CE 581

Reinforced Concrete Structures

Lecture 3: Modeling Concrete
 Introduction
- Uniaxial Tension
- Uniaxial Compression
- Modeling for Multiaxial Stresses
- Confined Concrete Response
- Stress transfer between Steel and Concrete
 Fracture Mechanics (Griffith 1913)
• Griffith introduced the fracture mechanics
based energy approach for glass.
• Extended further in 1950’s by Irvine.
Tensile Strength

Glass Fiber

Gupta (2002)
Size Exterior of a glass rod contains
many defects.
The ingenious insight that strength was highly influenced by defects lead to the
shift of attention to the behavior of cracks and formation of crack growth criteria.
Fracture Mechanics was born.
Fracture Mechanics: Need from Elasticity
Defects can be thought as inclusions or pores
Consider an infinite plate subjected to tension

𝜎𝜃𝜃 → ∞ as b → 0

This is where we need to approach from another point as classical elasticity can not
deal with seperation, field discontinuties or simply cracks.
Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics

Irwin’s Problem (1958)

Modes of Fracture

A new Parameter:

K: Stress intensity factor

 A new Criterion for Fracture

As r goes to zero, stress is infinity, therefore stress is not a good criterion for
crack initiation/propagation!!

f depends on element
size, loading, boundary
conditions etc.
Compare K with Kcr to
decide on fracture!!
Fictitious Crack Model for Concrete Fracture
• At the crack tip there is a fracture process zone
and causes softening!
• The fracture zone is formally represented as a
crack with the ability to transfer stresses. Such
stress transferring crack is called a fictitious
crack, as distinguished from a real crack,
which cannot transfer tensile stresses
perpendicular to itself.
• It is supposed that when the tensile strength is
reached, a micro-cracked zone starts
developing. The micro-cracked zone continues
to grow when the load increases and finally
some of the microcracks join together and a
real crack opens.
• The micro-cracked zone is able to transfer
stress. The greater the number of microcracks,
i.e., the wider the micro-cracked zone.

• Hillerborg et. al. (1976, 1992)

 Softening Region

• Initial loading branch can be assumed as a linear elastic material

• Because the crack-opening displacement cannot be smeared over a specific
part of the specimen’s volume, Hillerborg et al. (1976) proposed that the state
variables should change to stress and displacement.
• The shape of this curve is therefore essential information, as is the maximum
crack opening wc at which the crack becomes stress-free.
Softening Models
Reinhardt (1984)

k=0.31, wc=0.175 mm

Hordjik (1991)

c1=3, c2=6.93, wc=0.160mm

Comparison with Tests
 Model Parameters
Tensile Strength
Modulus of Elasticity
Fracture Energy
Characteristic Length
• This provides a switch between stress-strain response and stress-displacement
response.
• Brittleness can be taken as the elastic energy/fracture energy=L/lch Show!!
• Structural conditions (size, BC’s, composition, etc.) affect the brittleness of
concrete.
• Nowadays, tests are presented in terms of stress-displacement and
mentioning the measurement length.
• Uniaxial Tension tests are very difficult (heads, rotations, uniform
displacements, alignment, grip, etc.)
• That’s why indirect tension tests are coducted (inverse detection from bending
tests)
 Compression Stress Strain Models
Hognestad Model:
2ϵ ϵ 2
fck − for ϵ ≤ ϵo
ϵo ϵo
σ=
Stress, σ

ϵ − ϵo
fck 1 − 0.15 for ϵo ≤ ϵ ≤ ϵcu
Actual Response ϵcu − ϵo
Mitchell and Collins
Hognestad Mitchell Collins Model:
2ϵ ϵ 2
σ = fck − for ϵ ≤ ϵcu = 2ϵo
ϵo ϵo
2f ck
where Ec =
ϵo
Strain, ε

Advantanges: Simple and Easy to use for analysis and design

Disadvantage: 2 parameter models are incapable of simultenously describing Ec, εo, fck

Such models are called phenomenological models (mathematical equations that fit best
to the experimental data)
CEB-FIP Model
Ec1: tangent modulus
Eci : secant modulus
𝜀𝑐1 :
Eurocode-2 for Nonlinear Models
Eurocode 2 Parameters
Eurocode-2 for Design
 Multiaxial Loading
• At a material point there are six stress components in general.
• The understanding of failure requires generalization in light of
limited test results.

