THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF TALL AND SPECIAL BUILDINGS Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build.

17, 809822 (2008) Published online 11 September 2007 in Wiley Interscience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/tal.387

TOTAL STRAIN FE MODEL FOR REINFORCED CONCRETE FLOORS ON PILES

H. HOFMEYER1* AND A. A. VAN DEN BOS2
1

ABT consulting engineers, Arnhem, The Netherlands; and Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands 2 ABT consulting engineers, Arnhem, The Netherlands

SUMMARY A nite element (FE) model using a total strain material model has been developed to predict the behavior of warehouse reinforced concrete oors on piles. The material model (not the FE model itself) was calibrated to material tests. The FE model for the oor structure was checked with full-scale experiments. For a warehouse, punching load optimization and surface crack control are important design factors. It is concluded that if calibrated material models are used, total strain-based FE models are able to indicate surface crack width and punching strength for several types of reinforcement. Furthermore, it is concluded that it is possible to develop a total strain material model from material tests. Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

1.

INTRODUCTION

Existing nite element (FE) models for punching shear in concrete plates can be studied from different points of view, which are the dimensionality, the aim of the model, and the material model used. Regarding dimensionality, it should be noted that the application of three-dimensional FE models is quite recent (Dyngeland et al., 1994; Ozbolt et al., 1999; Staller, 2000). From 1980 to 1995, FE models were often two-dimensional, modeling the plate cross-section only, to save computing time (Loseth et al., 1982; Andr, 1982; Foeken, 1983; Borst and Nauta, 1985; Gonzlez-Vidosa et al., 1988; Mentrey, 1994; Hallgren and Bjerke, 2002). Another efcient technique to save computing time was a two-dimensional model of the plate surface, having multiple layers of degenerated shell elements over the thickness, thus creating a semi-three-dimensional approach (Marzouk and Chen, 1993; Polaka, 1998). Concerning the aim of FE models, most are developed for nding the relationship between the amount of reinforcement and the corresponding punching load (e.g., Xiao and OFlaherty, 2000). Still, other relationships are investigated. Abbasi and others researched the inuence of the main tensile reinforcement on the failure mechanism type using a nonlinear FE model (Abbasi et al., 1992). For the relationship between membrane stresses in the plate and the punching load, Kuang and Morley presented a model that used a material model that incorporates plasticity (Kuang and Morley, 1993). Hallgren and others presented a FE model for several shear-span-to-depth ratios and studied the corresponding failure mechanism type (Hallgren, 1996). The critical factor of FE models for concrete punching is the material model used, which is the relationship between strains and stresses for elastic behavior, crushing and cracking (Selby and Vecchio, 1993). Most FE models for realistic structures work with a macro material model, which models the
* Correspondence to: H. Hofmeyer, Faculty of Architecture, Building, and Planning, Unit Structural Design and Construction Technology (SDCT), PO Box 513/VRT 9.32, 5600 MB Eindhoven, The Netherlands. E-mail: h.hofmeyer@bwk.tue.nl

Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

810

H. HOFMEYER AND A. A. VAN DEN BOS

concrete as a continuum and does not incorporate the behavior of cement gel, particles and aggregates (Hofstetter and Mang, 1996; Zimmerman, 2004). Within this macro model, concrete cracking can be modeled through either a smeared or discrete crack approach (Fib, 2000). The discrete crack approach is based on an a priori determined crack location, with can be accomplished with interface elements (Hillerborg et al., 1976). It cannot be used for the research presented here, because crack locations are not known. The smeared crack approach reduces the stiffness in an FE at the moment the tensile strength is reached. Using the smeared crack approach, the strain in the concrete is decomposed into elastic and crack strains to make an FE calculation possible (Litton, 1974). Because the decomposition gives rise to numerical problems in some instances, another approach was developed: the total strain crack model that describes tensile and compressive behavior of concrete with a single stressstrain relationship (Vecchio and Collins, 1986). This makes the material model less vulnerable for numerical problems and it can easily be developed using material tests. An FE model based on a total strain approach, which indicates punching strength and surface crack width for specic types of reinforcement, does not exist. However, Van den Bos and Hofmeyer showed that such a model is needed for the design of warehouse oors where surface crack control and punching load optimization are the two most important design criteria (Van den Bos and Hofmeyer, 2005). This article presents a total strain FE model that indicates punching strength and surface crack width for several types of reinforcement. The material model (not the FE model itself) is calibrated to material tests. The FE model of the oor structure is veried against full-scale experiments that were carried out at Technische Universiteit Eindhoven (Van den Bos and Hofmeyer, 2005). 2. MATERIAL MODEL, MATERIAL TESTS

