UNIAXIAL BEHAVIOR O F CONCRETE

IN C Y C L I C TENSION
By David Z. Yankelevsky1 and Hans W. Reinhardt2
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ABSTRACT: A new one-dimensional model for random cyclic tension in concrete

is developed. The model determines several geometrical loci, defined as focal points,
in the uniaxial stress-displacement plane, which are used to compute the complete
unloading-reloading curves. Given the complete load-displacement curve, the focal
points are located, and the path of any unloading-reloading cycle can be computed.
A cycle may also be plotted graphically without further calculations. The model
is compared with test results recently obtained at the Stevin Laboratory, Delft Uni-
versity of Technology, as well as with other available data, and good agreement
is shown.

INTRODUCTION

Cracking is one of the most critical considerations when designing con-

crete structures, especially under service load, and is governed by the con-
crete tensile properties. The initiation of a crack (as well as the crack's de-
formation history) has a major influence on the nonlinear behavior of a concrete
structure. It affects both the local behavior, such as the bond between a steel
bar and concrete, and the global behavior, such as flexural stress distribu-
tion. Hence, the cracking process in concrete should be clearly understood
and well formulated for computational implementation.
Existing finite element codes are well developed to account for complex
nonlinear behavior of concrete once the appropriate numerical routines and
material models are introduced. In recent years, the tensile behavior of con-
crete has attracted much attention and, as a result, the accumulated knowl-
edge has increased considerably (Bazant and Oh 1983; Carpinteri and In-
graffea 1984; Hillerborg 1985; Petersson 1981; Reinhardt 1985; Shah 1984;
Sih and Di Tomasso 1985; Wittmann 1983, 1985).
Attention has been given to the development of numerical procedures to
simulate cracking and two major approaches have been adopted: the discrete
crack and the smeared crack models. Both approaches have advantages and
shortcomings (Sih and DiTomasso 1985); however, both should be based on
a reliable model for the tensile behavior of concrete.
Rather simplified and idealized models for describing the stress-strain be-
havior of concrete in tension are in current use. Most of the existing models
use a simple envelope function for the tensile stress-strain curve. However,
recent work shows that the predicted response of a structure is sensitive to
various envelope shapes corresponding to equal amounts of fracture energy
(Roelfstra and Wittman 1985). Only a few models introduce an unloading
option and those which have been proposed are extremely simplified (Bazant
and Oh 1984; Gopalaratnam and Shah, 1985; Rots 1985).
'Sr. Lect., Fac. of Civ. Engrg., Technion Israel Inst, of Tech., Haifa Israel 32000.
2
Prof. of Struct. Engrg., Civ. Engrg. Dept, Darmstadt Univ. of Tech., D-6100
Dermstadt, FRG.
Note. Discussion open until June 1, 1989. To extend the closing date one month,
a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals. The manuscript
for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on June 20, 1986.
This paper is part of the Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 115, No. 1, Jan-
uary, 1989. ASCE, ISSN0733-9445/89/0001-0166/S1.00 + $.15 per page. Paper
No. 23126.

166

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

type I type n

FIG. 1. Types of Uniaxial Tests in Tension

The writers are convinced that modeling the unloading-reloading behavior

in tension is crucial to the completeness of such a model, since cracks may
experience cyclic loading under external monotonically increasing loading.
For example, a crack opening increase in a certain crack might result in
redistribution of stresses in the structure and produce unloading and partial
closure in other adjacent cracks.
Advances in electrohydraulic control of testing machines allow tests in
which the complete stress-deformation history is determined. An extensive
experimental program has been recently completed at the Stevin Laboratory,
Delft University of Technology (Cornelissen et al. 1985; Moelands 1984;
Reinhardt 1984). Concrete samples have been loaded in tension and the cyclic
stress-deformation behavior of concrete has been studied.
In a recent paper the writers proposed a new model to describe the be-
havior of concrete under cyclic compression (Yankelevsky and Reinhardt
1987a). The model is based on geometrical properties of cyclic stress-strain
curves, and defines focal points which are used to reproduce the complete
unloading-reloading cycles.
The present work proposes a similar model for the more complex behavior
of concrete in tension and suggests a set of rules for reproducing unloading-
reloading cycles both for unloading in tension and for unloading in tension
followed by loading in compression. The present work expands the basic
approach, which was presented in 1987, to the tensile domain, and both
works complement each other. The complete focal point model can be used
to describe the complete uniaxial cyclic load behavior of concrete. The model
is compared with available test results and shows good agreement.

