Computational modelling

Exercise 4: Discrete & smeared cracking

Problem

Input
1. Finite element mesh

Figure 1 Finite element mesh

Figure 1 shows the finite element mesh used for the concrete beam (four point bending) problem used
for discrete cracking. Interface elements are used only for discrete cracking analysis. These are element
81-81. Elements 1-80 are continuum elements. For the smeared cracking analysis we only used those.
2. Element type(s) (degrees of freedom, interpolation, dimension, stress state, )
Element type(s)

CQ16M (eight-node quadrilateral

isoparametric plane stress
element)

Degrees of freedom

16 DOFs (i.e. 2 per node ux, uy)

Interpolation
Dimension
Stress state

Quadratic
25x25 mm
Plane stress

CL12I (six-node interface

element between two lines
in a two-dimensional
configuration)
12 DOFs (i.e. 2 per node ux,
uy)
Quadratic
50 mm (thick)
Line interface

3. Boundary conditions (constraints, loads)

Figure 2 Boundary conditions

Constraints shown in red at beam ends. (ux=0 and uy=0). At the top a load displacement of -0.5 mm in
global y direction is applied seen in red.

4. Material type and parameters

Element
Material type
Elastic modulus
Poisson ratio
Normal stiffness modulus (Kn)
Shear stiffness modulus (Kt)
Tensile strength
Fracture energy (Gf)

Continuum (plane)
Concrete
40000 N/mm^2
0.2
-

5. Cross-sectional properties
Length
Height
Thickness

500 mm
100 mm
50 mm

Interface (line)
Concrete
1600000 N/mm^3
66667 N/mm^3
3 N/mm^2
0.125 N/mm

PART 0: Linear static analysis

Figure 3 Stress contour plot (SXX)

Figure 4 Principle strain 1 contour plot

Figure 5 Reaction forces in global y-direction

The linear static analysis does not take cracking into account as we expected. With a total load
displacement of -1mm in y-direction the stresses and strain reach beyond the failure criterion in the
beam (figure 3 and 4).

PART 1: Discrete cracking

Analysis results
6. Displacements (e.g. as deformed model: scaled or non-scaled?; combined with e.g. stress
contour plots)

Figure 6 Deformed model combined with stress contour plot (SXX) at pre peak (step 4)

Figure 7 Deformed model combined with stress contour plot (SXX) at peak (step 14)

Figure 8 Deformed model combined with stress contour plot (SXX) at post peak (step 21)

Figure 9 Deformed model combined with stress contour plot (SXX) at post peak (step 80)

Figure 6-9 show the deformed models combined with the stress contour plots (SXX). The crack occurs
when the failure criterion is reached in the interface elements. This is the tension strength of 3MPa at
the bottom of the beam. Interesting to see are the stresses in figures 7 and 8 at the bottom of the beam.
Tensile stresses are larger than the failure criterion and should crack in reality. We used continuum
elements there so they only behave linear without cracks. Extra analysis with more interface elements in
the beam would be interesting.

7.

Force-displacements curve
6000
5000

Force [N]

4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0

0,02

0,04

0,06

0,08

0,1

0,12

Displacement [mm]
Discrete
Figure 10 Force-displacements curve of discrete cracking analysis

Figure 10 shows the load-displacement curve of the discrete cracking analysis of a four-point bending
problem. The load is applied with displacement control of 100 equally sized steps. The load in this graph
are the reaction forces in y-directions and the displacement is the nodal displacement in y-direction of
the node on which the load is applied. Qualitative and quantitative comments are given in section 10.

8. Stress and/or traction distributions

Figure 11 Traction diagrams on the left pre-peak and right at peak

Figure 12 Traction distribution both post-peak

Figure 11 and 12 show the traction (stresses) distribution over the height of the beam at the line
interface elements.

9. Convergence aspects (selected norm, trend, )

Convergence norm
Trend
Load steps (displacement controlled)
Iterative method

Displacement & force

Convergence after 0 iterations
0.01 (100)
Regular N-R.

10. Interpretation of load-displacement curve (qualitative, quantitative)

6000
5000

Force [N]

4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0

0,02

0,04

0,06

0,08

0,1

0,12

Displacement [mm]
Discrete
Figure 13 Load-displacement curve of discrete cracking with stress contour plots (SXX)

Figure 13 and 14 show the load-displacement curve of the discrete cracking analysis of the four-point
bending problem of a concrete beam. Displacement controlled load is applied at the top of the beam.
This is done in 100 equally sized load steps. Four adequate stress (SXX) and traction diagrams are added
in this figures. As seen in the figures the force-displacement curve initially increases linear. The beam
has a linear stress distribution over its height (figure 14). Then pre-peak the failure criteria is reached at
the bottom of the beam in tension (in this case 3MPa). This causes the start of the crack and a change of
stress-relative displacement relation of the interface element namely the linear tension softening. This
happens consecutively until the peak where the beam reaches its bearing capacity (around 5700 N). The
post-peak shape of the curve is exponential. This is what we expected for the concrete beam with the
given fracture energy (=area underneath) and brittle fracture. The crack keeps growing and the tension
and compression zone of the beam decrease.

