FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAM

USING FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

BY

IKYURE BRANCHI
14/30910/DE

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING,

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING,
UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE,
MAKURDI.

JUNE, 2018.

1
FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF REINFORCED CONCRTE BEAM USING FINITE
ELEMENT ANALYSIS

BY

IKYURE BRANCHI

14/30910/DE

A PROJECT SUBMITED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE, MAKURDI

IN PARTIAL FUFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF

BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING (B.ENG) DEGREE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINERING

UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE MAKURDI

AUGUST, 2018

2
FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF REINFORCEDCONCRETE BEAM USING FINITE ELEMENT
ANALYSIS.

BY

BRANCHI IKYURE

14/30910/DE

A PROJECTSUBMTTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE,MAKURDI

IN PARTIAL FUFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF BACHELOR

OF ENGINEERING (B.ENG) DEGREE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING.

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

UNIVERIST OF AGRICULTURE, MAKURDI, BENUE STATE.

AUGUST, 2018

3
 CERTIFICATION

UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE
MAKURDI.

FLEXURAL BEHAVIOR OF REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAM USING FINITE ELEMENT

ANALYSIS.

BY

IKYURE BRANCHI

14/30910/DE

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING,

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING.

WE CERTIFY THAT THIS IS ORIGINAL WORK OF THE CANDIDATE AND

THAT THIS PROJECT IS ACCEPTED IN PARTIAL FUFILMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING (B.ENG)
DEGREE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING.

NAME SIGNATURE DATE

SUPERVISOR; ENGR.N.S APEBO ------------------- ----------------

HEAD OF DEPT; ENGR.DR.G.D. AKPEN ------------------- -----------------

EXTERNAL
EXAMINER ; ENGR.PROF.S.SADIKU -------------------- ---------------

4
 DEDICATION

This project work is dedicated to God Almighty for His love and care, to my parents who has

been there always been there for me and to all my friends and well-wishers.

To God be the glory.

5
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

With a sincere heart of gratitude, I appreciate God almighty who kept me through my degree

program, by protecting and providing for me in times of need.

My special acknowledgement goes to my project Supervisor Engr. N.S.Apebo for his

cooperation and understanding with me during this period of writing my project and for taking

his time to go through my work and making necessary corrections and recommendations, the

head of civil Engineering Department, Engr.Dr. G.D.AKPEN and all my lectures for taking their

time to invest their knowledge in me, May God continue to bless and nourish you.Am greatly

indebted to to my parents, Mr. and Mrs. Branchi Achir for their financial and moral support

during the course of my program. Mention must be made of Dr. and Mrs Paul Orhii, Chief Mrs

Kate Nomhwange, Hon, Dr. and Mrs Kester Kyenge for their unflinching financial and moral

support which has seen me through the program. I must also not forget to acknowledge the

support of my cousin Mr. Kondoyol Ushahemba for His assistance to me during the program in

diverse ways and to my Aunties Priscilla Ajayi and,Msurshima Mbatyavkaa.

I must also acknowledge the Academic and moral support I enjoy from my course mates during

the program among whom are; Jagba Shadrack,Anjo Solomon,Babatunde Joseph,Ochala

Stephen,Okorie Samuel,Tyozenda Jerome, Vershima Paul Sesugh and to my best friend and

closest associate Mr.Aza Msonter and to my fellowship FNKSTS Without them I wouldn’t have

attained this height.

My special appreciation is reserved for Dr. ManyiManasseh for his efforts to ensure my

enrollment in the University and his continual struggle to ensure that I stay and study under a

peaceful and conducive atmosphere, the sky is just your starting pointMy profound gratitude to

6
everyone that had wished me well and contributed in one way or the order to my education. A

big thanks to you.

Comr. Branchi Ikyure

7
 ABSTRACT

Concrete structural components are used inbuildings in different forms. Understanding the response of
these components during loading is crucial to the development of an overall efficient and safe structure.
For the fact that this is a method that produces real life response, it is extremely time consuming, and the
use of materials can be quite costly. The use of finite element analysis to study these components has also
been used. The performed study investigation attempts to compare the results from elastic analysis of a
reinforced beam under transverse loading, using an analysis software package ANSYS 15.0.7 to the
results obtained from a normal theoretical analysis. The software was used to model the beam, two beams
of same span but different loading condition and sizes were taken for analysis the load increment was
done using Newton Raphson method. The results obtained compares well with the theoretical analysis
which was done using strength of materials method. The objectives of the study include; to analyze the
flexural behavior of reinforced concrete beam under the applied loading, to investigate and evaluate the
use of finite element analysis on the concrete beam and to compare the result from the software analysis
to that obtained from normal theoretical analysis. While chapter one presents the background of the
study, statement of problem, objectives, significance of study and scope of study. Chapter two contain
literature review, chapter three materials and methods chapter four results and discussions and chapter
five summary, conclusion and recommendations.

8
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page i
Certification ii
Dedication iii
Acknowledgement iv
Abstract v
Table of Contents vi
List of Figures vii
List of Tables’ viii

CHAPTER ONE
1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 Background of the Study 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem 2
1.3 Aims and Objectives 3
1.4 Scope of the Study 3
1.5 Significance of the Study 4

CHAPTER TWO
2.0 General Introduction 5
2.1 Theoretical Framework 5
2.1.1 Finite Element Analysis 6
2.1.2 Reinforcement 7
2.1.3 Material Properties 8
2.2 Empirical Framework 9
2.2.1 Finite Element Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Beam 12
2.3 Approach of the Research 19

9
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 Introduction 21
3.1 Calibration Method 23
3.2 Steps Involved In the Analysis 25
3.3 Modeling Procedure 25
3.3.1 Reinforcement Modeling 25
3.3.2 Real Constants 28
3.4 Materials Properties 29
3.5 Meshing 29
3.6 Numbering Controls 30
3.7 Loads and Boundary Condition 31
3.8 Analysis Type 32

CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 Introduction 33
4.1 Finite Element Analysis 33
4.2 Finite Element Results 33
4.2.1 Deflection of Beam in X Direction 33
4.2.1.2 Deflection of Beam in Y-Direction 35
4.2.1.3 Deflection Of Beam I Z-Direction 36
4.3 Stress Distribution 44
4.4 Shear Stress Distribution across the Beam 48
4.5 Total Deformation 49
4.6 Cracks and Crushing 50
4.7 Stress Distribution along the Length of the Beam 59
4.7.1 Shear Stress 59
4.7.2 Shear Elastic Strain 61
4.7.3 Maximum Principal Stress 61

10
4.8 Total Deformation 62

CHAPTER FIVE
5.1 Summary 64
5.2 Conclusion 65
5.3 Recommendation 65
References 66
Appendices 70

11
 LIST OF FIGURES

Fig 2.1: Typical Cracking Of Control Beam (Bulkhouse) 17

Fig 3.1 Material Properties in Ansys 21

Fig 3.2 Solid65 Element 23

Fig 3.3 Link8 Element 23

Fig 3.4 Reinforced Concrete Beam Model 25

Fig 3.5 Models for Reinforcement in Reinforced Concrete 27

Fig 3.6 Reinforcement Modeled In Beam 28

Fig 3.7 Reinforcement Modeled In Beam 29

Fig 3.8 Meshing Of Reinforced Concrete Beam 33

Fig 3.9 Loads and Boundary Conditions 35

Fig 3.10 Beam Model 35

Fig 3.11 Geometry of the Beam 36

Fig 3.12 Boundary Conditions 38

Fig 3.13 Reinforcement Details 39

Fig 4.1 Directional Deformation in X-Direction 42

Fig 4.2 Directional Deformation in Y-Direction 44

Fig4.3 Directional Deformation in Z-Direction 45

Fig 4.4 Principal Stress Distribution 46

Fig 4.5 Minimum Stress Distribution 47

Fig 4.6 Equivalent Stress 48

12
Fig 4.7 Shear Stress Distribution across the Beam 48

Fig 4.8 Maximum Shear Elastic Strain 48

Fig 4.9 Total Deformation 50

Fig 4.10 Cracks and Crushing 50

Fig 4.11 Yielding Of Steel Rebar 51

Fig 4.12 Cracks Developed In the Beam Section 55

Fig 4.13 Normal Elastic Strain 55

Fig 4.14 Equivalent (Von-Mises) Stress 57

Fig 4.15 Equivalent Elastic Strain 58

Fig 4.16 Stress Distribution along the Length of the Beam 59

Fig 4.18 Shear Stress 60

Fig 4.19 Shear Elastic Strain 61

Fig 4.20 Maximum Principal Stress 62

Fig 4.21 Total Deformation 62

13
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Stress Calculations (Kasat and Varghese) 10