EXPERIMENTAL DATA

An extensive experimental program was conducted in which concrete sam-

ples were cyclically loaded in tension. Test data are fully described else-
167

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

 where (Cornelissen et al. 1985; Moelands 1984; Reinhardt 1984).
Prismatic specimens of normal weight concrete were used. The specimens
were 250 mm long and had a cross section of 60 X 50 mm. A 5 mm-wide
saw cut formed a reduced cross section (50 X 50 mm) at midheight, where
cracking started.
At 28 days, the average compressive strength for 150 mm cubes was 47.1
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

N/mm 2 and the average tensile splitting strength was 3.2 N/mm 2 . Defor-
mation-controlled tests were performed using a closed loop electrohydraulic
loading machine at a deformation rate of 0.08 u,m/s. The tensile load was
applied through end plates which had been glued to the sample ends.
Deformations were measured by five electromechanical extensometers that
were attached to the front and to the back of the specimen. The reference
gauge length was 35 mm.
Four types of uniaxial cyclic tests were performed which are denoted as
type I, II, III, IV in Fig. 1. Type I refers to a monotonic deformation-con-
trolled tensile test. In types II, III, IV, post peak cycles were applied, during
which the stress was varied between the envelope and a low tensile stress,
a low compressive stress and a higher compressive stress, respectively. Typ-
ical test data are shown later.

CHARACTERISTICS OF STRESS-DISPLACEMENT BEHAVIOR

Monotonic Loading
Consider an unconfined concrete sample loaded in uniaxial tension through
a deformation-controlled stiff testing machine. Up to about 80% of its tensile
strength (/,), concrete exhibits linear elastic behavior, having a tangent mod-
ulus of elasticity which is comparable to that in compression (Gopalaratnam
and Shah 1984). When stress is increased further, the behavior is highly
nonlinear. Concrete softens considerably as the peak stress is attained and
then, as a result of increasing microcracks in the mortar and at the mortar
coarse aggregate interface, a descending branch of the stress-displacement
curve is obtained.
The peak stress is obtained at a small deformation of about 5 (xm (referred
to a gauge length of 35 mm), whereas most of the energy is absorbed in the
descending zone. Complete failure is obtained when the deformation is about
200 u,m; at this stage, this stress drops to zero and a crack is fully opened.
The observed post peak resistance is most probably due to discontinuous
microcracks which coalesce with further deformation and aggregate interlock
across the crack plane.
Only limited data are available on the complete stress-deformation re-
sponse of concrete subjected to uniaxial tension, some of which contradict
each other (Gopalaratnam and Shah 1985), primarily because of different
testing techniques. Comparison of the monotonic loading curve in uniaxial
compression with that in tension shows that the descending branch in tension
immediately beyond the peak is considerably steeper than in compression
and the ratio between the ultimate strain and the strain corresponding to the
peak stress in tension is considerably larger.

Cyclic Loading
Only a few test results have been reported for concrete cyclically loaded
in tension (Gopalaratnam and Shah 1985; Terrien 1980), and most of the
168

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

 o [N/mm2]
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

6 tot [10"3mm)

FIG. 2. Envelopes for Various Types of Tension Tests (Moelands 1984)

data available to the writers are from tests that were performed at the Stevin
Laboratory (Cornelissen et al. 1985; Moelands 1984; Reinhardt 1984). In
any cyclic loading test, the envelope curve of the stress-displacement rela-
tionship is the line on which lie both the starting points of unloading and
the end points of reloading. Within the natural scatter of test results under
similar conditions, it has been found (Moelands 1984) that for various load-
ing histories, (type I, II, III and IV), similar envelopes were obtained (Fig.
2). This finding leads to the conclusion that a unique envelope curve may
well represent the envelopes at all loading histories, and this envelope co-
incides with the monotonic curve (type I test). A similar assumption is com-
monly adopted in compression (Yankelevsky and Reinhardt 1987a).
Consider a typical cyclic test during which the sample is monotonically
loaded in tension to a certain displacement level and then the loading is
reversed. The unloading curve softens gradually while stress is decreasing
and the stiffness of the unloading curve, at a given stress level, is smaller
for larger displacements. The unloading curve crosses the zero stress level
at a relatively low slope but the slope increases again after reaching a certain
level of compressive stress. The unloading curve in tension becomes a load-
ing curve in compression, which becomes stiffer with increasing compres-
sive stresses.
During the next load cycle, the reloading curve demonstrates a high stiff-
ness as reloading starts and it softens gradually until it meets the envelope.
These characteristics may be seen in the various loading histories shown
later.