6000
5000

Force [N]

4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0

0,02

0,04

0,06

0,08

Displacement [mm]
Discrete
Figure 14 Load-displacement curve of discrete cracking with adequate traction diagrams

0,1

0,12

PART 2: Smeared cracking

Analysis results
6. Force-displacements curve
Before discussing the Force-displacement graph, see below information (from the .out file) for load step
7 and 8.

From the screen shot above, while there was no crack at the 7th load step, we notice 12 cracks had
opened at Load step 8. This would play a role in the Force-Displacement relationship. Using a 0.01(100)
i.e. specified load steps, the Force-Displacement relationship illustrated below in Fig. 15 was obtained.

Figure 15 Load-displacement relation for prescribed deformation of 0.5 mm (in 100 steps)

From Fig. 15, the relationship is linear up till Load step 7, and non-linear from step 8. The appearance of
cracks is the reason for this. With more load steps, we notice the slope (and thus the stiffness) reducing
as more cracks appeared. More deformation is obtained with less force increment up till the 19th Load

step. By the 20th load step, further deformation even with small reduction in force. Thus this relationship
shows an initial linear relationship, followed by non-linear relationship as cracks appeared and grew.
After the 20th load step, there was divergence and the FEM software did not give results. After
modifying the maximum number of iterations, a modified plot was obtained illustrated in Fig. 16

Figure 16 Load-Displacement Relation for prescribed deformation of 0.5 mm (in 50 steps)

Fig. 16 shows that a significant loss stiffness after the 20th load step, thus the force that can be
supported dropped significantly. Nevertheless, it does not become zero immediately. The fracture
energy play a role in the post-peak behavior (as seen in tension-softening in Fig. 16).
NB: I would use refer to Figure 16 subsequently. It was linear up till the 4th load step when 12 cracks
appeared. Non-linear relationship afterwards till the Peak (at the 12th Load step). Significant loss of
stiffness afterward.
7. Stress, crack and/or traction distributions

Figure 17a Crack initiation pattern at Load step 4

Figure 17b Crack pattern Pre-peak

Figure 17c Crack pattern at peak

Figure 17d Crack pattern Post peak

From crack initiation at Load step 4 (with 12 cracks), the cracks grew with increasing Load steps as
illustrated in Figures 17a d which shows the crack patterns at initiation, Pre-peak, at Peak and Postpeak respectively.
From the .OUT file, interesting facts on crack formation can be studied. From 12 crack at initiation (at
load step 4), the cracks grew to 86 at Load step 15. It is however interesting to note that no new crack
was formed afterwards. This behavior correspond to that expected on concrete subjected to imposed
deformation where there is a crack-formation stage (at which cracks are formed), and a stage of Fully
developed crack pattern (where no new crack is formed, rather the existing crack only grow). This
behavior was obvious from studying the .OUT file.
8. Displacements, stresses, strains etc. (e.g. as deformed model: combined with stress contour plots)

Fig 18 Displacement contour TDtY(V) at peak Force

Fig 19a Reaction vector FBY(V) at peak Force

Fig 19b Reaction vector FBY(V) at a Post-peak load step

The Fig 19a-b show how the reaction from the structure behave with increasing load step (i.e. as more
prescribed displacement is imposed). At Peak force, see the structure still proving resistance. Even after
the peak, some reaction provided by the structure (even though the reaction force is less than the peak
force attained at load step 12). However, with increasing imposed displacement, a point is reached
where a positive reaction force is no longer provided. This is seen in Fig. 19b above (see the direction of
the imposed load and reaction oriented in same direction). This tells us a lot about the cracking
behaviour of the concrete post-peak. The structure was still able to mobilize some resistance post-peak
rather than fail abruptly immediately after peak.
Stress Behaviour of smeared

Fig 20a Principal Stress (S1) at a pre-peak load step

Fig 20b Principal Stress (S1) at a Peak load step

Fig 20c Principal Stress (S1) at a Post-Peak load step

The Principal stress behavior Pre, At and post peak is illustrated in the Fig. 20a - c above. The Red colour
on the contour plots shows how the effective parts of the concrete that provide tensile resistance kept
moving deeper into the structure from the bottom. As a crack formed at a layer, its stiffness and tensile
strength reduce, and the tensile stresses redistributed to upper fibres. The direction of the flow of
stresses (i.e. the arrows in the plot) show this behaviour.
9. Strain Behavior of smeared
Before discussing the strain behavior, we have determined the relevant material properties thus:

In Figure 21a - d below, I have presented Principal Strain data (E1) for Load steps 11 (pre-peak), 12 (at
Peak), 13 and 38 (both Post-Peak). I have indicated the elastic strain limit (
and the plastic strain limit
on the contour plots using a yellow and red coloured line respectively.