Table 3.1 Material Properties in Ansys 21

Table 3.2 Material Properties Input Data in Ansys 32

Table 4.1 Equivalent Elastic Stress And Strain 57

14
 APPENDICES

Apendix 1: Table for Normal Stress and Normal Elastic Strain 67

Apendix 2: Hand Calculated Result 68

15
 CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Structural components made from concrete are used in buildings in different forms. Since

these members are been loaded it is imperative to know how they respond to the loading system

in order to check for the overall safety of the building. A concrete beam is one of the concrete

elements that exist in a building. A concrete beam is a structural element that caries load

primarily in bending. Bending causes a beam to go into compression and tension. Beams

generally carry vertical gravitational forces but can also be used to carry horizontal loads. The

loads carried by a beam are transfer to columns, walls which is then transferred to foundations.

The compression section must be designed to resist buckling and crushing, while the

tension section must be able to adequately resist to the tension. Different methods have been

used to study the response of structural components to loading. Experimental based testing has

been used as a means to analyze individual elements and the effects of concrete strength under

loading. While this is a method that produces real life response, it is extremely time consuming

and the use of materials can be quite costly. Unfortunately, early attempts to accomplish this

proceeding were also very consuming and Infeasible using existing software and hardware. In

recent years, however, the use of finite element analysis has increased due to processing

knowledge and capabilities of computer software and hardware. It has now become the choice

method to analyze concrete structural components. The use of computer software to model these

elements is muchfaster and extremely cost-effective. Saifullah et al (2011) said with the

invention of sophisticated numerical tools for analysis like the finite elements methods (FEM), it

16
has become possible to model the complex behavior of reinforced concrete beams using Finite

Element modeling and the accuracy of the result is more promising with this method.

Finite element method is a numerical analysis method that divides the structural element into

smaller portions and then models the loading conditions to evaluate the response of concrete.

The use of this method has increased due to the advancement in engineering and computer

knowledge .This method produces nonlinear analysis result because each portion possesses

different stress-strain behavior the response of each element is expressed in terms of a finite

number of degrees of freedom characterized as a value of unknown function at the set nodal

point. Since most problems encountered in engineering are nonlinear, the nonlinear analysis is an

effective too to obtain exact solution. Nonlinear analysis is a method that stimulates the exact

behavior of a material to evaluate strength in the inelastic region and to identify the potential of

the component to carry high load. The geometry of the loaded object is been changed during

loading in columns and other deformable bodies in such case nonlinearity is encountered. In this

project work finite element analysis is been carried out using ANSYS software. The use of Finite

element has been the preferred method to study the behavior of concrete as it is faster than the

experimental method and is cost effective. The performed study investigation attempts to

compare the results from elastic analysis software package to that obtained from a normal

theoretical analysis.

1.2Statement of the Problem

In beams analysis, there are two main types of failure namely, flexural (also known as

modulus of rapture or bend strength) and shear failure. Flexural failure is characterized by either

the crushing of concrete before the rebar yields or failure of rebar before the concrete. The

17
former usually happen to over reinforced section and it`s very acute because it does not give

warning to the residents or the users of the structure. The latter is accompanied by large

deformation when the rebar yields.

Momin muneeb, (2015) it is a character of under reinforced sections, it is important to

understand the point of failures and to overcome flexural failures, one needs to provide main

steel at the bottom/top of the beam and stirrups. In order to strengthen the concrete beam, we

have to consider the seriousness of the problems for that particular section of the beam before

any action can be taken. Because a beam is a structural member that carries load primarily in

bending, it is important to know the load it can carry to avoid building collapse.

1.3 Aims and objectives

The aim of this project work is to determine the flexural behavior of reinforced concrete

beam using finite element analysis.

The objectives of this project are;

i. To analyze the flexural behavior of the concrete beams under applied loading.

ii. To investigate and evaluate the use of finite element analysis on the concrete beams.

iii. To compare the result from elastic analysis of a reinforced beam under transverse

loading, using analysis software package to that obtained from a normal theoretical

analysis.

1.4 Scope of Study

This project work will only cover the flexural behavior of reinforced concrete beam. The

behavior and performance of the beam will be analyzed and observed before and after the load is

installed.

18
A concrete beam will be used to carry out the test for this project work. The model will be build

using ANSYS the flexural behavior of the beam will be tested on the model. Under beam design,

loads combining for a particular beam such as dead load and live load are important. But under

flexural behavior the beam would experience compressive force on the top of beam while tensile

force will act at the bottom of the beam.

1.5 Significance of the Study

This project work is conducted to examine how external pre-stressing could be of benefit

which is being used in strengthening the cracked flexural members. The study of the flexural

behavior of beam before actual design will help the engineers to design safer and long lasting

structures. This work is conducted to determine the flexural behavior of reinforced concrete

beam the result of which will provide vital data and information for designing stable, safe and

lasting structures especially in bridge design.

19
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 General Introduction

This chapter attempts to present and review previous literatures that are related to this study but

It will be too cumbersome to provide detail review of literatures related to this research work

however, attempt would be made to present some good literatures that will serve as a starting

point. The use of FEA has been the preferred method to study the behavior of concrete (for

economic reasons).

Willam and Tanabe (2001) publish a collection of papers concerning finite element

analysis of reinforced concrete structures. This collection contains areas of study such as: seismic

behavior of structures, cyclic loading of reinforced concrete columns, shear failure of reinforced

concrete beams, and concrete steel bond models.

Shing and Tanabe (2001) also put together a collection of papers dealing within elastic

behavior of reinforced concrete structures under seismic loads. The monograph contains

contributions that outline applications of the finite element method for studying post-peak cyclic

behavior and ductility of reinforced concrete columns, the analysis of reinforced concrete

components in bridge seismic design, and the analysis of reinforced concrete beam-column

bridge connection.

2.1Theoretical Framework

Beams like any other components of a structural system undergo deterioration over time.

The reasons may vary from structural overloading to environmental effects. Very often it is

impracticable to replace such components due to functional difficulties and economic reasons.

Instead, retrofitting/strengthening of such deteriorated components is a viable alternative. There

20
are many methods for strengthening. In this context, use of surface-bonded FRP layers for

strengthening beams is one of the popular methods and it represents an interesting area of

research. This technique has been widely investigated, and examples of existing structures

retrofitted using epoxy-bonded composite materials can be found in the literature (Chen, 2012)

While FE models for analysis of beams with surface-bonded FRP plates are not rare in the

literature, use of commercially available FE software for such purpose is rare.

On the other hand, the available commercial software’s for analysis and design of

conventional civil engineering structures lack the facility of incorporating additional layers of

different materials integrated to the virgin beam. However, for industrial purpose it is desirable

that suitable software are made available to the analysts and designers along with proper

guidelines to use them for appropriate modeling and analysis of beams with surface-bonded FRP

plates. To fulfill this requirement, a commercially available software ABAQUS-6.11 is chosen.

However, as the first step towards this purpose, it is necessary to assess the suitability of the

software for the simpler case i.e. modeling and analysis of the virgin beam without any

additional layer. Therefore, an effort is made in the present study to use the above software for

modeling and analysis of beams made of steel and reinforced concrete (RC). In this context,

choosing the appropriate element(s) out of the element library is extremely important for

predicting the structural behavior of the beam realistically with reasonable accuracy.

Consequently, various two and three dimensional elements are used for analysis of simply

supported beams under different loading conditions for their suitability and range of

applicability. Effect of varying the width of boundary strip and effect of different numerical

integration scheme on the solution accuracy are also studied.