TENSILE STRESS-DISPLACEMENT MODELS

Available Models
Early models were based on a single fracture parameter, namely the tensile
strength/, (Fig. 3(a)). When that level of stress has been reached, a crack
is formed in a perpendicular direction and the stress abruptly drops to zero.
169

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

 d a c
u -
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

6tot 6fot
(a! (bl (c|

'tot Mot
(e)

6 crack ^crack
(f) (g)

FIG. 3. Available Envelope Models for Uniaxial Tension

This simple representation has not been supported by current test results and
when used in finite element codes gives inconsistent results depending on
mesh size (Bazant and Cedolin 1979).
In recent years several attempts have been made to propose an idealized
tensile softening model, in which concrete exhibits a gradual decrease in
stress with increasing crack opening. These models include several fracture
parameters: the tensile strength/,, the fracture energy Gf, and parameters
which describe the shape of the softening diagram.
Various assumptions for the shape of the descending branch have been
proposed, such as linearized models using a straight line (Bazant and Oh
1983) [Fig. 3(b)] to represent the descending branch, or piecewise linear
models composed of two or three linear branches (Gustafsson 1985; Gylltoft
1983; Hillerborg 1985; Rots et al. 1985) [Fig. 3(c) and (d)]. More complex
models describe the descending branch by a nonlinear curve having an ex-
ponential (Gopalaratnum and Shah 1985), polynomial (Lin and Scordelis 1975)
or a combined (Cornelissen et al. 1985) expression [Fig. 3(e)],
170

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

 These models may also be classified according to the type of displacement
they use. Several stress-displacement models provide the total measured rel-
ative displacement 8tol within a given gauge length [Figs. 3(b)-(e)], while
other models use Hillerborg's fictitious crack model and provide the crack
opening 8crack (the nonrecovering deformation) as the displacement parameter
(Cornelissen et al. 1985; Rots et al. 1985) [Fig. 3(f)]. Most of the existing
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

stress-displacement models are simplified for lack of sufficient experimental

data.
Some of these stress-displacement models do not include unloading be-
havior and others include a very simplified unloading-reloading behavior
(Gopalaratnam and Shah 1985; Gylltoft 1983; Rots 1985) [Fig. 3(g)]. When
cracks are formed, the topology of the structure is changed and stresses are
redistributed over the entire volume. The stress redistributions result in non-
monotonic variations of stresses, even for monotonic external loading.
Therefore, the unloading-reloading behavior is important and should be in-
corporated in a stress-displacement model and be included in any numerical
calculations.

Requirements of Model
From the above it is clear that an appropriate stress-displacement model
for tensile behavior is essential for either an analytical or a numerical ap-
proach. Such a model should describe the average tensile stress in the crack
band (Sih and DiTomasso 1985) as a function of the total deformation with
respect to a given reference length or as a function of the crack opening.
However, when a stress versus total deformation (i.e., relative displacement)
relationship is given, it can easily be converted into a stress-strain relation-
ship in the ascending branch and into a stress-crack opening relationship in
the descending branch (Yankelevsky and Reinhardt 1987b).
An appropriate model should enable the analysis of nonmonotonic loading
on a structure which induces unloadings and reloadings on a certain crack.
Even in relatively simple loading cases, where the static loading is mono-
tonically increasing and a few cracks develop, it is very likely that opening
of a dominant crack will induce partial closure (i.e., unloading) of other
cracks. Hence a model should be able to represent unloading-reloading be-
havior.

PROPOSED MODEL

Model Concept
The concept of the present model is based on the observations of stiffness
changes during unloading and reloading in a certain cycle, as described ear-
lier, and the variation of stiffness at a certain stress level but at different
cycles, which refer to different coordinates of the point where unloading
starts. These observations may be summarized as follows:

1. The unloading curve starts to soften sharply at low tensile stresses, and as
load is changed to compression, and it stiffens with further compressive loading.
2. Softening is more pronounced when unloading starts at a larger deformation
and the unloading curves, which start at different points on the envelope, con-
verge with further unloading.
3. Reloading curves soften gradually until they meet with the envelope.
171

