables 1 and

postcrack stiffness, the deflection increases significantly,

2. The sign convention is defined as downward negative.

while the zone of cracking remains constant for the fixed

TABLE 1 Solutions of curvature and deflection in elastic beams maximum moment. However, the zone of cracking extends

Beam type φ1 δ1a from 0.555 to 0.648 L if the maximum moment is increased

at the maximum curvature.

Lφ

3 PB 2x x 4x2

4 L 3 L2 −1 κ

In addition to 3 and 4 PB, which are commonly used

4 PB x ≤ L3 Lφ

3x x 3x2

3 L 2 L2 − 1 κ in experimental programs, parametric studies are also

2

L

≤ x ≤ L2 φ extended for simple beam under uniformly distributed load

2L2 − 2L + 54 κ

x x 1

3

3 (UDL) and/or concentrated moment applied at the mid-

SS-UDL − L L −1

4x x

φ − 3xL Lx 3 − 2x

2

L2 + 1 κ span.33 The control point (κp, mp) correlates with the ten-

2

Lφ sion and compression constitutive laws (see Figure 1)

SS-Conc. moment (middle) 2x

12 L L2 − 1 κ

x 4x

SS-Pure bending φ 2L L − 1 κ

x x

x 2

2 ment a serviceability-based approach, one can impose the

C-UDL − L −1 φ x2

2L2 6 L2 − 3L + 1 κ

x 2x

design criteria based on curvature or deflection distribution

x−L

L φ at a specific point and obtain the corresponding service

x2

2L2 3 L − 1 κ

C-Conc. load (end) x

0≤x≤S a

S φ

x− S x2

2S2 3 S − 1 κ

C-Conc. load (any point) x

2S − 6 κ

S≤x≤L

x 1 of given curvature, strain, and stress level, or their interac-

tions. The design parameters can be selected among the

C = cantilever; Conc. = concentrated; SS = simply supported; UDL = uni-

formly distributed load. geometrical and mechanical response fields such as maxi-

a

S is the distance from start point to loading point. mum allowable curvature, or deflection between any two

YAO ET AL. 7

L L φcr x h i

3 PB 0 < x < Le Le < x < 2ðκ − 1Þðx − Le Þ f1 + f2 f3(f4 + f5 + f6 + f7)

2m 2 Le φcr L− 2Le +1

φcr x

φcr 3ðκx −L−

κLe − xÞ + L

L

4 PB 3m

0 < x < Le Le < x < L3 Le

x3 + g1 g2( g3 + g4 + g5)

3 Le 6Le L2

L

3 <x< L

2

κφcr κx2

− 2κxL + f6

2L2

qﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ 2!

SS-UDL L

1 − 1− m1 0 < x < Le Le < x < L2

xφcr

Le ðL − Le Þ ðL− xÞ xLκ − x2 κ − xL + x i1 i2 ði3 + i4 +

4φcr

2 L2 i5 + i6 + i7 Þ

ðL− 2Le Þ2 − Le Lκ + κL2e +

4

L φcr x h i

SS-Conc. moment (middle) 2m

0 < x < Le Le < x < L2 Le φcr 2ðκ −L−

1Þðx − Le Þ

+ 1 j1 j2

2Le

SS-Pure bending / / / mφcr φ mx x

2L L −1 2L L − 1

mx x

qﬃﬃﬃ

ðκ − 1Þðx2 − 2LLe Þ

2

C-UDL L 1 − m1 Le < x < L 0 < x < Le − φðcrL−

ðL− xÞ

L Þ2 φcr −κ

o1(o2 + o3 + o4) o5

e

ðL2e − 2LLe Þ

φcr ðx − LÞ

h i

C-Conc. load (end) 1− m1 L Le < x < L 0 < x < Le ðκ − 1Þðx − Le Þ u1 u2

L − Le φcr Le −1

h i

C-Conc. load (any point) 1− m1 S Le < x < S 0 < x < Le φcr ðx − SÞ

φcr ðκ − 1Þðx − Le Þ

−1 − v1 +6SL

v2 + v3

2 v7 − 2L

x 2

S − Le Le

2

v4 + v5 + v6

S<x<L 0 6SL2

a

Variables f1–f7, g1–g6, i1–i7, j1–j2, o1–o5, u1–u2, and v1–v7 are summarized in Appendix S1.

(b) effects of normalized moment m on deflection

distribution for 3 PB; (c) effects of normalized

curvature κ on deflection distribution for 3 PB

points. For example, one can solve for the level of rein- curvature solutions or other cross-sectional analysis pro-

forcement for a given cross-sectional size of the beam such grams with the following steps:

that a specified load would not cause a deflection thresh-

old. Deformation envelope at desired level of serviceability 1. Generate moment–curvature response for given geome-

level, or the response surface can be constructed using try and material properties using the proposed equations

continuous, or discrete variables in the form of design in Tables A1 and A2 in Appendix S1, or other software

charts. tools. Then linearize and normalize the results to get

model inputs mp and κp.