21
2.1.1Finite Element Analysis (FEA)

Finite element analysis is a method of solving, usually approximately, certain problems in

engineering and science. It is used mainly for problems for which no exact solution, expressible

in some mathematical form, is available. As such, it is a numerical rather than an analytical

method. Methods of this type are needed because analytical methods cannot cope with the real,

complicated problems that are met within engineering. For example, engineering strength of

materials or the mathematical theory of elasticity can be used to calculate analytically the

stresses and strains in a bent beam, but neither will be very successful in finding out what is

happening in part of a car suspension system during cornering. One of the first applications of

FEA was, indeed, to find the stresses and strains in engineering components under load. FEA,

when applied to any realistic model of an engineering component, requires an enormous amount

of computation and the development of the method has depended on the availability of suitable

digital computers for it to run on.

The method is now applied to problems involving a wide range of phenomena, including

vibrations, heat conduction, fluid mechanics and electrostatics, and a wide range of material

properties, such as linear-elastic (Hookean) behavior and behavior involving deviation from

Hooke’s law (for example, plasticity or rubber-elasticity).

2.1.2Reinforced Concrete

Reinforced concrete is a very common composite material which is formed by combining

concrete and reinforcement which has the main goal of compensating or the relatively low tensile

strength and ductility of concrete. The reinforcement, which most of the time are steel bars

represents all the interconnected bars inside the concrete that strengthen the construction. The

consolidation of the two materials behaves very well as there is almost no slippage between the

22
two and more than that the concrete acts like a protective layer for the steel bar exposed to

corrosion (George, 2014).

The high use of reinforced concrete all over the world is due to the advantages that the material

presents;

i. It has a high strength as concrete resist compression and steel resist tension forces

ii. It has high fire resistance

iii. It is a versatile material, can be cast to take a wide variety of shapes and sizes.

iv. It has low cost of maintenance.

However, reinforced concrete, like any other material, does not present only advantages. There

are certain characteristics that can lead to the selection of another structural material:

i. It requires mixing, casting and curing, processes that can affect the final strength of the

structure

ii. The forms that are require to cast the concrete in place are not economically

advantageous

iii. Shrinkage generates crack development and strength loss

2.1.3 Material Proprieties

In order to have a good knowledge of how reinforced concrete acts while subjected to

external loads, the user needs to possess an adequate understanding of the proprieties of its

components, hence a brief introduction to concrete and steel reinforcement is being presented

below.

As concrete is made from cement, aggregate and water it is likewise a composite material. The

components are mixed together in proper proportion that can vary slightly, adjusting the

proprieties of the model so it can fit a certain purpose. Following, the concrete increases in

23
strength, reaching its characteristics strengthafter 28 days. As mentioned above tensile stresses

are very small and as a result, compressive strength, fc, is the main criteria of determining the

quality of concrete (George, 2014).

This section discusses a comprehensive work published in the area of RC beam to provide

detailed understandings. Many experiments were conducted to study the flexural behavior of

reinforced concrete beams.

2.2 Empirical Framework

Kachlakev (2001) has simulated finite element models of RC beams in order to observe the

linear and non-linear responses up to a load of failure. He also studied about the results of three

other beams with 3-dimensinal layered elements using the ANSYS finite element program. The

beams analyzed were as follows:

i. Control beam with CFRP plates

ii. Control beam with GFRP plates

iii. Control beam with CFRP and GFRP plates.

He validated one-quarter of beam due to symmetry using the interface. To model concrete and

reinforcement using solid65, link8 elements and steel cushion at loading points, concrete volume

was meshed properly using necessary mesh attributes. Individual elements were modeled with

the nodes created by concrete mesh for reinforcement. Normally, the mesh is created by trial

process to achieve proper density.

Smeared crack approach was used to model all the elements. Stirrups were also modeled

using link8 elements. The results were compared with the results provided byexperimental

beams by Buckhouse (1997). The observations made from the resultswere load strain plots at any

point in the beams, mid-span load-defection plots andall levels of cracking and their patterns. He

24
also observed that slight changes in young’s modulus and compressive strength made a huge

deference in validation.

Riveros and Gopalaratnam (2013) studied the fracture response of RC deep beams and

also investigated on the strength and size of beams. Riveros and Gopalaratnamstudied the

various parameters, like crack initiation to sizes of beams, deflection capacities due to changes in

sizes, failure mechanisms due to shear span to depth ratios, brittle natures of beams, compression

and tension softening of concrete beams, bond slip behavior between concrete and

reinforcement, and yielding longitudinal reinforcement. The development also incorporates the

Delaunay refinement algorithm to create a triangular topology which is then transformed into a

quadrilateral mesh the quad-morphing algorithm. These two techniques allow automatic re-

meshing using the discrete crack approach. Nonlinear fracture mechanics was incorporated using

the fictitious crack model and the principal tensile strength for crack initiationandpropagation.

Kasat and Varghese (2012), in the design of efficient structures, have studied pre-stressed

concrete beams using ANSYS for finite element analysis under transverseloading conditions,

which was an economical way and obtained solutions as naturalstructures. He obtained the

failure load similar to the experimental results and alsohand-calculated stresses, initial cracks

occurrence and deflections ofbeam at anypoint.

Method of analysis Stresses in top fiber (N/mm) Stresses in bottom fiber (N/mm)

Calculation -11.6 1.16

ANSYS -10.48 1.16

Table 2.1: Stress calculations (Kasat and Varghese, 2012)

25
They found that failure mechanism, cracks, defections, stress and progressing cracks were

modeled accurately using FEA and results obtained were very close to the hand calculations.

Vasudevan and Kothandaraman (2012) have studied the RC beams under two point

loading conditions. They used ANSYS 12.0 for finite element study of the beam with the

smeared crack approach. Loads at initial cracks and ultimate load capacities were analyzed

according to the IS 456:2000 code. They analyzed the batch mode approach and graphical user

interface advantages. In their work, they simulated the entire processing of model for FEA

analysis by creating a single batch file before modeling in ANSYS APDL version. ANSYS was

used for plotting of load versus defection curves, crack propagation and steel yielding based on

material properties. They observed results obtained from FEA, which was very close to the

results of experimental findings.

Saifullah et.al (2011) has studied the nonlinear analysis of RC beam for different shear

reinforcement patterns by FEA analysis. They have selected RC beams with and without

different shear reinforcements using ANSYS for simulations. In this study, the cracks occurrence

in the concrete model and failure of concrete with different types of cracks were studied. When

the compressive crushing strength of concrete and modulus of rupture of concrete became less

than the stresses occurring on them, it resulted in propagation of cracks in concrete. These

cracking and crushing parameters are accounted for failure criteria for concrete model. ANSYS

also considers other two parameters i.e. uniaxial tensile and compressive strength for failure of

concrete. They compared their works with Wolansoki (2004) results which were in good

agreement with each other. Finally, they found different parameters like crack formations,

effective shear reinforcement pattern model.

26
 MohamadNajim (2007) studied the nonlinear analysis of RC beams under pure torsion.

The torsional strength due to the changes in the length of beam and cracks propagation due to

various loading conditions were studied and analyzed. He has tested six beams with different

length and same reinforcement ratios as per theACI318-05 code. The author considered multi-

linear isotropic stress-strain curve forthe concrete model from the equation by Mac Gregor

(1992) and modeled steel barsand loading plates using bilinear kinematics hardening (BKIN).

Torque-twist anglefor the beams was analyzed with incremental torque with application of

uniform loadand convergence of solution stopped at the reach of ultimate load. Here ductilityof

the beams was analyzed during post cracking stages, prediction of elastic torque, cracking

torque, ultimate torque and stresses in reinforcements were observed.

2.2.1 Finite Element Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Beam

Finite Element Analysis (FEA) represents a numerical method, which provides solution

to problems that would otherwise be difficult to obtain.The use of this technique is on the

increase because of the numerous advancements in engineering and computer knowledge, this

method is useful to non-linear analysis because each component possesses different stress-strain

behavior. The response of each element is expressed in terms of a finite number of degrees of

freedom characterized as a value of an unknown function at a set nodal point, (Bashil et al

(2014). The numerical analysis investigations were performed with commercial software

ANSYS. This software is a suite of powerful engineering simulation programs, based on finite

element method, which can solve problems ranging from relatively simpler linear analyses to the

most challenging non-linear simulations. The analysis of a structure with ANSYS is performed

in three stages

27
a) Pre-processing P – defining the finite element model and environmentalFactors to be applied

to it.

b) Analysis solver – solution of finite element model.

c) Post-processing of results like deformations contours for displacement, etc., using

visualization tools.