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

i to point Zt fto point Z

FIG. 4. Focal Point ModelScheme

There is a similarity between concrete behavior in cyclic compression and

in cyclic tension, although the behavior in cyclic tension seems more com-
plex when unloading is followed by compressive load on the sample.
In a recent paper, the general observations were successfully generalized
and quantified in the case of cyclic uniaxial compression (Yankelevsky and
Reinhardt 1987a) and a model in the same spirit, although quantitatively
different, is presented here for uniaxial cyclic tension.
The model assumes a unique envelope in tension, as was observed ex-
perimentally, and focuses on unloading from and reloading to that envelope
which is assumed to be given.
Model Rules
In the uniaxial stress-deformation plane there exist seven geometrical loci
which are defined as focal points. These points are placed along the tangent
to the envelope curve at the coordinates' origin. The focal points govern the
unloading and reloading curves either by rays transmitted from a certain
focal point towards known points in the stress-deformation plane, or by their
stress level.
Several focal points, denoted 0, Zl, Z2, Z3, Z4, Z5, Z6 are placed along
the tangent to the envelope curve at the coordinates' origin (see Fig. 4). Six
172

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

 focal points, which are common to all cycles and to all types of cyclic stress,
are solely dependent on the tensile strength/,, and have these stress levels

o-o = 0, 0 (1)

ffzi = - 3 / , (2)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Oz2 = - / , (3)

o-Z3 = - 0 . 7 5 /, (4)
<su = - 0 . 5 /, (5)
o-zs = -0.125 /, (6)

The location of focal point Z6 varies from cycle to cycle and depends on
the coordinates of point A, at which unloading starts (Fig. 4). The location
of Z6 is given later in Eq. 19.
For' a given point on the envelope (point A in Fig. 4) where unloading
starts, the following procedure yields the unloading curve:

1. Connect the starting point A (SA, aA) with focal point Z2 by a straight line.
The line intersects the S-axis at point B (SB, 0). SB is the residual deformation
for that cycle if the stress drops to zero.
2. Connect focal point Z3 with the already known point B, by a straight line.
The line intersects at point C (Sc,<rc) with the line connecting focal point Zl
and point A.
3. Connect focal point Z2 and point C by a straight line. This line intersects
at D(5D,o-D) with the line DE. Two points, in the stress-deformation plane, are
required to draw line DE: the first is point B, and the second is another geo-
metrical locus Z'6(5 A /2, -0.075 /,). With these two points, the line BZ'6 may
be drawn to yield points D and E (SE,o-E). Intersection of that line with line 0Z2
yields a dependent focal point Z6, the location of which is given by Eq. 19.
Point E has the stress level of focal point Z5.
Note that segment DE represents the major softening during unloading, which
takes place at a low stress level where there is a transition from tension to
compression. The upper bound for segment DE slope is always the slope of
segment CD.
4. Point F [SF.CTF] has the same stress level as focal point Z4, and lies on a
straight line connecting point E and focal point Z2.
5. Point G has the same stress level as focal point Z2 and rests on a straight
line connecting focal point Zl with point F.
Thus, a unique unloading curve is obtained within the stress range ,f < cr
< /,, along which unloading follows from point A. Further loading in compres-
sion, beyond point G, will follow a straight line parallel to line'0Z2.

When reloading starts at a certain point Q (Srelo-rel) along the unloading

curve, the complete reloading curve is obtained by the following rules:

1. Reloading from compression starts with the elastic stiffness (slope 0Z1)
until a stress level of focal point Z5 is reached. In Fig. 4, reloading starts at
point G and focal point Z5 stress level is reached at point H. If point Q lies on
lines EF or FG, the procedure is similar.

173

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

 2. If reloading starts at a state of less compression than the stress level of
point Z5, then that point on the unloading curve will be defined as point H for
the following procedure. Segment HI of the reloading curve is parallel to and
equal in length to segment AC.
3. Segment IJ is parallel to and equal in length to segment CD.
4. Segment JK is parallel to segment DE.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

5. Point N lines on AC at a stress level of 0.85 a A . A straight line connecting

focal point 0 with point N is an upper bound to the reloading curve.

In the most general case, segment JK intersects with ON at point K and

line KM (which coincides with ON) completes the reloading curve as it meets
with the envelope at point M. In other cases, line ON might be intersected
by line IJ and, in that case, the intersection point is denoted as K.
A typical example where segment IJ intersects with line ON at point K,
where the stress difference of segment IK is smaller than the stress difference
for segment CD, and point J is not on the reloading curve, will be shown
later (Fig. 11).