• We can make use of the following tests:

- Uniaxial Tension
- Uniaxial compression
- Torsion
- Direct shear
- Biaxial compression/tension
- Triaxial compression
• Generalization is needed for multiaxial loading
 Failure Criteria
• Failure criteria of materials can best be
described in a way which is independent from
coordinate system.
• This can be done by using principal stresses or
principal stress invariants.
𝑓 𝜎1 , 𝜎2 , 𝜎3 = 0
𝑓(𝐼1 , 𝐽2 , 𝐽3 ) = 0
 Principal Stresses
• Principal stress: Normal stresses that occur on
directions at which shear stresses vanish.
Deviatoric Invariants
 Principal Stresses
𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃𝑜
𝑠1 σ1 σ𝑚 2𝜋
2 cos 𝜃𝑜 −
𝑠2 = σ2 − σ𝑚 = 𝐽2 3
𝑠3 σ3 σ𝑚 3 2𝜋
cos 𝜃𝑜 +
3

with 𝜎1 ≥ 𝜎2 ≥ 𝜎3 . In Eq. (5.30) we have chosen the three stress invariants.

𝐼1 𝜋
𝜎𝑚 = 𝐽2 0 ≤ 𝜃𝑜 ≤
3 3
Interpretation of Principal Stresses
• Mean stress can be considered as an indicator
of average pressure (confinement!).
1 1
𝜎𝑚 = (𝜎1 +𝜎2 +𝜎3 )= 𝐼1
3 3
• J2 is a good measure of average shear stress.
2
𝜏𝑚 = 𝐽
5 2
Interpretation of Principal Stresses

Haigh-Westergaard Coordinate System: 𝜉, 𝑟, 𝜃

3 3
𝐼1 1 2 𝐽3
𝜉= , 𝑟 = 2𝐽2 , 𝜃 = acos( 1.5 )
3 3 𝐽2
 Properties of the Failure Curve
• Failure curve is smooth, convex, symmetric
• 𝜃 = 0 tensile meridian
• 𝜃 = 60 degrees tensile meridian
• Parameters should be determined from tests.
 Rankine Criterion
Failure occurs when maximum tensile
strength is reached.

OR
 Tresca and von Mises Criterion
Tresca

𝑓(𝐽2 ) 𝐽2 − 𝑘 = 0 Von Mises

Note that the failure

surface is not pressure
dependent!!

Usually not suitable for

concrete except low
confined 2D situations.
Mohr-Coulomb Criterion

Pressure dependency is linear!

Drucker-Prager Criterion
Pressure dependent !!
Simple!!
Flexible!!
Ottosen Criterion

Curved meridians
Better match with experimental data!
 Willam-Warnke Criterion
Five parameter model
Includes tension and compression regions with one equation
Exhibits very good match with experimental data!!
 Other Failure Criteria
• Hsieh-Ting-Chen (1977)
• Etse-Willam (1984)
• Menetry-Willam (1995)
• Lee-Fenves (1996)
• Kang-Willam (1999)
 Complete Plasticity Formulation
• Initiation of plastic response
• Flow rule (plastic strain direction)
• Hardening softening through evolution of
plastic strains
• Length scale
 Crack Models
• Smeared Crack
- Rotating
- Fixed
• Discrete Crack
– Lattice
– Applied Element
– Particle Methods
 Smeared Crack
• Introduced by Rashid (1968) where cracked concrete is assumed as a continuum.
• Easy to incorporate in finite element programs.
• Became widespread in 1970’s until mid 2000’s.

Fixed crack
Smeared Crack Approach (Vecchio 1988)
Smeared Crack
 Smeared Crack Model Features
• Formulation by strain decomposition
• Confined concrete through failure surface
• Dilation through Poisson effect
Discrete Crack Models (Ngo, Scordelis 1967)

Cracks are introduced as a priori

Finite element mesh is interconnected

with springs
More Advanced Discrete Crack Models
 New Generation Discrete Models
• Lattice Models
• Peridynamics
• Particle Methods (SPH)
 Lattice Model
Continuum is
represented as a
collection of truss or
beam elements up to
a scale of mm.

(Mesoscale)
 Lattice Modeling

Since modeling scale is in the order of mm, aggregates, ITZ and cement paste can be
modeled seperately with different modulus of elasticity and tensile strength.
 Peridynamics
• Navier (1820) proposed his theory based on forces (stress
concept was not known).
• Cauchy found the concept of stress about 50 years later.
• Silling (2000) invented peridynamics.
Equation of motion as summation of forces
within a horizon, 𝛿.

Bond based peridynamics

(point to point interaction)

State based peridynamics

(volume to volume interaction)

Bond based peridynamics with one element

horizon reduces to lattice models.
Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics
• First employed by Monaghan (1977) for astrophysical
problems.