Advances in the field of computer-aided engineering during the last two decades have been quite

extensive and have led to considerable benefits to many engineering industries. In the building

industry, use of advanced finite element tools not only allowed the introduction of innovative

and efficient building products, but also the development of accurate design methods. Here

SOLID65 and LINK8 elements are used to model RC and LRC beams. Features of these

elements are given here and details of the model used in the paper are given in next section.

SOLID65 allows the presence of four different materials within each element, one matrix

material (e.g. concrete) and a maximum of three independent reinforcing materials. Concrete

material is capable of directional integration point cracking and crushing besides incorporating

plastic and creep behavior. Reinforcement (which also incorporates creep and plasticity) has

Un-iaxial stiffness only and is assumed to be smeared throughout the element. Directional

orientation is accomplished through user specified angles. Concrete material is assumed to be

initially isotropic. Element is defined by eight nodes having three degrees of freedom at each

node: translations in the nodal x-, y-, and z-directions. Special features of SOLID65 are:

Plasticity, Creep, Cracking, Crushing, Large deflection, and large strain (Srinivasan and Sathiya

2010)

Chen and Li (2001) presented analytical investigation ofbehavior of connections between

a steel beam and concrete-filled circular steel tube column. Finite element analyses were

28
conducted to investigate the force transfer mechanism of various configurations of connection

details.

Good agreement between experimental and analytical results was obtained. The connection of a

beam directly welded to the steel tube cannot developthe required flexural strength due to

distortion of the tube wall. Both external diaphragm and side plate reinforced connections

possess sufficient flexural strength that can be transferred and resisted by the concrete core inside

the steel tube.

Lakshmi and Shanmugam (2002) presented a semi-analytical method to predict the

behavior of in-filled columns. Moment-curvature-thrust relation-ships were generated for column

cross sections by an iterative process. Nonlinear equilibrium equations resulting from geometric

and material nonlinearities were solved by an incremental-iterative numerical scheme based on

the generalized displacement control method. Square, rectangular, and circular cross-sections of

compact steel tubes filled with concrete were considered in the analysis. The columns were pin-

ended and subjected to uniaxial or biaxial loading.

The accuracy of the proposed analytical method was established by comparing the results with

the corresponding experimental values. Hu et al. (2003) conducted a study for proper material

constitutive models for concrete-filled tube (CFT) columns. The investigation was verified by

the nonlinear finiteelement program ABAQUS against experimental data. The cross sections of

the CFST Columns in the numerical analysis are categorized into three groups, i.e., circular,

square, and square hollow section stiffened by reinforcing ties. Via the numerical analyses, it

was shown that for circular CFST columns, the tubes can provide a good confining effect to the

concrete especially when the width-to-thickness ratio D/t is small (say D/t <40). For the square

CFST columns, the tubes do not provide a large confining effect to the concrete especially when

29
the width-to-thickness ratio B/t is large (say B/t >30). The confining effect of the square CFST

columns with reinforcing ties is enhanced by the use of reinforcing ties especially when the tie

spacing is small and the tie number (or tie diameter) is large. Szlendak (2004) studied the

composite connection, made with RHS chord or column filled by concrete and branches with

RHSsteel profile. The aim of his research was to derive a simple theoretical formula for

calculating the strength and stiffness of such joints. Test results of twelve connections in natural

scale were described. Geometry and material properties of the tested joints were given.

Theoretical solution of the joint strength and stiffness were proposed and the comparisons

between theoretical and experimental results were presented.

Liang et al. (2005); used the finite element method to investigate the flexural and shear

strengths of simply supported composite beams under combined bending and shear. A three-

dimensional finite element model was developed to account for geometric and material nonlinear

behavior of composite beams, and verified by experimental results. The verified finite element

model was then employed to quantify the contributions of the concrete slab and composite action

to the moment and shear capacities of composite beams. The effect of the degree of shear

connection on the vertical shear strength of deep composite beams loaded in shear was studied.

Design models for vertical shear strength including contributions from the concrete slab and

composite action and for the ultimate moment-shear interaction were proposed for the design of

simply supported composite beams under combined bending and shear. The proposed design

models provide a consistent and economical design procedure for simply supported composite

beams.

Han et al. (2007) studied a nonlinear finite-element analysis (FEA) model. In that study

based on the elastoplastic finite-element theory he analyzedthe load versus deformation of steel

30
beam to concrete-filled steel tubular column connections. Six tests on steel beam to concrete-

filled steel tubular (CFST) column connections using external ring after exposure to the ISO-834

standard fire were used to verify the theoretical model. The test parameters included the column

cross-sectional type, the fire duration time, the level of axial load in the column, and the beam-

column strength ratio. Each test specimen consisted of a CFST column and two steel beam

segments in circular form arrangement to represent the interior joint in a building. Three of the

six composite connection specimens had circular cross sections and three had square cross

sections. Five of the test specimens were simultaneously exposed to the standard ISO-834fire

condition. After they had cooled down to room temperature, each was tested under a constant

axial load and a cyclically increasing flexural load.

The analysis presented experimental results to validate the FEA model and to evaluate the

influences of different testing parameters on various characteristics of the beam-column

connection performance. Comparisons between the predicted results and the experimental results

indicated that the FEA model can predict the P-relations of steel beam to CFST column

connections and the column lateral load resistance after fire with reasonable accuracy. Finally,

the FEA model was used to make a parametric study of the influence of various factors on the

post fire behavior of the steel beam to CFST column connections.

Liang et al. (2007) investigated the critical local and post-local buckling behavior of steel

plates in concrete-filled thin-walled steel tubular beam-columns by using the finite element

analysis method. High strength steel and concrete lead to the use of thin steel plates in concrete-

filled steel tubular beam-columns. However, the use of thin steel plates in composite beam-

columns gives a rise to local buckling that would appreciably reduce the strength and ductility

performance of the members. Geometric and material nonlinear analyses were performed to

31
investigate the critical local and post-local buckling strengths of steel plates under compression

and in-plane bending. Based on the results obtained from the nonlinear finite element analyses, a

set of design formulas were proposed for determining the critical local buckling and ultimate

strengths of steel plates in concrete-filled steel tubular beam-columns. In addition, effective

width formulas were developed for the ultimate strength design of clamped steel plates under

non-uniform compression.

Buckhouse (1997) studied external flexural reinforcement of existing concrete beams.

Three concrete control beams were cast with flexural and shear reinforcing steel. Shear

reinforcement was placed in each beam to force a flexural failure mechanism. All three beams

were loaded with transverse point loads at third points along the beams. Loading was applied to

the beams until failure occurred as shown in Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1: Typical Cracking of Control Beam at Failure (Buckhouse 1997)

The mode of failure characterized by the beams was compression failure of the concrete in the

constant moment region (flexural failure). All failures were ductile, with significant flexural

32
cracking of the concrete in the constant moment region. Load-deflection curves were plotted for

each beam and compared to predicted ultimate loads. This project will utilize the experimental

results of these control beam tests for calibration of the FE models.

Faherty (1972) studied a reinforced and pre-stressed concrete beam using the finite

element method of analysis. The two beams that were selected for modeling were simply

supported and loaded with two symmetrically placed concentrated transverse loads.

The analysis for the reinforced concrete beam included: non-linear concrete properties, a linear

bond-slip relation, bilinear steel properties, and the influence of progressive cracking of the

concrete. The transverse loading was incrementally applied and ranged in magnitude from zero

to a load well above that which initiated cracking. Because the loading and geometry of the beam

were symmetrical, only one half of the beam was modeled using FEA. The finite element model

produced very good results that compared well with experimental results in Jenney (1954).

Faherty (1972), also analyzed a pre-stressed concrete beam that included: nonlinear

concrete properties, a linear bond slip relation with a destruction of the bond between the steel

and concrete, and bilinear steel properties. The dead load, release of the pre-stressing force, the

elastic pre-stress loss, the time dependent pre-stress loss, and the loss of tensile stress in the

concrete as a result of concrete rupture were applied as single loading increments, whereas the

transverse loading was applied incrementally. Only three finite element models of the pre-

stressed beam were implemented (or used): town-cracked sections, and a partially cracked

section. Symmetry was once again utilized.