Computation of Cyclic Stress-Deformation Curve

As has been earlier mentioned, the present model is based on a given
stress-deformation envelope. Then, all focal points except Z6 may be located
independent of the unloading-reloading cycle being constructed. As a final
preparatory step, the location of focal point Z6 is calculated for the specific
cycle and, when it is located, the complete unloading-reloading curve may
be produced for that cycle. In fact, at this stage it becomes a simple graphical
process to draw the cycle and further calculations are not required. Similar
to the model proposed for cyclic compression (Yankelevsky and Reinhardt
1987a), that fact seems to be a pronounced advantage of the focal point
model.
When numerical calculations are performed with this model, the coordi-
nates (S,(T) of the key points for constructing the unloading-reloading curve
from a point (SA, o-A) on the envelope are obtained by simple geometry con-
siderations, as follows:

Point B

SB = * (7)
"A+/(
<TB = 0.0 (8)
in which S2 = the S-coordinate of focal point Z2.
Point C

= ew-c 2 -C3
c, - c2
o-c = Q ( 5 C - C.) (10)
in which
0.75/,
C.=---7- (H)
5 B - Si
174

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

 Q = (12)
5A-C3
3(/,' SA - a A S2)
C3 = (13)
3/, + o-A
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

S3 is the S coordinate of focal point Z3.

Point D
Dj D 3 - D 2 SB
S (14)
= Dl -D2
orD = D,(5 D - D3) (15)
in which

Dl = (16)
I ^
D 2 = ^ - . . (17)

ft

D3 = (18)
/ + c
cr6 is the stress coordinate of focal point Z6:
0.075/,Jj SB
<i6 = =- (19)
0.075-5 2 + 0 . 5 - 5 A - 5 B

Point E
/ 0.125/A 8S B 5S A
SE = SB 1 - + 0.1255 2 = (20)
\ 6 / 3 6
crE = -0.125/, (21)

Point F
4 5 E + 3 S2
5F = (22)

O-F = -0.5/ (23)

Point G
Sa = 0.8S F + 0.6S 2 (24)

<rG = - / (25)
Unloading from point A to any lower stress level will follow the curve A-
C-D-B-E-F-G until a compressive stress of /, is reached. For higher
175

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

 compression the unloading will follow a line parallel to 0Z2.
The reloading curve is not unique and it is dependent on the stress level
at which reloading starts. The rules for constructing the reloading curve for
any stress level are given in the preceding section and may be programmed
to cover all the possibilities. The model rules for unloading and reloading
have been programmed and the computed curves are compared with test
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

results in the following section.

COMPARISON WITH TEST RESULTS

Tests at Delft
The unloading-reloading curves obtained by the present model are com-
pared with the data of tensile cyclic tests which have been performed at the
Stevin Laboratory of Delft University of Technology (Cornelissen et al. 1985;
Moelands 1984; Reinhardt 1984). The stress in the post peak cycles was
cycled between the envelope and a lower bound level of stress, which was
dependent on the type of tests previously shown in Fig. 2.
The present work assumes that the envelope curve is given and focuses
on unloading from, and reloading to, this curve. To avoid accumulated error
due to the assumed envelope curve and the present model, the experimental
envelope for each test was used and the model rules were used' to predict
the unloading and reloading curves. Thus the prediction accuracy of the pres-
ent model may be clearly shown.

Type II Tests
In this series of tests, the lower bound level of stress is about 5% of the
tensile strength. The dotted line in Fig. 5 shows the complete experimental
loading history.

d [N/mm2]
3.5

- o - o - JEST DATA
FOCAL POINT HOIEL

100 140
6 l o l |10 mm]

FIG, s. Type SI Test Results and Model Prediction

176

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 6. Single Loop of Type II Test

A computer reproduction of a certain cycle, according to the focal point

model, requires the envelope equation and the lower bound level of stress
(or the corresponding displacement if a displacement history is applied).
Instead of using an envelope equation for each test, four data points have
been used: the stress and displacement coordinates of point A (Fig. 4), at

TEST D M A
FOCAL POINT MODEL

6,t [10 mm]

FIG. 7. Type III Test Results and Model Prediction

177

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

 d lN/mm 2

TEST DATA
FOCAL POINT MODEL
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

6 )ot [10" mm

FIG. 8. Type IV Test Results and Model Prediction

which unloading starts, the displacement at the point where reloading starts,
and the stress level at which the reloading curve meets with the envelope.
Fig. 5 shows the computed unloading-reloading curves during a complete
test compared with the experimental curves. At a low level of deformation,
the loops are close to each other and rather narrow. The comparison between
the measured and the predicted cycles shows good agreement.
Fig. 6 shows a single cycle including the key points according to Fig. 4.
Type III Tests
In this series of tests, the lower bound level of stress is a compressive
stress of about 15% of the tensile strength.