2. For a given type of beam boundary and loading condition,

use the deflection coefficient δ* to get the normalized cur-

4 | GENERALIZED APPROACH TO vature κ as a function of position x using Tables 1 and 2.

C OM P U T E LO A D - D E F L E CT IO N R E S P O N S E 3. Substitution of the geometrical parameters: b, h, L,

basic material properties: E, εcr in the normalized solu-

As a generalized approach to generate load-deflection tions yields the numerical magnitude of load and deflec-

responses with given dimensions, loading geometry, and tions. Equations can be significantly simplified if the

material properties, one can use the closed-form moment– deformation at a specific point is required such as

8 YAO ET AL.

(b) effects of normalized moment m on deflection

distribution for 4 PB; (c) effects of normalized

curvature κ on deflection distribution for 4 PB

mid-span deflections, or any other specific point, stiffening, crack bifurcation, steel-concrete bond assumptions,

i.e., by setting x = L/2 in Step 2 for deflection coeffi- and use of an elastic perfectly plastic steel model which pre-

cient equations, one may get the mid-span deflection. dicts the limit-state moment capacity at the onset of steel

yielding. The increase in flexural load is therefore underesti-

mated. As the reinforcement ratio increases from 1.80 to

5 | E X P E R IM EN T A L V E R IF I C A T IO N OF 4.29%, ultimate moment capacity mp significantly increases

T H E AN A L YT I C A L M O D E L from 3.6 to 8.2 and curvature increases from 11.6 to 16.5,

which implies the dominating role of steel reinforcement in

5.1 | Conventional RC beams improving load bearing and deformation capacities.

To verify the broad applicability of the proposed model,

experimental data from literature covering various materials 5.2 | HRC beams with steel reinforcement and fibers

and sizes were simulated. The first set of data is reported by

Besides conventional RC, experimental data of HRC beams

Ko et al,34 where full-scale RC beams with various rein-

reported by Meda et al35 are also simulated. A span of 3.6 m

forcement ratio ranging from 1.80 to 4.29% were tested

and two different reinforcement ratios of 0.75 and 1.5% as well

under 3 PB. The RC beams have a span of 1.38 m and cross

as 30 kg/m3 of steel fibers in each group were studied in com-

section of 150 mm by 150 mm, with 30 mm concrete

parison with control RC beams. The beam specimen had

cover. The yield strengths of the rebars vary from 406 to

dimensions of h = 300 and b = 200 mm with concrete cover

443 MPa. The main model parameters include Young’s

=60 mm. Material properties of concrete and steel are listed in

modulus E, first crack tensile strain εcr, stiffness ratio Table 3. Figure 9a shows the trilinear moment–curvature

η = EIcr/EIg, and the full list of material properties is pre- models used for the simulation of experimental data, with

sented in Table 3. As presented earlier, full-range moment– results compared in Figures 9b,c. The analytical load-deflection

curvature responses of these sections were generated using responses accurately match the flexural responses of the HRC

the closed-form solutions in Tables A1 and A2 in Appendix beams under 4 PB tests. Ultimate moment capacity mp of

S1. The control points (κ p, mp) were taken from the normal- RC/HRC beams increases about 50% from 4.6/5.1 to 9.0/9.4

ized curve while Mcr and φcr were calculated using Equa- and curvature increases from 22.4/22.8 to 25.2/25.5 for the two

tion (1) and the model parameters in Table 3. Linearized reinforcement ratios of 0.75 and 1.5%, indicating the primary

moment–curvature models are therefore obtained in role of longitudinal reinforcement in enhancing the flexural

Figure 8a where beam dimensions and Mcr and φcr are capacity. On the other hand, addition of 30 kg/m3 of steel

indicated. fibers increases mp from 4.6 to 5.1 for ρ = .75%, and from 9.0

Comparison of experimental and simulated load- to 9.4 when ρ = 1.5%. In addition, stiffness ratio η increases

deflection responses is illustrated in Figure 8b, where good slightly from 0.17 to 0.19 and 0.33 to 0.34, respectively. The

agreement can be observed up to the steel yield point. How- role of steel fiber in improving the moment capacity and post-

ever, the ultimate strength in flexure is generally underesti- crack stiffness correlates with a normalized residual strength of

mated by the present model. Such discrepancies are μ = 0 and 0.2, which represents a change from a plain matrix

attributed to several factors such as multiple cracking, tension to one with a residual strength of 0.7 MPa. Note that in

YAO

ET AL.