Anthony J.Wolanski, B.S.(2004),studied “Flexural behavior of Reinforced and Pre-

stressed Concrete Beams Using Finite Element Analysis’’.in his work He study the behavior of

beams at first cracking, behavior at second cracking, behavior at initial cracking, Behavior of

33
reinforcement Yielding and Beyond ,Strength Limit State, LoadDeformation Response Of

Control and application of Effective Pre-stress, Self-weight, Zero

Deflection,Decomposition,Secondary Linear Region, behavior of Steel Yielding and beyond,

Flexural Limit State of Pre-stressed Concretebeam.

Barbosa and Ribeiro, (1998), considered the practical application of nonlinear models in

the analysis of reinforced concrete structures and the consequences of small changes in

modeling. The best results were obtained from the elastoplastic-perfectly plastic, work-hardening

models that reached ultimate loads, very close to the predicted values. It was also concluded that

the highest analysis loads could be considered as the ultimate loads of the models and the actual

beams.

Revathi and Menon, (2005), conducted finite element and experimental studies on under-

reinforced, over-reinforced and shear test beams in ANSYS, to validate the potential of

numerical simulation in predicting the nonlinear response of the elements. The numerical and

test results were seen to compare well. The ductile behavior of under-reinforced beams and the

brittle mode of failure in the over-reinforced and shear beams were produced well by the

numerical model. The crack patterns of the specimens were also seen to be in good correlation

with the patterns obtained from the numerical analysis. The study recommended the use of

convergence criteria in terms offorce to get more reliable and accurate results.

Dahmani, Khennane, et.al, (2010), conducted an investigation into the applicability of

ANSYS software for analysis and prediction of crack patterns in RC beams and the advantage of

performing numerical simulation instead of experimental tests. For this purpose, different phases

of the behavior of the FE model of an RC beam was studied from initial cracking to failure of the

beam

34
2.3 Approach of the Research

The literature review illustrate that the use of finite element package to model the

concrete beam was feasible.it uses ANSYS (2003) as the modeling software. A reinforced

concrete beam is modeled using ANSYS 15.0.7with three point load and the result will be

compared with the theoretical and experimental work. The load –deflection response of the

experimental beam will be compared to analytical predictions in order to calibrate the model for

determination of strains, stresses, deflections and cracks. The beam will have one fixed and one

pin supports.

35
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHOD AND MATERIALS

3.0 Introduction

This chapter attempts to present the materials and methods that was used in carrying out

the research work. Finite Element Analysis (FEA) represents a numerical method, which

provides solution to problems that would otherwise be difficult to obtain. The numerical analysis

investigations was performed with commercial software ANSYS. This software is a suite of

powerful engineering simulation programs, based on finite element method, which can solve

problems ranging from relatively simpler linear analyses to the most challenging non-

linearsimulations.

The model of the 9m span beam has been modeled and analyzed using the finite element

software package ANSYS (Version 15). ANSYS is the commonly used finite element analysis

software for research oriented studies. The elements adopted to model concrete, reinforcement,

supports and loading plate are given

Material ANSYS Element

concrete SOLID65

Reinforcement LINK8

Steel plates, supports and angles SOLID45

Table 3.1 elements in ANSYS

36
 The analysis of a structure with ANSYS was performed in three stages

a) Pre-processing P – defining the finite element model and environmental factors to be applied

to it.

b) Analysis solver – solution of finite element model.

c) Post-processing of results like deformations contours for displacement, etc., using

visualization tools. Advances in the field of computer-aided engineering during the last two

decades have been quite extensive and have led to considerable benefits to many engineering

industries. In the building industry, use of advanced finite element tools not only allowed the

introduction of innovative and efficient building products, but also the development of accurate

design methods. Here SOLID65 and LINK8 elements wereused to model RC and to create

flexural and shear reinforcement. Features of these elements are given here and details of the

model to be used .SOLID65 allow the presence of four different materials within each element,

one matrix material (e.g. concrete) and a maximum of threeindependent reinforcing materials.

Concrete material is capable of directional integration point cracking and crushing besides

incorporating plastic and

37
 Fig. 3.1 – Solid65 elements. (ANSYS 2006)
aaAAAA (99(9(ANSYS 2006

Fig. 3.2 – Link8 element. (ANSYS 2006)

38
Creepbehavior. Reinforcement (which also incorporates creep and plasticity) has uniaxial

stiffness only and is assumed to be smeared throughout the element. Directional orientation is

accomplished through user specified angles. Concrete material is assumed to be initially

isotropic. Element is defined by eight nodes Bul. Inst. Polit. Iaşi, t. LVI (LX), f. 4, (2010) having

three degrees of freedom at each node: translations in the nodal x-, y-, and z-directions. Special

features of SOLID65 are: Plasticity, Creep, Cracking, Crushing, Large deflection, and large

strain.

3.1 Calibration Model

A RCC beam with three point loading case wastaken for analysis withsize of the

reinforced concrete beam – 200 × 500 mm; size of loading and support steel plates – 100 × 500

mm, 6 mm thick; steel reinforcement details: 3 rebar’s of 12 mm diameter at bottom, 2 rebar’s of

8mm diameter at top, stirrups of 2 legged 6 mm diameter at 120 mm c/c.

39
 Fig 3.3 – RCC beam model.

3.2. Steps Involved in the Analysis

A. S t e p 1: Pre-Processing

a) Define the element type, Real constants, Material Models of the concrete model.

b) Create the model.

c) Concrete beam was meshed by mapped mesh.

B. S t e p 2: Solution

a) The boundary conditions and loads were applied

40
b) Solve.

C. S t e p 3: Post-Processing

a) Deflections at various locations was obtained.

b) Stress contours wereplotted.

3.3. Modeling Procedure

3.3.1. Reinforcement Modeling

There are three techniques to model steel reinforcement in finiteelement models for

reinforced concrete; the discrete model, theembedded model, and the smeared model. The

reinforcement in the discretemodel uses bar or beam elements that are connected to concrete

mesh nodes (Srinivasan and K. Sathiya2010). Therefore, the concrete and the reinforcement

mesh share the samenodes and concrete occupies the same regions as the reinforcement. A

drawbackto this model is that the concrete mesh is restricted by the location of thereinforcement

and the volume of the mild-steel reinforcement is not deducedfrom the concrete volume.

Because the stiffness of the reinforcing steel is evaluated separately from the concrete elements

the model is built in a way that keeps reinforcing steel displacements compatible with the

surrounding concrete elements, when reinforcement is complex, This model is very

advantageous. However, this model increases the number of nodes and degrees of freedom in the

model, therefore, increasing the run time and computational cost. The smeared model assumes

that reinforcement is uniformly spread throughout the concrete elements in a defined region of

the FE mesh. This approach is used for large-scale models where the reinforcement does not

significantly contribute to the overall response of the structure. Here, in this problem, the

smeared model was used to model reinforcement.

41
(a) (b)

(c)

Fig. 3.4 – Models for reinforcement in reinforced concrete: a – discrete; b –

embedded c – smeared. (ANSYS 2006)

The Solid65 element wasused to model the concrete. This element has eight nodes

with three degrees of freedom at each node – translations in thenodal x-, y-, and z-

directions. This element is capable of plastic deformation, cracking in

threeorthogonal

directions, and crushing.

A Solid45 element wasused for steel plates at the supports and loading of the beam.

42
 This element has eight nodes with three degrees of freedom at each node –

translations

in the nodal x-, y-, and z-directions.

A Link8 element wasused to model steel reinforcement. This element is a 3D spar element and it

has two nodes with three degrees of freedom – translations in the nodal x-, y-, and z-directions,

being also capable of plastic deformation.

