Buy article PDF
The purchased file will be sent to you
via email after the payment is completed.
US$ 35
|
Computers and Concrete Volume 34, Number 1, July 2024 , pages 1-14 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12989/cac.2024.34.1.001 |
|
|
|
SPMTool: A computer application for analysis of reinforced concrete structures by the Stringer-Panel Method - Validation of nonlinear models |
||
André Felipe Aparecido de Mello, Leandro Mouta Trautwein, Luiz Carlos de Almeida and Rafael Alves de Souza
|
||
| Abstract | ||
| The design of disturbed regions in reinforced concrete structures usually applies the well known Strut and Tie Method (STM). As an alternative, the Stringer-Panel Method (SPM), an intermediate model between STM and the Finite Element Method (FEM), consists in dividing a structure into two distinct elements: the stringers (which carry axial forces) and panels (which carry shear forces). SPM has already showed good applicability in manual calculations and computer implementations, and its most known application was SPanCAD, an AutoCAD plugin for linear and nonlinear analysis by SPM. Unfortunately, SPanCAD was discontinued by the developers, and it's not compatible with the most recent versions of AutoCAD. So, this paper aims to present a computer program that was developed as an upgrade to the latter: the Stringer Panel Modelling Tool (SPMTool), which is intended to be an auxiliary design tool and it presents improvements, in comparison to SPanCAD. It is possible to execute linear and nonlinear analysis by three distinct formulations: Modified Compression Field Theory (MCFT), Disturbed Stress Field Model (DSFM) and Softened Membrane Model (SMM). The nonlinear results were compared to experimental data of reinforced concrete elements that were not designed by SPM; these elements were also analyzed in SPanCAD. On overall, SPMTool made more realistic predictions to the behavior of the analyzed structures than SPanCAD. Except for DSFM predictions for corbels (1.24), in overall average, the ultimate load predictions were conservative (0.85 to 0.98), which is a good aspect for a design tool. On the other hand, the cracking load predictions presented overestimations (1.06 to 1.47) and higher variations (25.59% to 34.25%) and the post-cracking behavior could not be accurately predicted; for this use case, a more robust finite element software is recommended. | ||
| Key Words | ||
| disturbed regions; nonlinear analysis; reinforced concrete; Stringer-Panel Method | ||
| Address | ||
| André Felipe Aparecido de Mello: Engineering Faculty, Universidade Federal da Grande Dourados, Dourados/MS, Brazil Leandro Mouta Trautwein and Luiz Carlos de Almeida: Civil Engineering, Architecture and Urbanism Faculty, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas/SP, Brazi Rafael Alves de Souza: Civil Engineering Department, Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá/PR, Brazil | ||