Computer-Aided Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Using a Refined Nonlinear Strut and Tie Model Approach
Source abstract
Abstract
This paper presents a computer program for implementing a refined nonlinear strut and tie model approach for the practical design and analysis of disturbed regions in structural concrete. Nonlinear techniques in the selection, analysis and verification processes of a strut and tie model are incorporated in this program to eliminate the limitations of the conventional strut and tie model relating to the behavior and strength prediction of reinforced concrete. For the verification of the proposed model, the model results are compared to the experimental results of one-quarter-scale simply supported bottom-loaded deep beams. Analytical results showed a lower bound solution that agreed well with the experimental results. It was concluded that the nonlinear strut and tie model allows more economical design than the conventional strut and tie model. It was also concluded that for higher strength concrete, the strength of struts and nodal zones given by the ACI-318 02 code is unconservative and needs refinement to account for the brittleness of high-strength concrete.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete · Innovative concrete reinforcement materials · Structural Load-Bearing Analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (14)
Show source-provided references
1. ACI Committee 318-02 (2002). “Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-02). ” American Concrete Institute, Detroit.
2. 1986 · 83 · 925
3. El-Attar, A., Ghoneim, M., El-Ibiari, S. and Abdel Rahman, A. (2002). “Behavior of bottom loaded R.C. deep beams: an experimental investigation.” Journal of Engineering and Applied Science, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, 49(2), 337-356.
4. Kupfer, H. (1964). “Expansion of Morsch's truss analogy by application of the principle of minimum strain energy.” CEB bulletin No. 40.
5. Leonhardt, F. (1965). “Reducing the shear reinforcement in reinforced concrete beams and slabs.” Magazine of Concrete Research, 17(53), 187-198.10.1680/macr.1965.17.53.187 ↗
6. 1983 · 37 · 253
7. Marti, P. (1985). “Basic tools of reinforced concrete beam design.” ACI Journal, 83(1), 36-42.
8. Morsch, E. (1902). “Der Eisenbetonbau, seine Anwendung und Theorie.” 1st ed., Wayss and Freytag, A. G., Im Selbstverlag der Firma, Neustadt a. d. Haardt, 118 pp. (adopted from Schlaich et al., 1987).
9. Okamura, H. and Maekawa, K. (1991). “Nonlinear analysis and constitutive models of reinforced concrete.” Gihodo, Tokyo.
10. Ramirez, J. and Breen, J. (1983). “Proposed design procedures for shear and torsion in reinforced and prestressed concrete.” research report 248-4F, Center for Transportation Research, The University of Texas at Austin, 254 pp.
11. Ritter, W. (1899). “Die Bauweise Hennebique.” Schweizerische Bauzeitung, Zurich, (adopted from Schlaich et al., 1987).
12. 1987 · 32 · 7410.15554/pcij.05011987.74.150 ↗
13. Song, H., Bae, H. and Byun, K. (1998). “Design and analysis of anchorage zone in prestressed concrete girder using nonlinear strut and tie model.” The Sixth East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering & Construction, Taipei, Taiwan, 871-876.
14. YUN Y M · 2000 · 97 · 581