TABLE 3 Geometries, material properties, and model parameters for experimental verification studies

Study Beam series Fiber content L (m) E (GPa) σ cy (MPa) Es (GPa) fsy (MPa) εcr (με) ω μ ζ η mp κp EI (106 Nm2) EIcr (106 Nm2)

34

Ko et al ρ = 1.80% – 1.38 38.4 66.6 200 413 186 9 0 0.8 0.24 3.6 11.6 1.62 0.4

ρ = 2.91% 172 443 0.35 6.1 15.5 0.6

ρ = 3.59% 174 419 0.41 6.9 15.5 0.7

ρ = 4.29% 174 419 0.47 8.2 16.5 0.8

Meda et al35 (HRC) 2φ16-B-PC – 3.6 37.0 49.7 200 534 100 13 0 0.87 0.17 4.6 22.4 16.7 2.8

2φ16-B-30 30 kg/m3 45.0 12 0.2 0.19 5.1 22.8 3.1

4φ16-B-PC – 49.7 13 0 0.33 9.0 25.2 5.5

3

4φ16-B-30 30 kg/m 45.0 12 0.2 0.34 9.4 25.5 5.7

Yoo and Yoon37 (HPFRC) S30-1 2% 2.2 47.0 210 200 495 180 25 0.6 0.89 0.22 3.6 12.7 6.3 1.4

T30-1 232 27 0.7 0.25 3.9 12.6 1.6

S30-2 210 510 25 0.6 0.31 4.8 13.3 2.0

T30-2 232 27 0.7 0.33 5.1 13.3 2.1

Dupont40 (HRC) HRC 25 kg/m3 1.0& 30.5 26.4 200 560 110 8 0.34 0.93 0.11 3.0 19.4 4.1 0.4

2.0

HRC 50 kg/m3 30.3 26.1 130 7 0.39 0.22 4.9 18.5 4.0 0.9

HRC 60 kg/m3 39.0 55.4 160 9 0.56 0.32 5.7 15.7 5.2 1.7

41 3

Minelli et al H500 50 kg/m 2.64 30.8 32.1 200 580 146 7 0.3 0.88 0.29 6.4 19.9 80.2 22.9

H500 75 kg/m3 31.0 33.1 120 9 0.4 0.29 7.8 24.3 80.7 23.7

H1000 50 kg/m3 5.64 30.0 32.1 555 80 9 0.3 0.94 0.37 12.1 31.4 625.0 228.6

H1000 75 kg/m3 31.0 33.1 120 9 0.4 0.36 10.7 27.8 645.8 234.0

3

H1500 50 kg/m 8.64 29.0 32.1 518 80 9 0.3 0.96 0.29 11.27 27.9 2,109.4 804.8

H1500 75 kg/m3 30.0 33.1 110 9 0.4 0.29 8.6 20.7 2,109.4 810.0

Kim et al42 (HPFRC) S79-HL-28d 79 kg/m3 0.45 20.0 84 – - 260 16 0.13 – 0.10 2.2 13.3 0.84 0.1

S79-TL-28d 290 15 0.13 0.10 2.2 13.3 0.1

Mobasher et al43 (TRC) 100A 1.29% 0.25 20.0 51.0 – – 150 17 12.9 – 0.11 18.2 156.3 36.5 (10−6) 4.0 (10−6)

44 3

Mobasher et al (SFRC) S13-HL-28d 13 kg/m 31.0 28.0 – – 61 15 0.12 – 0.27 1.6 3.0 1.31 0.36

S26-HL-28d 26 kg/m3 0.45 31.0 28.0 63 14 0.33 0.24 1.7 3.9 1.31 0.31

S39-HL-28d 39 kg/m3 21.0 28.0 89 15 0.42 0.23 1.7 4.2 0.89 0.20

HPFRC = high-performance fiber reinforced concrete; HRC = hybrid reinforced concrete; SFRC = steel fiber reinforced concrete; TRC = textile reinforced concrete.

9

10 YAO ET AL.

diagrams of simulated data for different reinforcement

ratio; (b) comparison of load-deflection responses

between analytical simulation and experimental data

FIGURE 9 (a) Normalized moment–curvature diagrams of simulated data for different reinforcement ratio and fiber content; load-deflection responses of

HRC beams for different reinforcement ratios: (b) ρ = .75%; (c) ρ = 1.5%

comparing plain and FRC, contribution of plain concrete in ten- (UHPC). Yoo and Yoon37 tested full-scale UHPC beams

sion is ignored in design guidelines such as ACI 318-14.36 reinforced by rebar and steel fibers. The beams with a cross

section of 150 mm by 220 mm were tested under 4 PB and

span of 2,200 mm. Effect of reinforcement ratio was evalu-

5.3 | Ultra-high performance concrete ated at 0.94 and 1.50%. Two distinct types of smooth and