Fig 3.5– Reinforcements modelled in beam

43
 Fig 3.6 Reinforcement model in beam

3.3.2. Real Constants

Individual elements contain different real constants. No real constant set exists for the

Solid45 element. Real Constant Set 1 is used for the Solid65 element. It requires real constants

for rebar assuming a smeared model. Values were entered for material number, volume ratio, and

orientation angles. The material number refers to the type of material for the reinforcement. The

volume ratio refers to the ratio of steel to concrete in the element. Theorientation angles refer to

the orientation of the reinforcement in the smeared Model; ANSYS allows the user to enter three

rebar materials in the concrete. Each material corresponds to x-, y-, and z-directions in the

element. The reinforcement has uniaxial stiffness and the directional orientation is defined by the

user. For this present study the beam wasmodeled smeared reinforcement. Therefore, a value of

one will be entered for all real constants which turned the smeared reinforcement capability of

the Solid65 element off. Real Constant Sets 2, 3, 4, and 5 are defined for the Link8 element.

Values for cross-sectional area and initial strain were entered as

a) S e t 1: solid 65 all values given zero.

b) S e t 2. Area 10 mm bar 0.000131 m2.

44
c) S e t 3. Half 8 mm bar 0.00005655 m2.

d) S e t 4. Area 8 mm bar 0.00005026 m2.

e) S e t 5. Area 6 mm bar 0.00002827 m2

A value of zero was entered for the initial strain because there was no initial stress in the

reinforcement.

3.4. Material Properties

Three model properties are important to simulate perfect concrete behavior in ANSYS.
They are

Elastic property
Compressive Uniaxial Stress-Strain Relationship for Concrete
Cracking behavior

Elastic Property

“EX “is the modulus of elasticity of the material considered and “PRXY” is the
Poisson’s ratio. The characteristic compressive strength of the concrete considered is (fc’) 200
N/mm2 which was obtained from experiments and the Poisson’s ratio was 0.25.

Ec =5000 fc’ = 5000 200 = 70710.7 N/mm2

Compressive Uniaxial Stress-Strain Relationship for Concrete

Stress strain values are given to simulate the multi-linear behavior of the concrete. The
multi-linear stress-strain curve for concrete under compressive uniaxial loading is obtained using
Equations (5.1) and (5.2) (Desai and Krishnan 1964), and Equation (5.3) for modeling of
concrete.

Ultimate strain is calculated by

45
 Ec
2

1
f o 1

2 fc'
2
o
Ec
f
Ec 3

Where fc’ - stress at any strain , psi

- Strain at stress f

o - Strain at the ultimate compressive strength fc'

For the multi-linear stress strain curve of concrete, the first stress strain value

corresponds to elastic limit value. i.e., 1/3rd of the fc' using Equation 3. The intermediate points

are calculated from the Equation (5.1) and (5.2). Strains are selected and the stress is calculated

for each strain. The final point is crushing strain for unconfined concrete.

Two material models was used: material 1 for steel and material 2 for concrete, under the

linear isotropic material definition.

a) Material 2: for grade M20 concrete.

Modulus of elasticity, Ec= 200 N/mm2

Poisson’s ratio, ν = 0.25.

b) Material 1: for steel.

Modulus of elasticity, Es= 2e+5 N/mm2 = 2e+11 N/m2,

Poisson’s ratio, ν = 0.33.

46
 Table 3.1: Material Properties Input Data for ANSYS*

Material Element
Model No. Type Material Properties

Linear Isotropic
EX 200000 N/mm2

PRXY 0.33
1 LINK180
Bilinear Isotropic
Yield Stress 443.38 N/mm2

Tangent Modulus 20 N/mm2

2 SOLID65 Linear Isotropic

EX 200 N/mm2

PRXY 0.25

Concrete
Shear transfer coefficients for an
open crack 0.5

Shear transfer coefficients for a

closed crack 0.9

3.06
Uniaxial tensile cracking stress N/mm2

Uniaxial crushing stress -1

Stiffness multiplier for cracked

tensile condition 0.6

3 SOLID45 Linear Isotropic

EX 200000 N/mm2

PRXY 0.3

47
3.5. Meshing

Good result is obtained from the solid65 element with the rectangular meshing system.

For Solid65 element the mesh wasset up such that square or rectangular elements were created.

The volume sweep command was used to mesh the steel plate. This properly sets the width and

length of elements in the plates to be consistent with the elements and nodes in the concrete

portions of the model. The necessary element divisions were noted. The meshing of the

reinforcement is a special case compared to the volumes. The reinforcement model was

meshedusing line elements so that the nodes of the line elements come exactly over the node of

the solid elements which are later merged so that both rebar elements and the concrete elements

share the same nodes(R. Srinivasan and K. Sathiya, 2010).

Fig 3.7 Meshing of reinforced concrete beam

48
3.6. Numbering Controls

The command merge items merge separate entities that have the same location. These

items will then be merged into single entities. Caution must be taken when merging entities in a

model that has already been meshed because the order in which merging occurs is significant.

Merging key points before nodes can result in some of the nodes becoming “orphan”; that is, the

nodes lose their association with the solid model. The orphan nodes can cause certain operations

(such as boundary condition transfers, surface load transfers, and so on) to fail. Care was taken to

always merge in the order that the entities appear. Also, the lowest number was retained during

merging to avoid the above phenomena.

3.7. Loads and Boundary Conditions

Displacement boundary conditions are needed to constrain the model to get a unique

solution. To ensure that the model acts the same way as the experimental beam, boundary

conditions need to be applied at points of symmetry and where the supports and loadings exist.

The symmetry boundary conditions was set first. The model to be used was symmetric about

one plane.Nodes defining a vertical plane through the beam cross-section centroid define a plane

of symmetry. To model the symmetry, nodes on this plane must be constrained in the

perpendicular direction. Therefore the nodes at the plane of symmetry were given displacement

along x-direction, x; UX = 0. The support wasmodeled in such a way that a pin was created. A

single line of nodes on the plate wasgiven constraint in the UY- and UZdirections, applied as

constant values of 0. By doing this, the beam will be allowed to rotate at the support. The force,

P, applied at the steel plate wasapplied across the entire centerline of the plate. The static

analysis was used.

49
 Fig 3.8 Loads and boundary conditions
3.7 Analysis Type

The finite element model for the analysis is a simple beam under transverse loading carrying

three concentrated load for a span of 9m using static analysis.

BEAM TWO

BEAM OF SPAN 9M LOADED IN TWO PLACES WITH LOAD OF 20 KN.

The second beam was taken for analysis with a size of 450 X 230 mm length of 9M with load of

20 KN placed at distances of 2250 mm from point A-B,4000 mm from B-C and 1750 mm from
C-D.

50
 Fig 3.9 Beam model

A -------------------B ------------------------------------------C ------------------

--D

51
 Fig 3.10 geometry of the beam

A-B = 2250mm

B-C= 4000mm

C-D= 1750mm

Span of Load = 500mm

Span of Support = 500mm

DIMENSIONS OF THE BEAM = 9000mm X 450mm X 230mm

3.8 Contact Surfaces

The interfaces of concrete and load, concrete and supports are modeled with. Model was already

planned and modeled to have common ordinate value nodes for beam and corbel.

3.9 Boundary Conditions

3.9.1 Displacement Boundary Condition

52
The concrete beam is hinged at the base with fixed supports (the translations are restrained x, and
z directions). The axial force loaded on the beam were transverse with 20KN on each point.

Fig 3.11 boundary conditions

53
3.10 Reinforcement details

Fig 3.12 reinforcement details

54
3.11 Analysis process
The analysis of the model was set up to examine three different behaviors: initial

cracking of the beam, yielding of the reinforcement and the strength limit state of the beam.

The application of the load was done incrementally after each loading the restart option was used

to go to another step after convergence. Force and displacement were used as the convergence

criteria.

55
 CHAPTER FOUR

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

4.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents the results obtained by applying the methods and materials in chapter three.

The finite element analysis is done on a 9M span beam of size 500mmx200mm which was

subjected to various loading to determine the failure load in ANSYS 15.0.7.

4.1 Finite element Analysis

Finite Element Analysis (FEA) represents a numerical method, which provides solution to

problems that would otherwise be difficult to obtain. The numerical analysis investigations were

performed with commercial software ANSYS. This software is a suite of powerful engineering

simulation programs, based on finite element method, which can solve problems ranging from

relatively simpler linear analyses to the most challenging non-linear simulations.

