Back to company website

You are not logged in. Please login or register.

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.

Required information for guests


Required information

Topic review (newest first)

2 Post by dpryl

Dear MHS,
1. please first see ATENA Troubleshooting, 2.2.18 My analysis results do not match the experiment/expectations. How can I improve my model? for some basic model improvement ideas.

2. It is not clear from your question what working diagram have you defined for the rebar steel(s)? An ideal plastic model of course can not represent bar rupture...

3. If you still can not solve your problem, send us your model etc. following Troubleshooting, 2.1.1.

Regards.

1 Post by MHS

Dear reader,

Lately I've been working a case with lots of rebar in it. Beam height 1600 mm. Stir ups and bending rebar.

A simpler calculation by hand shows me that the most likely to happen failure mechanism would be breaking of the bending rebar.

In a way this is also shown in the ATENA studio output. The Load-deflection diagram shows not normal deflections after the failure load is reached. 1000 mm or something. And also the strains in the rebar are like 5 %.

So my conclusion would be that the structure has failed. But then again why do I see the load-displacement graph still going up. As if there is more load to carry. Isn't it supposed to go down like in the simpler tutorial with the shear failure mechanism?

Is this perhaps caused by the fact that this problem has more rebar ( also in the area which is under compressive stress)?

What can I do about this?

Many thanks for considering my request.