In addition to normal strength concrete, the proposed model twisted steel fibers were used at volume fraction of 2%.

is also applicable to ultra-high performance concrete Figure 10a shows the normalized moment–curvature

FIGURE 10 (a) Normalized moment–curvature relationship used to simulate the experimental responses of UHPC beams; comparison of load-deflection

responses between analytical simulation and experimental data for various reinforcement ratios: (b) ρ = .94%; (c) ρ = 1.5%

YAO ET AL. 11

FIGURE 11 Simulated maximum curvatures for various materials and beam sizes corresponding to deflections of (a) δ = L/600; (b) δ = L/450;

(c) δ = L/150

responses and Figure 10b,c compare the predicted and exper- parameters have been proposed to characterize the flex-

imental load-deflection responses for reinforcement ratios of ural toughness and residual strength of FRC. For exam-

0.94 and 1.50%, respectively. The basic material parameters ple, EN1465138 uses residual flexural tensile strengths

used in the model include Young’s modulus E = 47GPa, fR,1 and fR,3 at deflection levels of δ = 0.47 and

first crack tensile strain εcr = 180με. 2.17 mm, respectively (corresponding CMOD values of

The model simulations underestimate the moment 0.5 mm and 2.5 mm); ASTM C1609 uses an equivalent

capacity within an approximate range of 8–13% for different flexural strength ratio Re,3 at a similar deflection of

beam specimens, which have been discussed in the case of δ = L/150. However, extraction of design parameters

RC simulations. In addition, due to the significantly high- from small beams at an arbitrary deflection may be

compressive strength of UHPC, failure due to concrete questionable for full-scale structures due to many objec-

crushing is unlikely to occur for an under-reinforced beam. tions, among them the nature of size effect and the cur-

As a result, pronounced strain hardening is exhibited by vatures involved.39 A study of maximum curvature that

steel rebars after yielding and the flexural load increases correlates with the load at specified level of deflection is

until rebar fracture. In fact, all of the UHPC beams with therefore conducted. In addition to the beam specimens

steel fibers were subjected to flexure failure due to rebar presented earlier, simulations are extended to a database

rupture, as reported by the authors.37 Thus, the proposed of experiments by Dupont40 and Minelli et al41 on HRC

model provides conservative estimation as a preferred fea- beams, Kim et al42 on high-performance fiber reinforced

ture from the design perspective. It is also clearly shown concrete (HPFRC) and Mobasher et al43,44 on TRC and

that the load carrying capacity increased by approximately SFRC beams. Model parameters are summarized in

30% with an increase in the reinforcement ratio from 0.94 Table 3. Once the load-deflection responses are simu-

to 1.50%. Furthermore, marginal improvements in moment lated, the magnitude of maximum curvatures correspond-

capacity and stiffness ratio are observed in the UHPC ing to the specific levels of mid-span deflection at

beams with addition of twisted fiber in comparison to δ = L/600, L/450, and L/150 are extracted and plotted as

smooth fibers. The ultimate moment parameter mp increases a function of span (see Figure 11). Results show that as

from 3.6 to 3.9 when ρ = .94%, and 4.8 to 5.1 for the size of the beam increases, the maximum curvature

ρ = 1.5%. The improvement can be explained by the higher required to attain the load-deflection response decreases sig-

bond strength between twisted steel fibers and concrete nificantly, therefore large rotation capability observed in

matrix compared with smooth fiber. small samples may not be necessary, nor applicable in real

structures. The maximum curvature decreases by about 90%

as the span increases from 1 to 8.6 m (Figure 11a,b), and

5.4 | Correlation of specimen size with the maximum decreases by almost 80% from 0.45 to 2 m when δ = L/150

curvature in simulation (Figure 11c). The range of span studied is quite representa-

Since the analytical model provides the curvature and tive which covers many experiments reported in the litera-

deflection distributions to determine the load at given ture from lab to full scales. The simulated curvatures of

deformation levels, it can be used to compare the beam large beams using identical material parameters as smaller

results of various sizes for a serviceability-based crite- beams are much lower at equivalent levels of deflection. In

rion. Design parameters may include maximum allowable addition, large mid-span deflection of L/150 cannot be

curvature, deflection, ductility, or stress. Various reached in the case of larger beams (span >2 m) and thus

12 YAO ET AL.

Icr moment of inertia of cracked section

observations point out that the trend of specifying parame-

k neutral axis depth ratio

ters such as Re,3 at quite a large deflection for small speci-

L length of beam

mens in order to design and construct large beams may be

Le length of linear elastic region

too conservative as the curvatures obtained by the small

Lcr length of linear cracked region

samples may not be obtained in real size structures.