O [N/mm2]
1.4
loop 1

0.7

0
80
6 | o l [10"3 mm]
-0.7

-1.4

-2.1

IEST DATA
-2.8 roCAL POINT MODEL

-3.5

FIG. 9. Type IV Test: Comparison of Loop 1 Test Data with Model Prediction

178

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

 6 IN/mm 2
1.75
U loop Z
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

40 50
6, 0 l [10"3mm]

TEST DATA
FOCAL POINT MODEL

FIG. 10. Type IV Test: Comparison of Loop 2 Test Data with Model Prediction

Fig. 1 shows the complete experimental results of type III tests. Fig. 7
shows the cyclic curves over the low range deformation. It is seen that for
unloading at low total deformation the loops are narrow. The predicted curves
compare well with the measured data.

Type TV Tests
In this series of tests, the lower bound level of stress is a compressive
stress equal to the tensile strength.
The complete experimental loading history of a typical type IV test is
shown in Fig. 1. The softening at the low stress level is more pronounced

FIG. 11. Type IV Test: Comparison of Loop 3 Test Data with Model Prediction

179

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

 o [N/mm2]

focal point model

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

i
0
It h 10
^
20
^
30 40
--
50
3
60
6 tot [10" mm]

FIG. 12. Comparison of Test Data by Gopalaratnam and Shah (1985) with Model
Prediction

when unloading starts at a larger deformation. All the unloading curves con-
verge towards the stress axis with further unloading and overlap each other.
A somewhat closer examination of the predicted loops is possible in Fig. 8.
However, in these complex cycles it is better to isolate a single experimental
loop and compare it with the reproduced loop, according to the model laws.
Figs. 9-11 show the comparison for loops 1,2, and 3 (see Fig. 8).

Other Tests
Cyclic tensile tests have been reported by Gopalaratnam and Shah (1985)
for both concrete and mortar samples. Comparison of typical test results for
concrete with the present model predictions for the various cycles and good
agreement is obtained at low deformations as shown in Fig. 12. Agreement
is reasonable at larger deformations but is found to be worse at large de-
formations.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

A new one-dimensional stress-deformation model for concrete subjected

to cyclic tension is presented. The model uses a set of focal points to com-
pute the piecewise linear branches of the unloading and reloading curves in
the tensile stress domain and in the tension-compression domain. Given the
envelope curve and the point at which unloading starts, the complete un-
loading-reloading curve may be constructed with aid of a given set of rules.
The rules are general and may reproduce any cycle in which unloading
takes place to any level of a lower stress, either in tension or in compression.
The model is an extension of a recent work devoted to cyclic compression
and, although being more complex, has been found to compare well with a
variety of test results having different loading histories.
The present model enables a more realistic representation of the complex
behavior of concrete in tension and might be implemented in computer codes.
180

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

 This work complements the earlier work of the writers (1987a), and with
these two parts the uniaxial cyclic behavior of concrete, both in compression
and in tension, can be modeled. Linkage of the two parts requires care, since
the model for compression is expressed in terms of strains and the present
model is expressed in terms of displacements. The present formulation will
be used wherever a discrete crack approach is used, and it may be converted
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

to terms of strain when a smeared crack approach is followed.

