Abstract

AbstractIn a recent paper in Structural Concrete, the authors Dönmez and Bažant explain that the theoretical background of the Model Code 2010 equations for one way and punching shear are not sufficiently grounded in theory and should instead use an energy‐based size effect law in their formulation to match behavior. To support this claim, finite element simulations were presented. In this paper the basic assumption that an energy‐based method must govern the shear failure of beams without stirrups is questioned. These questions are shown to be based on the hardening behavior of aggregate interlock tests and the inability for slip strains to localize during shear failure. In addition to these theoretical arguments finite element analyses were conducted with a constitutive model that is energy‐based but that also does an appropriate job at modeling aggregate interlock, an aspect that appears to be lacking in the analyses of Dönmez and Bažant. These new results are shown to better model the test results and confirm that aggregate interlock is important in explaining shear strength and therefore the size effect in shear for slender members. As such any concerns about the safety of the Model Code shear equations appear unwarranted.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.