m normalzied moment

mp normalzied moment at onset of perfectly

plastic stage

6 | CON CLU SION S M moment

Mp moment at onset of perfectly plastic

A trilinear moment–curvature relationship defined by the flex- stage

ural crack initiation and ultimate capacity was proposed as the n modulus ratio (Es/E)

basis for the derivation of an analytical load-deflection model P applied load

exhibiting deflection hardening behavior. The analytical solu- α normalized transition strain

tions characterize the full-range distributions of curvature, β normalized tensile strain (εt/εcr)

rotation, and deflection at any given point along the beam. βtu normalized ultimate tensile strain

Various types of beams and loading conditions were χ normalized postcracked modulus (Ecr/E)

addressed such as 3, 4 PB, uniformly loaded, concentrated δ beam deflection

moment on simple and cantilever beams. δ* deflection coefficient

The load-deflection and moment–curvature responses ε strain

correlated with the classical elastic solutions and extended εc concrete compressive strain

into parameterized nonlinear stress–strain materials model. εcr concrete strain at first tensile crack

Deformation envelope at any given level of load, deforma- εcy concrete compressive strain at peak

tion, and location along the beam as well as their interac- stress

tions were generated. Results are directly applicable to εcu ultimate compressive strain

serviceability-based design tools. A parametric study exam- εt concrete tensile strain

ined the effect of moment–curvature parameters on the εtrn concrete strain transition point

load-deflection response. The model’s accuracy was verified εtu ultimate tensile strain

by comparing simulated and experimental load-deflection εs steel strain

responses for RC, HRC and UHPC beams. Various beams φ curvature

with spans ranging from 0.22 to 8.6 m, which cover many φcr curvature at first flexural crack

experimental data in the literature from lab-scale to full size φp curvature at onset of perfectly plastic

specimens were simulated and the results indicated that stage

residual strength parameters such as Re,3 at relatively large φmax maximum curvature

deflection values for small specimens may be too conserva- η normalized postcracked flexural stiffness

tive for design of real size structures. (EIcr/EIg)

κ normalized curvature

7 | NOTATIONS κp normalized curvature at onset of per-

fectly plastic stage

As area of steel rebar κmax normalized maximum curvature

A21, A22, A31, variables in Table A1 in Appendix S1 λ normalized compressive strain (εc/εcr)

A32, B21, B22, μ normalized residual tensile strength

B31, B32 (σcst/σcr)

C1–C11, D1–D5 variables in Table A2 in Appendix S1 ρg steel reinforcement ratio per gross area

b beam width σ concrete stress

d effective depth at location of steel rebar σc concrete compressive stress

E elastic tensile modulus of concrete σ cr cracking tensile strength

Es elastic modulus of steel σ cy concrete compressive yield strength

f1–f7, g1–g6, variables in Table 2 σ cst residual tensile strength

i1–i7, j1–j2, σt concrete tensile stress

o1–o5, u1–u2, ω normalized concrete compressive yield

v1–v7 strain (εcy/εcr)

h full height of a beam section. ζ normalized depth of steel reinforcement

Ig moment of inertia of gross section (d/h)

YAO ET AL. 13

01.007

Yiming Yao http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5751-8180 22. Taheri M, Barros JAO, Salehian H. A design model for strain-softening and

Barzin Mobasher http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7580-2855 strain-hardening fiber reinforced elements reinforced longitudinally with

steel and FRP bars. Compos Part B Eng. 2011;42:1630-1640. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2011.04.009

23. van Zijl GPAG, Mbewe PBK. Flexural modelling of steel fibre-reinforced

REFERENC ES concrete beams with and without steel bars. Eng Struct. 2013;53:52-62.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2013.03.036

1. Panagiotakos TB, Fardis MN. Deformations of reinforced concrete mem- 24. Mobasher B, Yao Y, Soranakom C. Analytical solutions for flexural design

bers at yielding and ultimate. Struct J. 2001;98:135-148. of hybrid steel fiber reinforced concrete beams. Eng Struct. 2015;100:

2. Shushkewich KW. Moment-curvature relationships for partially Prestressed 164-177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.06.006

concrete beams. J Struct Eng. 1990;116:2815-2823. https://doi.org/10. 25. Yao Y. Characteristics of Distributed Cracking for Analysis and Design of

1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1990)116:10(2815) Strain Hardening Cement Based Composites [dissertation]. Tempe, AZ:

3. Naaman AE. Prestressed Concrete Analysis and Design: Fundamentals. Arizona State University; 2016

2nd ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Techno Press; 2004. 26. Computers and Structures, Inc. – Technical Knowledge Base (2014)

4. Mirambell E, Real E. On the calculation of deflections in structural stainless Moment-Curvature Analysis for Hollow Prestressed-Concrete Piles. https://

steel beams: An experimental and numerical investigation. J Constr Steel wiki.csiamerica.com/display/kb/Moment+curvature. Accessed February 10,

Res. 2000;54(1):109-133. 2017

5. Kwak H-G, Kim S-P. Nonlinear analysis of RC beams based on 27. StructureExpress (2016) Moment Curvature Analysis of Circular Reinforced

moment-curvature relation. Comput Struct. 2002;80:615-628. https://doi. Concrete Column Section with SE::MC. http://structurexpress.com/

org/10.1016/S0045-7949(02)00030-5 example-1-1/.