Two types of concrete were used in the investigation: non-reinforced concrete and ber-reinforced concrete. Both types are low shrinkage and made with the following constituents: watercement ratio 050; cement content 330 kg/m3; 75% ENV 197-1:1992 class III/B Portland blast furnace cement; 25% type III rapid-hardening Portland cement; coarse aggregate: 75% parts smaller than 32 mm, 25% parts smaller than 16 mm and 160 mm slump. The ber-reinforced concrete was reinforced with 35 kg/m3 Bekaert Dramix RC 65/60 BN (Figure 1). The concrete was tested in compression, pure tension, and shear. By the use of FE models that simulated the material tests, it was possible to obtain input variables for the FE material model. 2.1 Compression tests

Standard cube compression tests were carried out as shown in Figure 2. The loading speed was 2 mm/min. The average compression strength and standard deviation of all 30 days aged cubes were 400 N/mm2 and 18 N/mm2, respectively, for eight ber-reinforced cubes and 410 N/mm2

0.9 mm fy >1000 N/mm2 60 mm Bekaert Dramix RC 65/60 BN

Figure 1. Bekaert reinforcement ber
Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 17, 809822 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/tal

TOTAL STRAIN FE MODEL FOR RC FLOORS

811

and 17 N/mm2 for 11 plain cubes. Curve A in Figure 2 displays a typical loaddeformation relation for plain concrete. Average stressstrain values from all experiments (curve C) were used as input for an FE model of the compression test (curve B). Figure 2 shows that the results from the FE analysis compare very closely to the experimental data. For non-reinforced and ber-reinforced concrete, the same FE input (curve C) can be used as the test results for the two materials are almost identical. 2.2 Pure tension tests

For investigating the behavior of concrete in tension, a test set-up was used that was originally developed for studying the post-peak behavior of unreinforced masonry in tension (Van der Pluijm, 1999). The tension plates of the set-up shown in Figure 3 remain perfectly parallel during load application,
Strain [1] 0 1200 1000 A Load [kN] 800 600 20 400
(A) Typical comp. test [kN-mm]

0.005

0.01 50 B C 40 30 Stress [N/mm2]

Compression test Displacement controlled load application

Concrete cube, 150*150*150 mm Steel compression plates, polished surface

200 0 0

(B) FEM simulation [kN-mm] (C) FEM input [N/mm2-1]

10 0

0.5

1.5

Deformation [mm]

Figure 2. Concrete compression test, plain and ber-reinforced concrete

Strain [1] 0 25 20 Load [kN] 15 10 B 5 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Strain over 25 mm [1] A 0
s = elastic hinges

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05
s s Actuator HE300B

(A) Typical tension test [kN-1(25mm)] (B) FEM Simulation [kN-1(25mm)] (C) FEM input [N/mm2-1]

1.6 Stress [N/mm2] 1.2 0.8

Special system to keep loading plates perfectly parallel, 300*300*10 mm s s Concrete cube, 150*150*150 mm, saw cuts result in circular cross-section Steel tension plates, glued to concrete

C 0.4

Figure 3. Concrete pure tension test, plain concrete

Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 17, 809822 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/tal

