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)

7 Post by dpryl

I understand you plan to follow MC2010 section 7.11 Verification assisted by numerical simulations, but have you already discussed the safety formats with your supervisor?

Ad 1.: Maybe you can find some publications with similar experiments, and verify / calibrate your model (modelling approach) using that?

I still do not get how you plan to compare with the design formula? The problem with partial safety factors is the failure mode can frequently be different than the real.

Regards.

6 Post by ali

Thank you for the articles

Title of my study is "Numerical study of Tension Reinforcement Lap Length calculated by Model Code Using a Four-Point Beam Loading System"

1) In my current study i don't have any experimental campaign. To validate my model i am trying to compare the failure load given by software with theoretical failure load calculated based on sectional analysis.

Once model gives results almost accurate with theoretical in terms of failure load, I will carry out further study which is actually variation of splice length.

Regards

5 Post by dpryl

If you explain us your plans, we may be able to help you find a way...

What kind of theoretical prediction do you wish to compare to?

What are the questions to be answered by your analysis (see also ATENA Troubleshooting, 2.1.1)?

I recommend the following articles on the safety formats topic:

https://www.cervenka.cz/assets/files/pa … rvenka.pdf

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio … r_Analysis

Regards.

4 Post by ali

Thanks

I am using design option in ATENA, direct comparison with theoretical predictions could not be possible ?

3 Post by dpryl

Dear Ali,
1. please make clear how you plan to compare the calculate results with design formulas?
The most typical approaches with nonlinear FEM is working with mean properties and directly comparing to average measurements, or applying a global safety factor to prove safety.

2. Trying to constrain a nonexistant degree of freedom is a problem - please correct.

3. You may need a bond law for your model. The statement that you usually do not need it for ribbed reinforcement and fine meshes (Troubleshooting, 2.2.11) is mainly valid for 3D models - one can simply say in 2D, one dimension of your elements is the thickness, and this is usually much larger than the bar diameter.

Regards.

2 Post by pavlo

Recently hasnat1947 was working on a very similar problem. You can find his posts on this forum.

1 Post by ali

Dear All

I am analyzing my beam under four pint bending. I failed to reach my desired results. I tried to figure out where i am doing something wrong but couldn't achieve.

Theoretical Failure Load = 54.9 KN

I need to validate my model in term of theoretical failure load.

I am attaching my model in below link

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1rPUjW … f9t5335VFS

Regards