6. Mobasher B (2011) Mechanics of Fiber and Textile Reinforced Cement 28. ENGISSOL (2012) Cross Section Analysis & Design—Worked Examples.

Composites. Boca Raton, Florida, USA: CRC Press. https://www.crcpress. http://www.engissol.com/

com/Mechanics-of-Fiber-and- worked-examples-on-cross-section-analysis-design.html. Accessed February

Textile-Reinforced-Cement-Composites/Mobasher/p/book/9781439806609. 10, 2017

Accessed November 1, 2016 29. OpenSeesWiki (2011) User Documentation—Moment Curvature Example.

7. He Z, Ou J, Wang B. The trilinear moment vs. curvature relationship of http://opensees.berkeley.edu/wiki/index.php/Moment_Curvature_Example.

concrete beams reinforced with fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) rebars. Accessed February 10, 2017

Compos Struct. 2007;77:30-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2005. 30. Chadwell CB, Imbsen RA XTRACT: a tool for axial force – ultimate curva-

06.012 ture interactions. George E. Blandford, ASCE, Nashville, Tennessee, United

8. Tazarv M, Saiidi MS. UHPC-filled duct connections for accelerated bridge States In: Structures; 2004.

construction of RC columns in high seismic zones. Eng Struct. 2015;99: 31. Shirmohammadi F, Esmaeily A. Software for biaxial cyclic analysis of rein-

413-422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.05.018 forced concrete columns. Comput Concr. 2016;17:353-386. https://doi.

9. Hillerborg A. Fracture mechanics concepts applied to moment capacity and org/10.12989/cac.2016.17.3.353

rotational capacity of reinforced concrete beams. Eng Fract Mech. 1990;35: 32. Ger J, Cheng FY. Seismic Design Aids for Nonlinear Pushover Analysis

233-240. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-7944(90)90201-Q Of Reinforced Concrete and Steel Bridges. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press;

10. Lopes SM, do Carmo RNF. Deformable strut and tie model for the calcula- 2011.

tion of the plastic rotation capacity. Comput Struct. 2006;84:2174-2183. 33. Wang X. Analytical Load-Deflection Equations for Beam and 2-D Panel

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2006.08.028 with a Bilinear Moment–Curvature Model [master’s thesis]. Tempe, AZ:

11. Carreira DJ, Chu K-H. The moment-curvature relationship of reinforced Arizona State University; 2015.

concrete members. J Proc. 1986;83:191-198. 34. Ko M-Y, Kim S-W, Kim J-K. Experimental study on the plastic rotation

12. Hemmati A, Kheyroddin A, Kazem Sharbatdar M. Plastic hinge rotation capacity of reinforced high strength concrete beams. Mater Struct. 2001;34:

capacity of reinforced HPFRCC beams. J Struct Eng. 2015;141:04014111. 302-311. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02482210

https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000858 35. Meda A, Minelli F, Plizzari GA. Flexural behaviour of RC beams in fibre

13. Sheikh SA, Yeh CC. Analytical moment-curvature relations for tied con- reinforced concrete. Compos Part B Eng. 2012;43:2930-2937. https://doi.

crete columns. J Struct Eng. 1992;118:529-544. https://doi.org/10.1061/( org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.06.003

ASCE)0733-9445(1992)118:2(529) 36. ACI Committee 318, American Concrete Institute. Building code require-

14. Crisinel M, Marimon F. A new simplified method for the design of com- ments for structural concrete (ACI 318-14): an ACI standard: commentary

posite slabs. J Constr Steel Res. 2004;60:481-491. https://doi.org/10.1016/ on building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318R-14), an

S0143-974X(03)00125-1 ACI Report; 2014.

15. Barth KE, Hartnagel BA, White DW, Barker MG. Recommended proce- 37. Yoo D-Y, Yoon Y-S. Structural performance of ultra-high-performance

dures for simplified inelastic Design of Steel I-girder bridges. J Bridge Eng. concrete beams with different steel fibers. Eng Struct. 2015;102:409-423.

2004;9:230-242. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2004)9:3(230) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.08.029

16. Liu J, Astaneh-Asl A. Moment–rotation parameters for composite shear tab 38. Vandewalle L. RILEM TC162-TDF: Test and design methods for steel fibre

connections. J Struct Eng. 2004;130:1371-1380. https://doi.org/10.1061/( reinforced concrete: Bending test (final recommendation). Mater Struct.