812

H. HOFMEYER AND A. A. VAN DEN BOS

thereby allowing non-uniform crack distributions to occur. This yields a typical S-shape segment in the descending branch of the experimental loadstrain curve A. Saw cuts in the concrete cube create a circular cross-section with a diameter of 123 mm. The average tension strength and standard deviation for four ber-reinforced experiments are 241 N/mm2 and 018 N/mm2, respectively. For the two tests on non-reinforced concrete these values are 156 N/mm2 and 006 N/mm2. There is a difference in tensile strength for plain and ber concrete that is only found for pure tension tests. Still, pure tension tests are used in favor of bending tests because pure tension tests results are closest to actual tensile strength and therefore they yield the best results if a FE model is used with a total strain material model. A typical loaddeformation relation for non-reinforced concrete is shown in Figure 3 by curve A. Curve C represents average stressstrain values for the two non-reinforced concrete tests. They were used as input for an FE model of a pure tension test (curve B). Figure 3 shows that the results from an FE analysis of a non-reinforced concrete specimen compare very closely to the experimental data. Figure 4 shows the same procedure for ber-reinforced concrete. 2.3 Shear tests

For the investigation of concrete subject to shear only, vertical shear failure surfaces in the concrete specimens are created by applying horizontal offset saw cuts as shown in Figure 5. Subjecting the cubes to compression allows the concrete between the saw cuts to fail in shear. Curve A in Figure 5 shows a typical loaddeformation relationship. In the process of calibrating the FE model for shear, it was found that the shear modulus G of the concrete should be multiplied by 02 after cracking, which is indicated by FEM input curve C. Using this input, the FE model shows a loaddeformation behavior shown by curve B and this curve is similar to experimental curve A. 3. FE MODEL FOR FULL-SCALE EXPERIMENTS

At the Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, full-scale experiments have been carried out on warehouse slabs to investigate surface crack behavior and punching strength for specic reinforcement types (Van den Bos and Hofmeyer, 2005) (Figure 6). A steel boundary frame was used to simulate the boundary
Strain [1] 0 30 A 25 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Strain over 25 mm [1] 0.05 0.1 0.15

Load [kN]

20 15 C 10 5 0

(A) Typical tension test [kN-1(25 mm)] (B) FEM Simulation [kN-1(25mm)] (C) FEM input [N/mm2-1]

Figure 4. Concrete pure tension test, ber-reinforced concrete

Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 17, 809822 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/tal

Stress [N/mm2]

TOTAL STRAIN FE MODEL FOR RC FLOORS

Shear angle [rad.] 0.000 120 100 Load [kN] 80 60 40 20 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 Deformation [mm]
(A) Typical shear test [kN-mm] (B) FEM simulation [kN-mm] (C) FEM input [N/mm2-rad]

813

0.001 A B

0.002

0.003

0.004 6

Shear test

C 0.2G

5 4 3 2 1 0

Shear stress [N/mm2]

37.5 mm 75 mm 37.5 mm

1.0 mm

Displacement controlled load application Concrete cube, 150*150*150 mm Failure surface y Saw cut over full cube width Steel compression plates, polished surface

z x

75 mm

75 mm

Figure 5. Concrete shear test, ber-reinforced concrete (for normal concrete: the same reduction factor 02 for shear modulus G can be used)

3 strain gauges at bottom of plate 585 220 585 A A' 220 585 220 Test specimen, concrete plate Test rig beam LVDT meas. length 300 mm Loading plate, simulates pile moving up

585

Steel boundary frame Support plates, keep plate fixed in loading direction 610

y x

220 610

220 610

220 610

All measures in mm.

Test rig beams Test specimen, concrete plate Hydraulic jack Test rig beams Section A-A'

Support plates, hinge connected to load cells Steel boundary frame, concrete filled steel tube 200x200x12 Loading plate, hinge connected to hydraulic jack

Figure 6. Full-scale experiments

Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 17, 809822 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/tal

814

H. HOFMEYER AND A. A. VAN DEN BOS

conditions in practice (Van den Bos and Hofmeyer, 2005). Data for the test specimens are given in Table 1. Figure 7 shows the four types of reinforcement. 3.1 ACI code predictions

