Abstract:The design of reinforced concrete structures starting from a linear analysis is allowed by design codes and leads to safe solutions. The structural model built for the analysis may be composed not only of bar and shell elements, but also solid elements. In the present work, the formulation of the Reinforced Solid Method (RSM) was reviewed and applied to the Ultimate Limit State design of a reinforced concrete member, with the computation of the required reinforcement and concrete check of each individual solid… Show more
“…When designing a structural member, benefits stemming from the application of the design based on three‐dimensional stress fields may be outlined: the method relies neither on the definition of strut‐and‐tie schemes, nor on nonlinear analyses, nor on optimization processes. The authors of Reference 20 applied the formulation, as proposed by Nielsen and Hoang, 11 for designing a four‐pile cap, as briefly illustrated in Figure 13a and Figure 13b. Complementarily, they performed a nonlinear numerical simulation to find that the ultimate load was ~50% higher than the design load (Figure 13c), thus corroborating the safety of the design method.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Design of a four‐pile cap: (a) finite solid element model for determining the 3D linear stress field; (b) calculated reinforcement stresses in the x‐ direction f tx ; (c) nonlinear numerical simulation of the designed element: x‐ reinforcement stresses for the ultimate load. Source : Adapted from Reference 20.…”
The ultimate limit state design of reinforced concrete members usually derives from the analyses of structural models composed of unidimensional or bidimensional elements (bar and shell elements, respectively). Less recurrent in these structural models is the use of solid elements, which may be ascribed to the difficulties arising when dimensioning the structure for the complete stress field with six stress components (σx, σy, σz, τxy, τxz, τyz) derived from the analyses. In the present work, the design method for three‐dimensional stress fields combining linear analysis and limit design is revisited, with the description of the resisting mechanism in which the applied stresses are balanced with stresses in the concrete and in the reinforcement. Expressions for the verification of concrete crushing and the evaluation of the required reinforcement are deduced analytically and interpreted physically. The design process is organized into four design cases, according to the internal stresses mobilized in concrete. The proposed equations are presented in a framework for direct application to engineering practice, as demonstrated in noted design examples for selected stress states.
“…When designing a structural member, benefits stemming from the application of the design based on three‐dimensional stress fields may be outlined: the method relies neither on the definition of strut‐and‐tie schemes, nor on nonlinear analyses, nor on optimization processes. The authors of Reference 20 applied the formulation, as proposed by Nielsen and Hoang, 11 for designing a four‐pile cap, as briefly illustrated in Figure 13a and Figure 13b. Complementarily, they performed a nonlinear numerical simulation to find that the ultimate load was ~50% higher than the design load (Figure 13c), thus corroborating the safety of the design method.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Design of a four‐pile cap: (a) finite solid element model for determining the 3D linear stress field; (b) calculated reinforcement stresses in the x‐ direction f tx ; (c) nonlinear numerical simulation of the designed element: x‐ reinforcement stresses for the ultimate load. Source : Adapted from Reference 20.…”
The ultimate limit state design of reinforced concrete members usually derives from the analyses of structural models composed of unidimensional or bidimensional elements (bar and shell elements, respectively). Less recurrent in these structural models is the use of solid elements, which may be ascribed to the difficulties arising when dimensioning the structure for the complete stress field with six stress components (σx, σy, σz, τxy, τxz, τyz) derived from the analyses. In the present work, the design method for three‐dimensional stress fields combining linear analysis and limit design is revisited, with the description of the resisting mechanism in which the applied stresses are balanced with stresses in the concrete and in the reinforcement. Expressions for the verification of concrete crushing and the evaluation of the required reinforcement are deduced analytically and interpreted physically. The design process is organized into four design cases, according to the internal stresses mobilized in concrete. The proposed equations are presented in a framework for direct application to engineering practice, as demonstrated in noted design examples for selected stress states.
“…Relevant scholars had provided corresponding theories and calculation methods for the seismic performance of strengthened RC frame structures. Reinaldo et al 22 combined linear analysis and limit design of three‐dimensional stress fields for the design of concrete structures. Mohammadjavad et al 23 proposed an image‐based stiffness quantification method to estimate the post‐earthquake stiffness loss of RC structures.…”
This paper proposed three composite strengthening methods for repairing seismic‐damaged RC frames to restore their seismic capacity. Combined with the damage characteristics and failure mode of the frame under the earthquake action, the local strengthening of the column adopts the angle steel and gusset plate, and then the whole frame is strengthened by the inclined brace, the thin‐walled steel plate and the V‐shaped buckling restrained brace (BRB), respectively. Through the cyclic loading test, the main seismic indexes of the strengthened specimen, including hysteresis curve, skeleton curve, ductility, energy dissipation capacity, and stiffness degradation, are studied. The influence of different strengthening methods on the seismic performance of the seismic‐damaged specimens is analyzed. The results show that the seismic performance of strengthened specimens is significantly improved, and the bearing capacity, ductility, and energy dissipation capacity are increased by 2.58–5.57, 1.05–1.24, and 7.67–15.87 times, respectively. The thin‐walled steel plate shear wall and the inclined brace are destroyed at first during loading to effectively delay the premature destruction of the main frame. The composite strengthening method makes the original frame realize the failure mechanism of “strong joint weak member, strong column weak beam” under strong earthquake action. The strengthened specimen satisfies the seismic requirement and has good seismic performance. The seismic performance of the frame strengthened with the V‐shaped BRB is better than that of the other two strengthening methods. Based on the test date, the formula for calculating the shear‐bearing capacity of the beam end is presented.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