Fig 21a Principal Strain (E1) at a Pre-Peak load step 11

Fig 21b Principal Strain (E1) at-Peak load step 12

Fig 21c Principal Strain (E1) Post-Peak load step 13

Fig 21d Principal Strain (E1) Post-Peak load step 38

In each case, significant part of the structure remain within elastic strain limits (most of the dark blue
parts on the contour plot), however we can also see how the parts of the section increasingly have
strains that exceed the plastic limit. Up to the peak force (corresponding to 12th Load step of the
prescribed displacement), we notice that no part of the section reaches Ultimate strain capacity. This is
indicated on the diagrams with the red line being above the Legends (in Fig. 21a b) as the maximum
strains were less than
.
However, at the very next Load-step post-peak, strains beyond the plastic limit are introduced. This
point correspond to the sharp drop in the Force-Displacement curve in Fig. 16. As earlier stated, there is
significant loss of stiffness there, and plastic flow of the material started (i.e. much displacement for
very low load increment). Notice how the red line took more and more part of the section with
increasing load step (as seen in the red line in Fig. 21 c d).

10. Convergence aspects (selected norm, trend, )

NB: In the Equilibrium iteration, I set the maximum number of iteration to 40.
Convergence norm
Trend

Load steps (displacement controlled)

Iterative method

Displacement & force

Most of the load steps converged between 0 7
iterations. Load steps 13 (corresponding to the
transition between peak and post-peak)
converged after 32 iteration.
0.02 (50)
Regular N-R.

Verify and/or comment the analysis results:

11. Hand calculations where possible
Linear static hand calculations can be made using euler assumptions. Using a tensile strength of
3MPa the beam its bearing capacity is 3333.33 N. This assumes that the beam will fail when 3MPa is
reached at the bottom. This is very conservative.

Tensile strength
Thickness beam
Height beam
Section modulus
Maximum moment
Maximum force

3 MPa
50 mm
100 mm
83333.33 mm^3
250000 Nmm
3333.33 N

12. Other verifications or comments, quantitatively or qualitatively where possible

Smeared vs. Discrete
7000
6000

Force [N]

5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0

0,02

0,04

0,06

0,08

0,1

0,12

Displacement [mm]
Discrete

Smeared

Fig 22 Discrete vs. smeared cracking analysis

Figure 22 shows the load-displacement curve of the smeared and discrete cracking of the (four-point
bending) concrete beam. For both analysis is displacement-controlled load applied in 100 equally sized
steps. Comparing the results qualitatively you see similarities and differences. Both analysis show a
similar initially linear behaviour of curve (linear stress/strain distribution over its height). Than the

discrete cracking starts peaking earlier than the smeared. Eventually the smeared overshoots the
discrete. A higher ultimate bearing capacity of the beam is reached. Reasoning for this behaviour is hard.
But it might have something to do that the discrete cracking with just one line of interface elements is
too conservative. More interface elements might be needed for more accurate behaviour.

13. Voluntary: comparisons between analyses (e.g. an increase of the fracture energy)
To study the effect of the fracture energy, we used other fracture energies and studied the effect.
Figure 23 shows the Force-displacement behaviour when a Fracture energy was used.

Fracture Energy (Gf) = 5 N/mm

5000
4500
4000

Force (N)

3500
3000
2500
2000

Series1

1500
1000
500
0
0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,2

Displacement (mm)
Fig. 23 Effect of Fracture energy increase
The fracture energy had significant impact on the post-linear elastic behaviour of the structure. Unlike in
Figure 16 where there was sharp drop in stiffness and reaction force beyond a certain peak force,
increased fracture energy gave more capacity to the structure after the elastic region. The higher the
fracture the energy, the closer the structure get to an ideal plastic behaviour. Similarly, the lower the
fracture energy, the closer it tends towards a fully brittle material.
Behaviour in Unloading
When unloaded in several load steps, the outcome is presented in graphical form below in Fig. 24. It is
obvious that significant permanent strains have crept in. This is clearly demonstrated in Fig. 24.

Force (N)

Loading & Unloading

4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
-500 0

Loading
Unloading

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

Displacement (mm)
Fig 24 Loading & unloading

1,2