4.2 Finite element results

The results obtained from the post processing of the finite elements analysis for the test beam is

presented and interpreted same.

4.2.1 Deflection of the beam

The result for the deflection of the beam was obtained using the element type solid65 in which

concrete model was generated. The deflection of the beam in ANSYS is called directional

deformation. This could be determine in both coordinate or axis of symmetry which are X,Y and

Z. The picture below shows the deformation of the beam in X-direction.

56
 Fig.4.1 Directional deformation in X-axis

From the above figure it can be seen that when the beam was loaded it deflects to the x-direction.

The deflection was distributed across the span of the beam but is highest at the point of loading

close to the left hand support and minimal at the loading point close to the right hand support. As

indicated by the legend the deflection is maximum at point B with magnitude of 15.007mm and

minimal at point D with magnitude of -14.516mm, but lesser at various points across the span.

In the design of such beam under same loading condition deflection check at point B would be

the point of interest in X-direction.

57
4.2.1.2 Deflection in the Y-direction

unlike the deflection in the x-direction the deflection in y-direction as can be seen in the figure

below is highest at the extreme ends of the beam span covering the supports but minimal at point

C. the deflection in y-direction has the maximum value of 0.59479mm and minimum value of -

152.69mm.the deflection in this direction is maximum at the points of support.

Fig 4.2 Directional deformation in Y-direction

58
4.2.1.3 Directional deformation in z-axis

The deflection of the beam in the z coordinate is somehow distributed across the beam but is a

bit more at the extreme ends of the beam and at the center as can be seen from the legend at the

left hand of the figure.in designing this beam the deflection in the z-coordinate will be checked at

those points undersuch condition of loading. The maximum value is 0.15235 while the minimum

value is -0.15235.

Fig 4.3 Directional Deformation in Z-axis

59
4.3. Stress Distribution in the Beam

The stress is distributed along the length of the beam as the loads were applied across the various

spans of the beam length. The distribution of the stress across the beam length is not even, it has

the maximum value of 356.07 mpa and minimum value of -65.413 mpa. The distribution is

shown in the picture below.

Fig 4.3 principal stress distribution

60
Fig 4.5 minimum stress

61
 Fig 4.6 equivalent tress or von-mises stress

The von-mises stress as shown by the result analysis is maximum at the center of the beam and

somehow concentrated at a distance around the support.

62
4.4 Shear stress distribution across the beam

The shear stress distribution across the beam is maximum around the applied loading areas and

near the supports but zero at the supports and around other sections of the beam. The distribution

is as shown in the picture below. In considering the beam for design attention will be given to

those areas to prevent the shear failure of the beam in future. The value ranges from 0 –0.032278

Mpa.

Fig 4.7 maximum shear elastic strain.

63
4.5 Total deformation

This is also known as total failure of the beam, the beam failed due to continuous loading

of the beam after yielding of the reinforcement. As shown by the picture below, the beam is

expected to deform maximally at the center by mere observation which is in conformity with the

analysis result. Depending on the loading condition and where the beam could be used more

attention would be given to that center section of the beam to avoid failure but the designer will

have to make his own decision based on the situation on ground in order to ensure the overall

safety of the beam and the structure. The deformation has a maximum value of 278.23 mm and

minimum value of 0.0695569 mm. The deformation is due to the stresses generated in the beam

from the applied load.

64
 Fig 4.7 total deformation

4.6 cracks and crushing

Due to the continua loading of the beam to determine the yield strength and shear failure of the

beam cracks are formed in the beam initially and as the load increases the cracks increase until

the failure of the beam is observed. The development of such cracks is as shown in the figure

below.

65
Figure 4.8 yielding of steel reinforcement

66
Fig 4.9 Cracks developed in the beam section

67
 RESULTS FOR BEAM OF SPAN 9M LOADED IN

TWO PLACES WITH LOAD OF 20 KN.

The finite element analysis was carried out on the reinforced concrete beam model.

Two-point Force loading was applied. The observations made from the analytical investigations

are presented in the following sections. The parameters considered for the present study are (i)

Normal Stresses (ii) Cracking Pattern and Failure Mode, (iii) Total Deformation and Deflection

(iv) Strain Energy and (v) Von mises stress (vi) Maximum Principal Stress (VI) Normal Elastic

Strain

68
69
 NORMAL STRESS VS NORMAL ELASTIC STRAIN OF RCC BEAM

Table 4.1

Stress Strain

5.8 0.029

4.3 0.021

2.8 0.014

1.2 0.006

-0.28 -0.001

-1.8 -0.0085

-3.3 -0.016

-4.8 -0.023

-6.3 -0.031

-7.9 -0.038

4.8 Equivalent elastic strain and stress

The equivalent stress distributed along the length of the beam has a maximum value of

7.5824e6 Pa and a minimum value of 0 Pa as shown by the legend at the left hand corner of the

figure shown below.

70
 Fig 4.11 Equivalent (von-Mises) stress

The equivalent elastic strain as can be seen from the fig below has a maximum value of 0.038336

mm and a minimum value of 0 mm as indicated by the colors on the beam and the legend shown

at the left corner of the figure below.in designing for the beam the designer will make his

decision based on the results of the analysis.

71
Fig 4.13 equivalent elastic strain

72
4.9 Stress distribution along the length of the beam

4.9.1 Shear stress

Shear in ANSYS is referred to as shear stress which is the stress that is responsible for

the tearing apart of a reinforced concrete beam. The result of shear stress generated from the

beam model has a maximum value of 1.4694e6 Pa and minimum value of -1.7202e6 Pa. as

shown by the figure below the maximum value of the shear stress is found around the supports

but minimal in the middle of the beam. In designing the beam for which ever purpose attention

for shear has to be drown to those areas.

73
 Fig 4.14 Shear elastic strain

shear elastic strain of the beam model shows that the value of shear elastic strain is maximum

around the beam supports but mostly concentrated at the left support as shown by the red

coloration on the beam and the legend at the left corner of the result generated with the

maximum value of 0.08368 m/m and minimum value of -0.021502 m/m at the right support as

indicated by the blue color.

Fig 4.15 shear elastic strain

74
4.9.3 Maximum principal stress stress

The peak principal stress of the beam under analysis is found at the first and last span of the

beambut with minimal value at the mid-span of the beam especially on the top of the beam. The

red Color shows where the stress is higher and the blue color shows where it is minimal. The

Maximum value of the principal stress is 5.7977e6 Pa found near the supports and minimum

Value is -1.4725e6.

Fig 4.16 maximum principal stress

75
4.10 Total deformation

Deformation of the beam which in ANSYS is called total deformation is the point at

which the beam failed completely. This occurred at the center of the beam as shown by the

picture below. The mid span of the beam which is not supported though not loaded has the

highest deflection value.The beam has a maximum deflection value of 0.47 M which is equal to

470 mm and minimum value of 0.05 M.Ths. section of the beam should be point of interest to

the designer to determine the life span of the beam and the safety of the structure.

Fig 4.17 Total deformation

76
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Summary

Two beams of 9 M span each with different loading conditions were modeled in a

powerful software that handles problems in all fields of engineering ANSYS 15.0.7 and the

results obtained reviews the ease of using finite element analysis method for analyzing structural

members in a building to give the designer a better understanding so as to make an informed

decision while selecting sections for design.

The result obtained from the software analysis compares well with the result obtained from

strength of materials method for hand calculations.

Table 5.1 compilation of results

Method of analysis Stresses in top fiber (N/mm2) Stresses in bottom fiber (N/mm2)

(MPA) (MPA)

Calculation

ANSYS 5.8 -7.9

77
5.2 CONCLUSION

(1) Deflections and stresses at the centerline along with initial and progressive cracking of

the finite element model compare well to Hand calculated data obtained from a

reinforced concrete beam.

(2) The failure mechanism of a reinforced concrete beam is modeled quite well using FEA.

(3) Deflections and stresses at the zero deflection point and decompression are modeled well

using a finite element package.

(4) The load applied to cause initial cracking of the concrete beam compares well with hand

calculations.

(5) Flexural failure of the concrete beam is modeled well using a finite element package, and

the load applied at failure is very close to hand calculated results.