American Standard ACI 318-02 is used, without any safety factor, for predicting the punching load of the experiments (Table 2). The ACI code performs well. It does not permit use of the normal mat (A), pile mat (B), and circular pile mat (C) as shear reinforcement. Even the bent-up bars are not allowed as shear reinforcement because the test specimen depth is too low. If still a prediction is made, the value permitted is lower than for the non-shear-reinforced sections because, for the concrete shear part, a reduced value should be used. 3.2 Model geometry

An FE model of the oor structure is made using the general FE program Diana (Diana, 2004). Because the full-scale experiments are symmetric, only one quarter of the structure needs to be modeled. This quarter will be completely built with volume elements. The geometry of the FE model is shown in Figure 8. The concrete oor slab comprises two volume layers while the boundary frame structure consists of three volume layers. 3.3 Boundary conditions

Symmetry conditions are applied along two sides as shown in Figure 8. The support is xed in the zdirection, but is free to rotate. This also applies to the experiments.

Table 1. Test specimens for full-scale experiments Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Concrete Fibera Fibera Fibera Normal Normal Normal Normal Normal Reinforcement (B) Square pile matb (C) Circular pile matc (B) Square pile matb (C) Circular pile matc (A) Normal matd (B) Square pile matb (A) Normal matd (B) Square pile matb (D) Bent-up barse

Concrete ber reinforcement equals 35 kg/m3 Bekaert Dramix RC 65/60 BN. The square pile mat consists of 10 bars (diameter 8 mm, length 1000 mm) in each direction, cross-sectional bar distance 100 mm. Upper surface of the mat distance 30 mm. Only positioned above the pile. c Circular pile mat consists of one bar (diameter 8 mm, length 17000 mm) circular bent using an increasing radius of 75 mm for each revolution. On this mat, 7 u-shaped bars (diameter 8 mm, length 1000 mm) are welded. d Normal mat consists of bars (diameter 8 mm) in each direction, cross-sectional bar distance 100 mm. Positioned above the whole test specimen. e Bent-up bars are two trapezoidal 45 degrees bent bars (diameter 8 mm) in each direction, cross-sectional bar distance 200 mm.
b

Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 17, 809822 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/tal

TOTAL STRAIN FE MODEL FOR RC FLOORS

815

Normal mat (A)

(B) Square pile mat Bars 8 mm, distance 100 mm 3000 mm Bars 8 mm, circular and U-shaped (C) Circular pile mat

30 mm 3100 mm (B) Square pile mat

160 mm

Bent-up bars 8 mm, distance 200 mm (D) Bent-up bars

1000 mm

1000 mm

1000 mm

30 mm 160 mm 1050 m m 1000 mm 1050 m m

Figure 7. Reinforcement types AD

Table 2. Experiments versus FE model Ultimate load (kN) ACI 318-02 Ultimate load (kN) Number of cracks Exp. observed (in LVDT range) 9 20 27 6 9 23 24 24 (9) (15) (13) (5) (8) (12) (11) (10) Crack width (mm)

Exp. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Exp. 361 458 440 349 353 351 422 496

FE model 384 400 438 337 355 382 393 412

FE model Distributed Distributed Distributed Distributed Distributed Distributed Distributed Distributed

Exp. 144 103 074 351 136 055 066 081

FE model 145 075 043 552 208 054 079 075

343 343 343 343 291

Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 17, 809822 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/tal

816

H. HOFMEYER AND A. A. VAN DEN BOS

(1500+200) mm Volumes for steel frame (1500+200) mm

160 mm 200 mm

ux=0, roty=0, rotz=0 y z x 110 mm

Volumes for support 300*300 mm

Lines for square pile reinforcement mat uy=0, rotx=0, rotz=0 Surface for steel loading plate

Figure 8. 1/4 FE model geometry volumes

3.4

Elements

The FEs used in the analysis are CTP45 (Diana, 2004). These are isoparametric wedge elements with 15 nodes. The reinforcement shown in Figure 7 is modeled by specic Diana embedded reinforcing bars (Diana, 2004) for each individual steel rod. 3.5 Material model and properties