ASCE)0733-9445(2004)130:9(1371) 2002;35:579-582.

17. Lee JJ, Shinozuka M. Real-time displacement measurement of a flexible 39. Jiang Z, Banthia N. Size effects in flexural toughness of fiber reinforced

bridge using digital image processing techniques. Exp Mech. 2006;46: concrete. J Test Eval. 2010;38:332-338. https://doi.org/10.1520/

105-114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-006-6124-2 JTE102386

18. Grédiac M. The use of full-field measurement methods in composite mate- 40. Dupont D. Modelling and Experimental Validation of the Constitutive

rial characterization: Interest and limitations. Compos Part Appl Sci Manuf. Law (σ-ε) and Cracking Behaviour of Steel Fiber Reinforced Con-

2004;35:751-761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2004.01.019 crete [dissertation]. Leuven, Belgium: Catholic University of Leuven;

19. Sutton M, Wolters W, Peters W, et al. Determination of displacements 2003.

using an improved digital correlation method. Image Vis Comput. 1983;1: 41. Minelli F, Conforti A, Cuenca E, Plizzari G. Are steel fibres able to miti-

133-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/0262-8856(83)90064-1 gate or eliminate size effect in shear? Mater Struct. 2014;47:459-473.

20. Yoneyama S, Kitagawa A, Iwata S, Tani K, Kikuta H. Bridge deflection https://doi.org/10.1617/s11527-013-0072-y

measurement using digital image correlation. Exp Tech. 2007;31:34-40. 42. Kim D, Naaman AE, El-Tawil S (2010) Correlation between tensile and

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1567.2006.00132.x bending behavior of FRC composites with scale effect. Jeju Island, South

21. Soranakom C, Mobasher B. Correlation of tensile and flexural responses Korea, pp 1379–1385

of strain softening and strain hardening cement composites. Cem Concr

14 YAO ET AL.

strength of regular and high performance fiber reinforced concrete from Barzin Mobasher

flexural tests. Construct Build Mater. 2014;70:243-253. https://doi.org/10. Arizona State University, School of

1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.07.037

Sustainable Engineering and Built

44. Mobasher B, Dey V, Cohen Z, Peled A. Correlation of constitutive response

of hybrid textile reinforced concrete from tensile and flexural tests. Cem Environment, Tempe, AZ

Concr Compos. 2014;53:148-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.

2014.06.004

AUTHOR'S BIOGRAPHIES

Yiming Yao

Key Laboratory of Concrete and

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Prestressed Concrete Structures

of Ministry of Education, School

Additional Supporting Information may be found online in

of Civil Engineering, Southeast

the supporting information tab for this article.

University, Nanjing, China

Wang X, Mobasher B. Analytical displacement solu-

Karan Aswani

tions for statically determinate beams based on a tri-

PK Associates, Scottsdale, AZ

linear moment–curvature model. Structural Concrete.

2018;1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/suco.201700150

Xinmeng Wang

DiGioia Gray & Associates,

Tempe, AZ

- Torsion BarUploaded bydownloadlagum
- lcfUploaded byKoum Charles
- Simulation Instructor WB 2011 ENGUploaded byjorgemariovega4910
- Lecture 07-08 - Solid MechanicsUploaded byDinesh Kumar
- An Elastoplastic Model Based on the Shakedown Concepts for Flexible PavementsUploaded byMwezi Jules
- 2 axial loadingUploaded bytigin
- Paper-Anchorage of Steel Building to ConcreteUploaded bynasrullahk_24
- ME2113-2010SEM1 Past year paperUploaded byUnknown uploader
- 3 TorsionUploaded byChenthil Kumar
- Adyn CompositeUploaded byRogelio Mdiaz
- Update 2014Uploaded bymatteo_1234
- P690Uploaded byteckhuatl
- Mechanical Characterization of Aggregates(1)Uploaded byRama Lakshmi Velusamy
- Unit 1 Forces on MaterialsUploaded byayam
- Axisymmetric Analysis of Ground Reinforcing in Tunnelling DesignUploaded byHumberto Jorge
- IS 3935Uploaded byVinay Kumar
- Elastomeric BearingsUploaded byalperen52
- TQMUploaded byLibin
- The Stress Calculation in the Frictionally Slipping Contact Between a Rigid Cylinder and a Half PlaneUploaded byHui Qiu
- stress3dUploaded byRonald Cario Seguin
- ARMA-77-0236Uploaded byHafiz Asyraf
- Example on Hydrostatic and Deviatoric Stresses PDF Solutions Manual - Google SearchUploaded byBehera Kishore
- ljhumbc.pptxUploaded byVaddi Meher
- Abaqus BehaviorUploaded byСтефан Жечев
- Topic 2Uploaded bylucas
- Net DesignUploaded byRobert Florez
- THE PINUploaded byAgustín Yáñez Quezada
- DocumentUploaded bysunilsharma853380
- EFFECT OF STRAIN RATE ON PLASTIC FLOW AND FAILURE IN POLYCRYSTALLINE TUNGSTENUploaded by朱峯君
- DRY-CUTTING OPTIONS WITH A CHAINSAW AT THEUploaded bytkujun

