4.7 Article

Simplified modeling of cracking in concrete: Application in tunnel linings

Journal

ENGINEERING STRUCTURES
Volume 70, Issue -, Pages 23-35

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.03.031

Keywords

Tunnel lining; Lumped damage mechanics; Concrete like materials; Crack opening displacement; Circular finite element

Funding

  1. CAPES (Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior), Brazil
  2. FAPESP (Fundagacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo), Brazil [2012/02370-7]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper presents a formulation for the analysis of the inelastic behavior of pipes, tunnels and rings. This new framework is based on lumped damage mechanics and emphasizes on the mathematical description of concrete cracking; the approach can be extended to other brittle materials as well. Lumped damage mechanics combines the concept of plastic hinge with the ideas and procedures of fracture and continuum damage mechanics. The resulting models allow for the characterization of the damage state of the structure, it is even possible to quantify the crack opening displacements in a simplified way. Experimental and fracture mechanics results were used to validate the proposed method. The structural analyses can be carried out using very few elements (less than a dozen in most cases) while the conventional approaches require tens of thousands of them. Thus, even if the models can be implemented in conventional finite element programs, the computations can also be carried out with symbolic manipulators, general numerical analysis programs (Maple, Matlab, Mathematica, Mathcad, and so on) or even spread-sheet applications. This simplified approach can be used for design purposes, validation of finite element analysis or structural reliability assessment where thousands of analyses of a same structure are needed. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available