A total strain approach is used with xed smeared cracking; i.e., the crack direction is xed after crack initiation. For this approach, a compression and a tension stressstrain curve are used. Compression curve C in Figure 2 is employed for both non-reinforced and ber-reinforced concrete. For tension, curve C in Figure 3 is used for non-reinforced concrete and Figure 4 is used for ber-reinforced concrete. Curve C in Figure 5 is employed for shear in both types of concrete. The steel reinforcement behaves elastically (E = 210 000 N/mm2) up to the Von Mises yield stress of 440 N/mm2, from which perfect plastic behavior has been assumed. The members of the steel boundary frame, shown in Figure 6, consist of grout-lled square hollow steel sections of 200 200 5 mm. The calculated elastic modulus of equivalent uniform beams measuring 200 200 mm is 90 000 N/mm2. They are assumed to be subject to elastic behavior only. 3.6 Load

The displacements in the z-direction of all element nodes of the steel loading plate are coupled. One of these nodes is given a prescribed displacement in the z-direction. The reaction force of this prescribed displacement equals the load on the plate. In every element node, forces are applied to model the dead load of the concrete plate.
Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 17, 809822 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/tal

TOTAL STRAIN FE MODEL FOR RC FLOORS

817

3.7

Solving strategy

A common NewtonRhapson solving strategy is used to sequentially solve the separate linear systems of equations. To increase the solving speed, a line-search algorithm is used. Because the load is a represented by a prescribed displacement, no problems occur in nding the ultimate load and in continuation after the ultimate load. 4. FE MODEL RESULTS

The following FE model results will be compared to the full-scale experiments: the ultimate load and loaddisplacement curve (1), the crack pattern, crack widths, and failure geometry (2), and the strain gauge readings (3). The results from experiment 2 have been selected for further discussion as its reinforcement layout is mostly used in practice. Results of other full-scale experiments are summarized. 4.1 Ultimate load and loaddisplacement curve (1)

Table 2 gives the ultimate punching load for the full-scale experiments and the FE model. Independent of the specic reinforcement type, the FE model predicts the ultimate load well. This is clearly shown in Figure 9. Figure 10 shows the loaddisplacement curves for Experiment 2. The stiffness of the experiment (curve A) seems to be signicantly smaller than the stiffness of the model (curve B). At this stage the exibility of the test-rig has not yet been taken into account in the FE model. The deection in the test-rig was measured to be 24 mm at the ultimate load. Including this exibility in the FE analysis of the oor structure leads to a loaddisplacement relationship represented by curve C in Figure 10. 4.2 Crack pattern, crack opening widths, and failure geometry (2)

The number of cracks and their width are also given in Table 2. The experimental crack width is obtained from the measured deformation of the surface over a specic distance and dividing by the number of cracks over this length. The deformation is measured by a linear variable differential transformer (LVDT) over 300 mm, as shown in Figure 6. The FE model assumes distributed cracks only, as shown in Figure 11. To obtain the FE crack width, the maximum FE
600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Experiment [1] Full-scale experiment [kN] FE model [kN]

Load [kN]

Figure 9. Ultimate loads

Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 17, 809822 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/tal

818
500 400 Load [kN] 300 200 100 0 0

H. HOFMEYER AND A. A. VAN DEN BOS

B C A

(A) Full-scale experiment 2 (B) FE model (C) FE model with test-rig deformation 10 20 30 40

Displacement [mm]

Figure 10. Loaddisplacement curve for FE model and full-scale experiment 2

approx. 770 mm

Model: ORTHO LC1: Load case 1 Step: 38 LOAD: 7.2 Gauss EL.EKNN1 EKNN Max = .125E-1 Min = 0

approx. 550 mm

Figure 11. Fine and equally distributed crack pattern for the FE model (upper surface above load application) (Diana 8.1.2. TNO Diana BV, Delft, The Netherlands)

crack strain is multiplied by the LVDT measurement length and then divided by the number of cracks found in the experiments. Figure 12 shows the crack widths from the experiments and the FE model. The FE model slightly underestimates the crack width for ber-reinforced concrete as shown by Experiments 1, 2 and 3, but is qualitatively correct for the different types of reinforcement: applying a square pile mat (Experiment 2) or a circular pile mat (Experiment 3) decreases the
Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 17, 809822 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/tal

