You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Active topics Unanswered topics
Forum updated
We have recently updated our forums system, and we have cleared all spam topics and users. In case we accidentally deleted your account, please register again. If you miss a topic you have posted before, please let us know.
Post new reply
Post new reply
Compose and post your new reply
You may use: BBCode Smilies
All fields with bold label must be completed before the form is submitted.
Topic review (newest first)
Dear Roya,
the elastic modulus to be entered in the material definition is the initial modulus (=of the undamaged material) under uniaxial loading (tensile or compressive should give the same E near 0).
If you have a stiffness difference between your analysis and the measurement, please follow ATENA Troubleshooting, 2.2.18 My analysis results do not match the experiment/expectations. How can I improve my model?
The important question is if the stiffness differs from the very beginning (-> check the boundary conditions and the elastic modulus) or later (check the nonlinear parameters).
Dear Sir,
I am modeling the shear failure of a prestressed concrete girder using ATENA 3D. I know the secant stiffness of the concrete through performing modulus tests; however, I had not used the stiffness values in my material model. Instead, I used the Ec values suggested by ATENA.
I only specified the compressive strength and used the automatically generated stiffness. Because the stiffness of the experimental results seems to be lower than that produced by ATENA, I would like to use the experimentally determined stiffness in my material model.
I believe the Ec value that is asked for, in the 3DVariableNonLinearCementirious material is not the secant stiffness in a uniaxial stress-strain relationship. Is the Ec that the user has to input for the "biaxial stress-strain relationship by KUPFER"?
Ec=f'ef/ec? or Ec=sigma,c/e,eq?
I would appreciate your help.
Thanks,
Roya
