Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
s =
=
( + < > +
(4)
3.2 Frictional yield surface (shear boundary):
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
0
1 2 10 1
0
1 2 10 1
0 1 11
12
( )
1
,
1
1
b
T T N
T V N N
T V N N
T
N
v
F
E k k c f
E k k c f
E k c
c
o o
o o o
o o o
o
c
=
+ < + >
=
+ + < + >
=
+ < >
(5)
where:
( )
1 1 1
0.37/(3.755 ) 3.755
v
v v
v
f k E k E
o
o o
o
< >
= < + >
(6)
3.3 Numerical implementations using the new
formulation
Four-node tetrahedral solid elements with three
translational degrees of freedom per node were used to
represent the concrete, FRP laminate and adhesive
layers in the finite element simulations. Due to the
geometrical and loading symmetries, only one eighth of
the FRP-wrapped column was modelled. Symmetrical
boundary conditions were placed along the planes of
symmetry. A displacement-controlled numerical procedure
was used in the finite element analysis to capture the
softening branch of the loaddisplacement curve and the
post-debonding behaviour. The finite element mesh of
one eighth of a concrete cylinder is shown in Figure 1.
All details concerning the in-house code and the related
formulations will be presented in future publications.
Figure 1 Finite element mesh
The comparison between experimental results and
numerical predictions is depicted in Figures 2 and 3 for
the application of one and six CFRP sheets, respectively.
The experimental results were taken from the research
work of Lahlou et al. (1992). From Figures 2 and 3, it
was concluded that the microplane approach with the
new modifications accurately simulate the stressstrain
relationships of concrete under both low (one CFRP
sheet) and high (six CFRP sheets) lateral confinement
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Strain %
A
x
i
a
l
s
t
r
e
s
s
(
M
P
a
)
Exp.
M4 (before modification)
M4 (proposed
Figure 2 Comparisons between experimental results and numerical
predictions using one sheet of CFRP
September 2729, 2010, Beijing, China
629
0
30
60
90
120
150
0 1 2 3 4 5
Strain (%)
A
x
i
a
l
s
t
r
e
s
s
(
M
P
a
)
Exp.
M4 (proposed
modification)
Figure 3 Comparisons between experimental results and numerical
predictions using six sheets of CFRP
pressures. The M4 model of Bazant without including
the proposed modification has an obvious difficulty to
simulate the hardening behaviour of CFRP-wrapped
concrete cylinders with one sheet (Figure 2).
4 CONCLUSION
In part of this study, an experimental program has been
carried out to investigate the behaviour of concrete
cylinders subjected to low confining lateral pressures.
The lateral pressures were designed to give the same
lateral and axial responses resulting from using FRP
wraps. In another part of the paper, nonlinear
micromechanics-based finite element analysis have been
developed using the microplane concrete theory to
simulate the behaviour of FRP-wrapped concrete
columns. The analysis was carried out based on our
proposed modifications of the original M4 model.
Nonlinear functions were multiplied to the deviatoric
and shear boundaries functions to overcome the numerical
problems encountered when using the old formulations.
In the application of FRP-wrapped columns, the finite
element analysis with the microplane concrete theory
after considering the proposed modifications was shown
to accurately represent the stressstrain relationships
of the concrete under both low and high lateral
confinement pressures. The key advantage of the
proposed formulations is the ability to adequately
represent the concrete behaviour under low lateral
confinement pressure and maintaining the consistency
with the existing microplane model for un-confined
concrete.
REFERENCES
Caner F. & Baant Z. 2000. Microplane model M4 for concrete. II:
Algorithm and calibration. Journal of Engineering Mechanics,
ASCE, 126(9), 954-961.
Deniaud C. & Neale K.W. 2006. An assessment of constitutive
models for concrete columns confined with fibre composite
sheets. Composite Structures, 73(3), 318-330.
Ghazi M. & Attard M. & Foster S. 2002. Modelling triaxial
compression using the microplane formulation for low
confinement. Computers and Structures, 919-934.
Lahlou K. & Aitcin P. & Chaallal C. 1992. Behaviour of high
strength concrete under confined stresses. Cement and Concrete
Composites, 14, 185-193.
Malver J. & Morrill K. & Crawford J. 2004. Numerical modelling
of concrete confined by fiber-reinforced composites. Journal
of Composites for Construction, ASCE, 8(4), 315-322.
Mirmiran A. & Zagers K. & Yuan W. 2000. Nonlinear finite
element modelling of concrete confined by composites, Finite
Element Analysis and Design, 35(1), 79-96.
Neale K.W. & Abdel Baky H. & Yahiaoui A. & Ebead U. 2008.
Micromechanical modelling of FRP-strengthened concrete
structures. Sixth International Conference on Analytical Models
and New Concepts in Concrete and Masonry Structures
(AMCM), Kotynia, R. & Gawin, D. (Eds.) Lodz, Poland,
109-124.
Parent S. & Labossire P. 2000. Finite element analysis of
reinforced concrete columns confined with composite materials.
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 27(3), 400411.
Spoelstra M. & Monti G. 1999. FRP-confined concrete model.
Journal of Composites for Construction, ASCE, 3(3), 143150.
Toutanji H. 1999. Stressstrain characteristics of concrete columns
externally confined with advanced fibre composite sheets.
ACI Materials Journal, 96(3), 397-404.