TOTAL STRAIN FE MODEL FOR RC FLOORS

7 Crack width [mm] 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Experiment number Experiments FE model

819

Figure 12. Crack width at ultimate load

Table 3. Data FE model for experiment 2 Calculation step no. 6 14 18 23 29 38 Load (kN) 97 208 251 300 348 400 Maximum crack strain at integration points 0000375 0002070 0002990 0004150 0005490 0008570 Crack width (mm) 003 018 026 036 048 075

500 400 Load [kN] 300 200 100 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 Crack width [mm] B A (A) LVDT (B) FE model

Figure 13. Total crack opening width over several (34) cracks above the pile head, typical experiment (number 2) and FE model

crack width. Omitting reinforcement (experiment 4) yields large cracks, both in the experiment and the FE model. The FE model predicts cracks width well for traditionally reinforced experiments (experiments 68). For Experiment 2, the crack width was studied as a function of the load, both for the experiment and the FE model. The crack width values were obtained using the same method as presented in the previous paragraph. Table 3 and Figure 13 present the results and these results show that the FE model
Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 17, 809822 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/tal

820

H. HOFMEYER AND A. A. VAN DEN BOS

Incremental displacements .18 .16 .141 .121 .101 .81E-1 .612E-1 .414E-1 .215E-1 .171E-2

y z x

Grey surface is used for contour plot

Strain .5E-2 .4E-2 .3E-2 .2E-2 .1E-2

X
y z x

Grey surface is used for contour plot

Figure 14. Incremental displacements (top gure) and punching cone geometry (bottom gure) (Diana 8.1.2. TNO Diana BV, Delft, The Netherlands)

gives a good indication of the size and progress of the crack width. This is also valid for all the other full-scale experiments and FE models. The failure geometry of experiment 2 is shown in Figure 14. In this gure, a contour graph is shown of the incremental displacements after the last load increment. Incremental displacements are the increase of displacements for one load increment. The punching cone has an upper diameter of
Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 17, 809822 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/tal

TOTAL STRAIN FE MODEL FOR RC FLOORS

300 250 200 Load [kN] 150 100 50 0 0 0.0002 0.0004 0.0006 Strain [-] Experiment, strain gauge (c) FE model, node 2220, ex

821

Figure 15. Reading of the x-direction of strain gauge

440 mm and a lower diameter of 220 mm. In relation to a oor thickness of 160 mm, the spread angle is 55 degrees. Similar measurements were obtained from the experiments. 4.3 Strain gauge readings (3)

Three strain gauges were positioned on the bottom concrete surface (Figure 6). For each gauge a comparison was made between the experiment and the FE model. For experiment 2, Figure 15 shows strains in the x-direction from the gauge. The FE model gives reasonably accurate results for the strains on the surface of the concrete oor slab and thus gives additional verication of the FE model. 5. CONCLUSIONS

An FE model employing a total strain approach was developed for the analysis of warehouse concrete oors with specic reinforcement on pile foundations. The total strain material model was calibrated to experimental tests for compression, tension, and shear. The FE model of the oor structure was veried by full-scale experiments for ultimate load, crack pattern, crack width, deformation and strain measurements. The FE model performed well enough to use it for design purposes. The research shows that it is possible to develop and calibrate a total strain material model based on material tests.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to record their appreciation of J. C. D. Hoenderkamp for his contribution to this manuscript.
REFERENCES

Abbasi MSA, Baluch MH, Azad AK, Abdel Rahman HH. 1992. Nonlinear nite element modelling of failure modes in RC slabs. Computers and Structures 42(5): 815823. Andr H-P. 1982. Zum Tragverhalten des Auagerbereichs von Flachdecken. PhD thesis, Universitt Stuttgart, Germany.
Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 17, 809822 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/tal