Continuity

Momentum
Consitutive Models for Section Analysis

• Tension: Simple uniaxial models or neglect

• Compression: Need to model the confinement
effects due to presence of ties.
• We use confined concrete models for the
predetermined regions bounded with ties
• For unconfined regions (cover), we use
unconfined concrete models.
 CONFINEMENT of RC COLUMNS

The confinement provided by the rectangular hoop is not

as effective as the circular hoops or the spiral, due to the
difference in geometry.
Test Results
 CONFINEMENT
• Active Confinement (Tests of Richart)
• Passive Confinement
The passive lateral pressure applied to the concrete core is a function of
the deformation of the confining reinforcement (spiral or tie).
The confining pressure decreases as the deformation of the lateral steel
increases.
CONFINEMENT of SPIRAL COLUMNS

• In spiral columns, the

deformation increases
as the core diameter
and spiral spacing
increase and spiral
diameter decreases.
• The circular spiral is
subjected to axial
tension, thus axial
elongation occurs.
Confinement
Efficiency
 Stress in Ties
For ties with normal strength steel, yielding is achieved,
therefore fs=fy.

For confinement reinforcement up to 1400MPa, following

formula is suggested.

Ravzi-Saatcioglu (1999)
Strength of Confined Concrete
Richart and Brown (1934), C = 0.85
Strain at Peak Stress

OR
Columns with Rectilinear Hoops
Confinement Effectiveness
Confinement Effectiveness
Loading Rate Effect
Aggregate Effects
 Detailing Rules for Design
Circular hoop ends should be anchored with mechanical/welded splice.
135 degree bent hooks should be used.
90 degree hooks are allowed at one end of the hook.
If axial loads are above balanced case 135 degree hooks are recommended.
Comparisons with Test Results

Popovics (1973)
Comparisons with Test Results
 CONFINEMENT MODELS
Most commonly used confined concrete models:

• Modified Kent and Park model

J. B. Mander, M. J. N. Priestley, and R. Park, “Theoretical Stress-Strain Model for Confined Concrete,” Journal of

Structural Engineering-ASCE, Vol. 114, No. 8, August 1988, p.p. 1804-1825

• Sheikh and Uzumeri model

Sheikh, S.A., and Üzümeri, S.M., “Analytical Model for Concrete Confinement in Tied Columns”, Journal of

Structural Engineering-ASCE., v.108, ST12, Dec. 1982, p.p. 2703-2722

• Saatçıoğlu and Razvi model

Saatcioglu, M., Razvi, S.R., “Strength and Ductility of Confined Concrete”, Journal of Structural Engineering-
ASCE, v.118, ST6, June 1992, p.p. 1590-1607

• Mander, Priestley, Park Model

Theoretical Stress Strain Model for Concrete, Journal of Structural Engineering-ASCE, v.118, ST6, June 1988,
p.p. 1590-1607
 SAATCIOGLU AND RAZVI MODEL

The strength of confined concrete is expressed as a function

of lateral confining pressure 2.

fcc  k3 fck  k1σ 2

For normal strength concrete, k3 can be taken as 0.85. k1

is expressed as a function of the confining pressure 2.

6.7
k1 
σ 2 0.17
SAATCIOGLU AND RAZVI MODEL
 SAATCIOGLU AND RAZVI MODEL
For spiral columns the confining pressure is

2A0
σ2  f ywk
Ds 

In the above equation Ao, s and fywk are the cross-

sectional area, spacing and the yield strength of the
spiral used. D is the core diameter of the column
(area inside the spiral).
SAATCIOGLU AND RAZVI MODEL

RECALL:

In the spiral column, the confining pressure is uniform.

This is not the case in rectangular tied columns.

The displacement of a rectangular tie varies from zero to

a maximum at the midspan of the tie.

Since the confining pressure varies inversely with the

deformation, it is maximum at the tie supports and
decreases towards the midspan.

In practice, it is assumed that rectangular hoops are only

50 percent as effective as the circular spirals.
 SAATCIOGLU AND RAZVI MODEL

The probable variation of the confining pressure for two

different steel configurations is shown in the figure.
 SAATCIOGLU AND RAZVI MODEL

Saatçıoğlu and Razvi proposed to replace this nonuniform pressure

with an equivalent uniform pressure 2e . Thus the equation
developed by Zia and Cowan can be rewritten as:

f cc  k3 f ck  k1σ 2e
 SAATCIOGLU AND RAZVI MODEL

f cc  k3 f ck  k1σ 2e
where;
6.7
k1 
σ 2e 0.17
For a square section 2e is expressed as, σ 2e  βσ 2
where;
ΣA0 f ywk sinα 
σ2 
s  bk
 bk  bk  1.0 
β  0.26    
 a  s  σ 2 
 SAATCIOGLU AND RAZVI MODEL

where;
Aofywk sin : summation of tie forces on a section taken in
horizontal or vertical direction. The inclination of
the tie to the section taken as shown in the figure.

