Comparison between resistant load contours generated considering the parabolic-rectangular (DPR) and the rectangular (DR) stress-strain diagrams for rectangular sections under combined axial compression and biaxial bending

Abstract

The aim of this study is to compare the load contour diagrams generated for rectangular RC cross-sections under combined axial compression and biaxial bending obtained by the two forms of analysis allowed by NBR 6118:2014 [1]: the first using the parabolic-rectangular stress-strain diagram (DPR) and the second using the rectangular (constant stress) diagram (DR). In order to compare the load contours generated, a reference cross-section was adopted for which the concrete strength class (from C20 to C90) and the deformation domains (4, 4a and 5) were varied for the study. It was studied whether the use of the different diagrams (DPR or DR) would provide greater (or smaller) resistant efforts for the same section. The results show that the use of the DR is only acceptable when the section is working up to the 4th domain. Above this domain, it was observed that the use of this diagram shows resistant efforts inferior to those calculated by the DPR. In addition, it was found that, for concretes with resistance class above C50, in oblique loading directions, the use of the DR presents higher resistant efforts than those calculated using the DPR.