822

H. HOFMEYER AND A. A. VAN DEN BOS

Borst de R, Nauta P. 1985. Non-orthogonal cracks in a smeared nite element model. Engineering with Computers 2: 3546. Diana. 2004. Diana version 8.1.2. TNO Diana BV, Delft, The Netherlands. Dyngeland T, Hoiseth K, Opheim E, Hole A. 1994. Nonlinear analyses of reinforced concrete members subjected to punching shear. In Computer Modelling of Concrete Structures: Proceedings of EURO-C 1994 International Conference, Innsbruck. Fib. 2000. Punching of structural concrete slabs. Technical Report Bulletin 12. International Federation for Structural Concrete, Lausanne, Switzerland. Foeken van R. 1983. Prediction of crack patterns and loaddeection curves of some reinforced benchmark problems with DIANA. Report No. BI-83-40/68.8.2002. Instituut TNO voor Bouwmaterialen en Bouwconstructies, Delft, The Netherlands. Gonzlez-Vidosa F, Kotsovos M, Pavlovic M. 1988. Symmetrical punching of reinforced concrete slabs: an analytical investigation based on nonlinear nite element modeling. ACI Structural Journal 85: 241250. Hallgren M. 1996. Puching shear capacity of reinforced high strength concrete slabs. Doctoral thesis, TRITA-BKN Bulletin 23. KTH Stockholm, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm. Hallgren M, Bjerke M. 2002. Non-linear nite element analyses of punching shear failure of column footings. Cement and Concrete Composites 24(6): 491496. Hillerborg A, Modeer M, Petersson PE. 1976. Analysis of crack formation and crack growth in concrete by means of fracture mechanics and nite elements. Cement and Concrete Research 6(6): 773782. Hofstetter G, Mang HA. 1996. Computational plasticity of reinforced and prestressed concrete structures. Computational Mechanics 17(4): 242254. Kuang JS, Morley CT. 1993. A plasticity model for punching shear of laterally restrained slabs with compressive membrane action. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 35(5): 371385. Litton RW. 1974. A contribution to the analysis of concrete structures under cyclic loading. PhD thesis, University of California, Berkeley, CA. Loseth S, Slatto A, Syvertsen T. 1982. Finite element analysis of punching shear failure of reinforced concrete slabs. Nordic Concrete Research Publication 1 http://www.itn.is/ncr. Marzouk H, Chen Z. 1993. Finite element analysis of high strength concrete slabs. ACI Structural Journal 90: 505513. Mentrey P. 1994. Numerical analysis of punching failure in reinforced concrete structures. Thse No. 1279. Dpartement de Gnie Civil, EPFL, Lausanne. Ozbolt J, Mayer U, Vocke H, Eligehausen R. 1999. Das FE-Programm MASA in Theorie und Anwendung. Betonund Stahlbetonbau 94(10): 403412. Polaka MA. 1998. Shear analysis of reinforced concrete shells using degenerate elements. Computers and Structures 68: 1729. Selby RG, Vecchio FJ. 1993. Three-dimensional constitutive relations for reinforced concrete. Technical Report 93-02. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto, Canada. Staller M. 2000. Analytische und numerische Untersuchungen des Durchstanztragverhaltens punktgesttzter Stahlbetonplatten. PhD thesis, TU Mnchen. Van den Bos AA, Hofmeyer H. 2005. Experiments investigating concrete oor punching using specic reinforcement. Heron 50(2): 93108 (available online at http://heron.tudelft.nl). Van der Pluijm R. 1999. Out-of-plane bending of masonry, behavior and strength. PhD thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. Vecchio, FJ, Collins MP. 1986. The modied compression eld theory for reinforced concrete elements subjected to shear. ACI Journal 83(22): 219231. Xiao RY, OFlaherty T. 2000. Finite-element analysis of tested concrete connections. Computers and Structures 78(13): 247255. Zimmerman S. 2004. Nonlinear homogenization of concrete-like material structures. Berichte aus dem Bauwesen. Shaker: Aachen, Germany.

NOTATION E G Youngs modulus (N/mm2) Shear modulus (N/mm2) Poissons constant

Copyright 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Struct. Design Tall Spec. Build. 17, 809822 (2008) DOI: 10.1002/tal