APPENDIX I. REFERENCES

Bazant, Z. P., and Cedolin, L. (1979). "Blunt crack band propagation in finite ele-
ment analysis." J. Engrg. Mech., ASCE, 105(EM2) 297-315.
Bazant, Z. P., and Oh, B. H. (1983). "Crack band theory for fracture of concrete."
Rilem, Mat. and Struct., 16(94), 155-177.
Carpinteri, A., and Ingraffea, A. RR. (1984). Fracture mechanics of concrete. Mar-
tius Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague, Netherlands.
Cornelissen, H. A. W., Hordijk, D. A., andReinhardt, H. W. (1985). "Experiments
and theory for the application of fracture mechanics to normal and lightweight
concrete." Proc. Int. Conf. on Fracture Mechanics of Concrete. F. H. Wittman,
ed., Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Gopalaratnam, V. S., and Shah, S. P. (1985). "Softening response of plain concrete
in direct tension." ACI J., Proc, 82(3), 310-323.
Gustafsson, P. J. (1985). "Fracture mechanics studies of non yielding materials like
concrete." Report TVBM-1007, Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Lund Inst, of Tech., Swe-
den.
Gylltoft, K. (1983). "Fracture mechanics models for fatigue in concrete structures."
thesis presented to Div. of Struct. Engrg., University of Technology, at Lulea,
Sweden, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Phi-
losophy.
Hillerborg, A. (1983). "Analysis of one single crack." Fracture Mechanics of Con-
crete, F. H. Wittmann, ed., Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 223-249.
Hillerborg, A. (1985). "Numerical methods to simulate softening and fracture of
concrete." Fracture Mechanics of Concrete, G. C. Sih and A. DiTomasso, eds.,
Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague, Netherlands.
Hillerborg, A. (1980). "Analysis of fracture by means of the fictitious crack model
particularly for fiber reinforced concrete." Int. J. of Cement Composites, 2, 177-
184.
Lin, C. S., and Scordelis, A. (1975). "Nonlinear analysis of RC shells of general
forms." J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 101(ST3), 523-538.
Moelands, J. M. (1984). "Modelling of fatigue behavior of plain concrete under
alternating and repeated loading," Graduate Thesis, Delft University of Technol-
ogy, Delft, Netherlands, (in Dutch).
Petersson, P. E. (1981). "Crack growth and development of fracture zones in plain
concrete and similar materials." Report TVBM-1006, Lund Inst, of Tech. Sweden.
Reinhardt, H. W. (1985). "Plain concrete modeled as an elastic strain-softening ma-
terial at fracture." Eng. Fract. Mech., 22(5), 787-796.
Reihardt, H. W. (1984). "Fracture mechanics of an elastic softening material like
concrete." Heron, 29(2), 1-42.
Roelfstra, P. E., and Wittman, F. H. (1985). "Numerical method to link strain soft-
ening with failure of concrete." Rilem Int. Symp. on Fracture Mechanics of Con-
crete, Lausanne, Switzerland, 127-139.
Rots, J. G., Nauta, P., Kusters, G. M. A., andBlaauwendraad, J. (1985). "Smeared
crack approach and fracture localization in concrete." Heron, 30(1).
Rots, J. G. (1985). "Strain softening analysis of concrete fracture specimens." Proc.
Int. Conf. on Fracture Mechanics of Concrete. F. H. Wittmann, ed., Elsevier,
Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Shah, S. P., ed. (1984). "Application of fracture mechanics to cementitious com-
posites." NATO-ARW Northwestern Univ., Evanston, 111.

181

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182

 Sih, G. C , and DiTomasso, A., eds. (1985). Fracture mechanics of concrete: Struc-
tural application and numerical calculation. Martius Nijhoff Publishers, Dor-
drecht, Netherlands.
Terrien, M. (1980). "Emission acoustique et comportement mecanique post-critique
d'un beton sollicite en traction. Bulletin de Liaison Lab. Ponts et Chaussees, 105(1),
65-72.
Wittmann, F. H. (1985). Rilem Int. Symp. on Fracture Mechanics of Concrete, Lau-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Anna University Chennai on 12/06/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

sanne, Switzerland.
Wittmann, F. H., ed. (1983). Fracture mechanics of concrete. Elsevier, Amsterdam,
Netherlands.
Yankelevsky, D. Z., and Reinhardt, H. W. (1987a). "Model for cyclic compressive
behavior of concrete." / . Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 113(2), 228-240.
Yankelevsky, D. Z., and Reinhardt, H. W. (1987b). "Response of plain concrete to
cyclic tension." ACIMat. J., 84(5), 365-373.

APPENDIX II. NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper:

Q,c 2 ,c3 = parameters of stress and displacement;

DD2 ,D 3 = parameters of stress and displacement;
f, = tensile strength;
Gf = fracture energy;
Si = 5-coordinate for focal point i;
s = deformation (relative displacement);
z, = notation for focal point i;
a = stress;
0".- = stress level for focal point /; and
o-6 = stress level for focal point 6.

182

J. Struct. Eng., 1989, 115(1): 166-182