5.3 RECOMMENDATION FOR FUTURE STUDIES

The literature review and analysis procedure utilized in this work has provided useful

insight for future application of a finite element package as a method of analysis. To ensure that

the finite element model is producing results that can be used for study, any model should be

calibrated with good experimental data. This will then provide the proper modeling parameters

needed for later use.

78
 REFERENCES

Anthonial Barbosa, S. Idelsohn, and E.Dvorkin.(1998): Analysis of reinforced concrete

structures using ANSYS nonlinear concrete model.

Anthony J. and Wolanski, B.S. (2004): “Flexural Behavior of Reinforced and Prestressed

Concrete Beams Using Finite Element Analysis”, Master’s Thesis, Marquette University,

Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Bashir, A. Ahmad, K. Khan, M.N. Rafique and Karam S. (2014): “Identification of Shear Cracks

in Reinforced Beams Using Finite Element Method”,Pakistan journal of Science, Vol.

66,No 1 March 2014.

Chen C.C. and Li H.L.(2001): Finite element analyses of steel beam to concrete- filled circular

steel tube column connections, Proceedings of the Eighth Inter-national Conference on

the Application of Artificial Intelligence to Civil andStructural Engineering Computing,

Stirling, Scotland, 171-172

Chen G.M a, J.F. Chen b, J.G. Teng, (2014): On the finite element modelling of RC beams shear

strengthened with FRP, Construction and Building Materials 32 (2012) 13–26.

Faherty, K.F. (1972), “An Analysis of a Reinforced and a Prestressed Concrete Beam by Finite

Element Method,” Doctorate’s Thesis, University of Iowa, Iowa City

Fanning, P. Buckhouse, E.R. (1997): “External Flexural Reinforcement of Existing

Reinforced Concrete Beams Using Bolted Steel Channels,” Master’s Thesis, Marquette

University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Han L.-H., Huo J.-S.,Wang Y.-C.( 2007): Behavior of steel beam to concrete- filled steel tubular

column connections after exposure to fire, Journal of Structural Engineering, 133, 6, 800-

814

79
Hu H.T., Huang C.S., Wu M.H., Wu T.M.,( 2003): Nonlinear analysis of axially loaded

concrete-filled tube columns with confinement effect, Journal ofStructural Engineering,

ASCE, 129, 10, 1322-1329

Kachlakev, D., PhD., Miller, T, PhD, P Yim, S, PhD, PE; Chansawat, K. and Potisuk, T., ( 2001)

“Finite Element Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Structures Strengthened with FRP

Laminates”, Oregon Department of Transportation, Research Group

Kachlakev, D.I.;PhD., Miller, T, phD, p. Yim, S.phD, PE. Chansawat, K.andPotisuk, T. (2001),

“Finite Element Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Structures Strengthened With FRP

Laminates,” California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, CA and Oregon

State University, Corvallis, Oregon Department of Transportation, May.

Khennane, k. and Umehara, (2002): Nonlinear Analysis of Externallyprestressed concrete

Beams Electronic Journal of Structural Engineering,No.2,,pp.85-96.

Lakshmi B., Shanmugam N.E.,( 2002):Nonlinear analysis of in-filled steel-concrete composite

columns,Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 128, 7, 922-933

Liang Q.Q., Uy B., Bradford M.A., Ronagh R.H.,( 2005): Strength analysis of steel-concrete

composite beams in combined bending and shear, Journalof Structural Engineering,

ASCE, 131, 10, 1593-1600

Liang Q.Q., Uy B., Liew J.Y.R.,( 2007): Local buckling of steel plates in concrete-filled thin

walled steel tubular beam-columns, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 63, 26, 750-

760

MacGregor, J.G. (1992):Reinforced Concrete Mechanics and Design, Prentice-Hall, Inc.,

Englewood Cliffs,

80
Revathi and Menon. (2005), prestressed concrete: A fundamental Approach,prentice-Hall, Inc

Englewood Cliffs,NJ.

Saifullah,M.A. Hossain, SM.K. Uddin,M.R.A KHAN and M.A. Amin, (2011): Nonlinear

Analysis of RC Beamfor Different Shear Reinforcement patterns by finite Element

Analysis”International Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering Vol:11 NO

01,Fabruary 2011.

Shing, P.B. and Tanabe, T.A., Ed. (2001):Modeling of Inelastic Behavior of RC Structures

Under Seismic Loads, American Society of Civil Engineers.

Srinivasan R. and Sathiya K. (2010): Flexural Behavior Of pre-stressed Concrete beams Using

Finite Element Analysis,BuletinulInstitutuluiPolitehnic Din

IaşiPublicatDeUniversitateaTehnică „Gheorghe Asachi” Din IaşiTomulLvi (Lx), Fasc. 4,

2010

Szlendak J.K. ( 2004): Strength and stiffness of RHS beam to RHS concrete filled column joints,

Proceedings of the Fifth International Conferenceon Connections in Steel Structures,

Bialystok Technical University, Poland, 1024-1036.

Vasudevan, G. and S Kothandaraman. (2012): Behavior prediction of RC beams comparison of

experimental, FEA and analytical methods". In: IEEE-International Conference On

Advances In Engineering, Science And Management.

Vasudevan, G. S Kothandaraman, and S.Azhagarsamy (2013):Study on non-linear flexural

behavior of reinforced concrete beams using ANSYS by discrete reinforcement modeling".

In: Strength of Materials 45.2 (2013), pp. 231{241}.

Willam, K. and Tanabe,T.A, Ed. ( 2001): Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced Concrete

Structures, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills,MI

81
 APPENDIX

TABLE FOR NORMAL STRESS AND NORMAL ELASTIC STRAIN

Stress Strain

5.8 0.029

4.3 0.021

2.8 0.014

1.2 0.006

-0.28 -0.001

-1.8 -0.0085

-3.3 -0.016

-4.8 -0.023

-6.3 -0.031

-7.9 -0.038

82
Hand calculations

Beam properties

Span = 9 m

Depth = 450 mm

Width = 230 mm

Concrete strength = 200 N/mm

Modulus of elasticity of concrete = 57,000 X square root 200.

Modulus of elasticity of steel Es = 2+e5 N/mm

Poisson’s ratio = 0.3

Reinforcement cover = 65mm

Effective depth = 385 mm.

Maximum moment

Maximum moment = 20 X 1000 X 2250 +20000 X 4000

= 45000000 + 80,000000

= 1.25 X 10 N/mm

Gross Moment of Inertial

Ig = 1/12 x bh to power 3

= 1/12 x 230 x 4503

= 1.73 x 10 9 mm4

Modular ratio n = Es/Ec

= 2 X 10 5/70710.7

= 2.83

modulus of rupture = 7.5 X Square root fc'

83
 = 7.5 X 14.14 = 106.1 N/mm

230

Y bar
385”
450

2
n-1 X As

Figure A.2 – Transformed Cross-Section

𝜋𝑑𝑏2
Ab = 𝐴 = 4

= 18696

As = 4.Ab = 74785613.1 mm2

As’ = 2.Ab = 37392

A1 = bh = 230 x 450 = 103500 mm2

y1 = h/2 = 225 mm

Top Steel

A2 = n-1 x AS’ =2.83-1 X 37392 = 68,427.36 mm

y2 = d’ =65

BOTTOM STEL

A3 =n.AS = 2.83 X 74785613.1 = 211643 mm2

y3 = d = 385 mm.

Ytop = A1 X y1 + A2 X y2 + A3 X y3/ A1+ A2+A3 =

84
= 103500 X 225 + 65 X 68427.36 +385 X 211643/103500+68427.36+211645 = 28.5

Ytop/d = 0.0633

The moments of inertia calculated are as follows

Y1= y1-YTOP=196.5 mm

Y2 = Ytop-Y2 = 28.5-65=-36.5mm

Y3 =Ytop – y3 = 28.5-385 =-356.5 mm

Transformed moment of inertial = IO +Ai (Yi)2 =1.74 X 109+(-55360,578) = 1151201922 mm4

Igt/Ig =0.9683 mm2

Stress in the extreme fiber is now calculated

fct= My2/Itr =125000000 x 65 /1151201922=-7.05 N/mm2

Stress in the steel is now calculated

fst = My2/Itr X 8.= 5.6 Mpa

85