<![CDATA[Cervenka Consulting Forums — Failure Surface CC3DNonLinCementitious2]]> https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?id=1630 Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:22:24 +0000 PunBB <![CDATA[Re: Failure Surface CC3DNonLinCementitious2]]> https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=2875#p2875 Dear Tii, in the 3DNonLinearCementitious2 material model family, biaxial state is simply a special case, covered by the general triaxial formula.

You might be interested in the 3DNonLinearCementitious3 material model, which has some confinement-related improvements over the NLCem2 model. Please see the description in ATENA Theory, 2.2.12 Confinement-sensitive constitutive model.

]]> Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:22:24 +0000 https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=2875#p2875 <![CDATA[Failure Surface CC3DNonLinCementitious2]]> https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=2874#p2874 Hello everyone,
I have a question concerning the failure criterion of the CC3DNonLinCementitious2 material. Its using the Willam-Menetery failure surface in the triaxial stress state. Does it use this criterion for the biaxial stress state too or does it use the biaxial failure surface according to Kupfer like the SBeta material?
In the ATENA Theory manual it sounds like the constitutive model uses Willam-Menetery for the biaxial stress state too but in my opinion it describes the concrete (especially high strength concrete)  in the biaxial stress state insufficient.

]]> Thu, 25 Apr 2013 10:34:28 +0000 https://forums.cervenka.cz/viewtopic.php?pid=2874#p2874