- 1980-Simplified Cracked Section AnalysisUploaded byChan Dara Koem
- Socket Base Connections With Precast Concrete Columns.pdfUploaded byAc2140
- Joint StrengthUploaded byChan Dara Koem
- 2003-Unbonded Posttensioned Concrete Bridge Piers I Monotonic and Cyclic AnalysesUploaded byChan Dara Koem
- 1985-Review of Cracking of Partially Prestressed Concrete Member Canadian Journal of Civil EngineeringUploaded byChan Dara Koem
- 1993-Model Precast Concrete Beam-To-Column Connections Subject to Cyclic LoadingUploaded byChan Dara Koem
- 1984-cyclic behavior of lightly reinforced concrete beam.pdfUploaded byChan Dara Koem
- 1984-cyclic behavior of lightly reinforced concrete beam.pdfUploaded byChan Dara Koem
- 1996-Stress Transfer Mechanicm of Socket Base Connection With Precast Cncrete ColumnsUploaded byChan Dara Koem
- Bond Slip of Tendon ExperimentUploaded byChan Dara Koem
- MODEL FRP CONFINED rc COLUMN USING SAP2000Uploaded byChan Dara Koem
- 1157Uploaded byChan Dara Koem
- Dynamic Test Evaluation of Numerical Models for Unbonded Post-tnsioned Concrete WallsUploaded byChan Dara Koem
- An Investigation on Stressing and Breakage Response of a Prestressing Stands Using an Efficint Finite ElementUploaded byChan Dara Koem
- 1-s2.0-0266353895000690-mainUploaded byChan Dara Koem
- Bond of 13 Mm Prestressing Steel Strands in Pretensioned Concrete MembersUploaded byChan Dara Koem
- 1984-cyclic behavior of lightly reinforced concrete beam.pdfUploaded byChan Dara Koem

- Corrosion Performance TestsUploaded byChatchai Manathamsombat
- CHAPTER 7 Design of Prestresed Concrete BridgesUploaded byLittleRed
- Sp 17 14 Vol1 PreviewUploaded bythakrarhits
- 14532154 Experimental Study of Strenth of Latex Modified Fibre Reinforced ConcreteUploaded bydejay100
- ENV 1992-1-4-1996Uploaded byDaniel Seceleanu
- books_list.pdfUploaded byusman
- Aslan100 GFRPUploaded byzsomborus
- elements of civil engg-compiled.docUploaded byMahesh Ramteke
- Concrete 27-28-30 Oct 07 Fire Damaged BuildingUploaded byVeenoy
- 03 49 00 Glass Fiber Reinforced Concrete PanelsUploaded bySourav Basak
- Composite 1Uploaded byNermin Özgür
- v375 eBook eBook Download Reinforced Concrete Structures Analysis and Design by David FanellaUploaded byGandhi Hammoud
- Effect of wire mesh on the strength of R.C.C. beams repaired using ferrocement layersUploaded byijrdt
- DA_PYLD2004Uploaded bynimkan1000
- Sika Solutions for Concrete BridgesUploaded bycaapromo
- IAN 104-07 the Anchorage of Reinforcement and Fixings in Hardened Concrete (DMRB, 2007)Uploaded bysandycastle
- HALFEN Curtain Wall Support SystemsUploaded byvinthf
- 7 Flat SlabsUploaded bySandro Ledermann-Türme
- FLEXURAL BEHAVIOUR OF PRESTRESSED HOLLOW SLABUploaded byIAEME Publication
- peraturanUploaded byFahriAriansyah
- Checklist r1Uploaded byFikri
- ISIS Manual - FRP Concrete ReinforcementUploaded bymenumorut173012
- School Structural Design Criteria_FINALUploaded byDinesh Poudel
- Cross-Section Strength of Columns_Design BookletUploaded byD_D_A
- Concrete 1Uploaded bychdhr
- Assessment of Vehicle Live LoadsUploaded bychrislcy
- plandoc_4_3763Uploaded bymagdyamdb
- Numerically based proposals for the stiffness and strength of masonry infills with openings in reinforced concrete framesUploaded byWallison Medeiros
- 001 RCM Chapter 1 - IntroductionUploaded byMossSkosana
- Sct1375 Technical SpecUploaded byMUTHUKKUMARAM