Section A-A
 SAATCIOGLU AND RAZVI MODEL

s : spacing of ties
bk : core dimension measured from center to
center of ties
 : inclination of the tie
a : unsupported length of ties. Length is
measured between two longitudinal bars held
in place. Bars are held in place either by the
corner of ties or by cross ties
 SAATCIOGLU AND RAZVI MODEL

For a rectangular section 2e is expressed as,

σ 2e 
σ 2exbkx  σ 2eybky 
bkx  bky 
where;

σ2ex  βxσ2x and σ 2y  β y σ 2y

 b  b  1.0 
βx  0.26  kx  kx    1.0 σ 2x 
 Aox f ywk sinα
 
a x  s   σ 2x

 s  bkx 
 bky  bky  1.0 
β y  0.26      1.0 σ 2y 
 Aoy f ywk sinα
 a y  s  σ 2y 
    s  b 
ky
 SAATCIOGLU AND RAZVI MODEL

where:
A0x sin : summation of the cross-sectional areas of ties in x-direction
Aoy sin : summation of the cross-sectional areas of ties in y-direction
ax , ay : unsupported length of ties in x and y directions (mm)
bk : core dimension (center to center of ties (mm))
bkx , bky : core dimensions of a rectangular column (mm)
fywk : yield strength of tie (MPa)
S : tie spacing (mm
 : inclination of the tie
 SAATCIOGLU AND RAZVI MODEL
The stress-strain relationship of confined concrete is expressed as a
parabola with a linear descending portion (negative slope).

Ascending portion:
1
 2ε   ε  
2 1 2λ

σ c  f cc  c    c    f cc
 εcoc   εcoc  
 
The strain corresponding to the peak stress fcc is expressed as;

k1σ 2e
εcoc  εco 1  5λ where λ
k3 f ck
where, co is defined for unconfined concrete and it can be taken as 0.002.
 SAATCIOGLU AND RAZVI MODEL
Descending portion:

εc85  260ρcoc  εu85

ρ
 Aoxy sinα
s(bkx  bky )
where;

 Aoxy summation of cross-sectional areas of the ties on sections

taken in x and y directions

εu85 = 0.0038 (for unconfined concrete)

 SAATCIOGLU AND RAZVI MODEL
Example 1.3
Given: Consider the square column cross-section shown in the figure.
Cross-sectional dimensions of the column are, 500500 mm,
with core dimensions of 400400 mm. The unsupported length
of the ties is a = 183 mm. Longitudinal steel is 8-24 and ties are
2-10/72 mm. Yield strength of longitudinal bars and ties are,
420 MPa and 310 MPa respectively. Unconfined concrete
strength is 23 MPa.
Required: Determine the stress-strain characteristics of confined concrete
using Saatçıoğlu-Razvi model
 EXAMPLE
The ties on sections cut in vertical and horizontal directions will be identical. On
such sections, four ties are cut, two being perpendicular (=90)
to the section taken and the other two making and angle of =
0
45 with the plane.

First the confined concrete strength shall be calculated. For this purpose the
effective confining stress has to be determined.

 Ao f ywk sin α  2  78.5 310sin 900   2  78.5 310sin 450   83,085N

In each direction,

σ2 
 Ao f ywk sin α

83,085
 2.88 MPa
s  bk 72  400

 bk  bk  1.0   400  400  1.0 

β  0.26      0.26      0.534
 a  s  σ 2   183  72  2.88 
 EXAMPLE
Thus;

σ 2e  βσ 2  0.534 2.88  1.54 MPa

6.7 6.7
k1    6.2
σ 2e 0.17 1.540.17

For the given concrete grade f ck = 23 MPa we have k3=0.85

k3fc=0.8523=19.5 MPa

Therefore,

fcc=k3fck + k1 2e=19.5 + 6.2  1.54=29 MPa

 EXAMPLE
To have the complete stress-strain curve coc and c85 should
also be calculated. This requires the calculation of  first.

k1σ 2e 6.2  1.54

λ   0.49
k3 f ck 19.5

Having found  , coc and can be found as

εcoc  εco 1  5λ   0.0021  5  0.49  0.0069

In order to find c85 , r should be calculated first.

A oxy  
sinα  2 2  78.5sin90 0  2  78.5sin45 0  536 mm2
 EXAMPLE

Therefore;

ρ
 A oxy sinα

536
 0.0093
s(bkx  bky ) 72(400 400)

Having found r , c85 can be calculated as

u850.0038.

c85260r coc + u852600.00930.0069+0.00380.0205

 EXAMPLE

Now the equations of the ascending and descending portions of the

confined stress-strain curve can be written

ASCENDING PART:
0.5
 2ε  εc  
2
σ c  29 c
   MPa
 0.0069  0.0069 

 29  0.85 29 
σ c  29    εc  0.0069  29  320εc  0.0069 MPa
 0.0069 0.0205
 EXAMPLE

fcc = 29 MPa 30
fc = 23 MPa 25
20
Stress

15
10
5
0
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
 coc = 0.0069
Strain
 o = 0.002
 EXAMPLE
30
25
20
Stress

15
10
5
0
0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005
Strain

Saatcioglu – Razvi predicts softer stiffness in the ascending branch.