11 - Chapter 5 - Finite Element Analysis Using Ansys

201
CHAPTER 5
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS USING ANSYS
5.1 Introduction to Ansys
The Finite Element Method (FEM) is a numerical analysis for obtaining approximate
solutions to a wide variety of engineering problems. This has developed simultaneously with
the increasing use of high-speed electronic digital computers and with the growing emphasis
on numerical methods for engineering analysis. Although originally developed to study
stresses in complex airframe structures, it has been extended and applied to the broad field of
continuum mechanics. Because of its diversity and flexibility as analysis tool, it is receiving
much attention in engineering field and in industry. The basic concept behind FEM is that a
body or structure is divided into smaller elements of finite dimensions called finite
elements. The original structure is then considered as an assemblage of these elements at a
finite number of joints called nodes.
The properties of the elements are formulated and combined to obtain the solution for
the entire structure. The shape functions are chosen to approximate the variation of
displacement within an element in terms of displacement at the nodes of the element. The
strains and stresses within an element will also be expressed in terms of the nodal
displacement. The principle of virtual displacement is used to derive the equations of
equilibrium for the element and the nodal displacement will be the unknowns in the
equations.
The ANSYS computer program is a general purpose Finite Element Modeling
Package for numerically solving a variety of engineering problems. These problems include
static and dynamic structural analysis (both linear and non linear), steady state and transient
heat transfer problems, mode-frequency and buckling analyses, acoustic and electro magnetic
problems and various types of field and coupled-field applications. The program contains
many special features which allow nonlinearities or secondary effects to be included in the
solution such as plasticity, large strain, hyper elasticity, creep, swelling, large deflections,
contact, stress stiffening, temperature dependency, material anisotropy and radiation.
As ANSYS has been developed, other special capabilities, such as sub structuring,
submodeling, random vibration, kinetostatics, kinetodynamics, free convection fluid analysis,
acoustics, magnetics, piezoelectrics, coupled-field analysis and design optimization have
202
been added to the program. These capabilities contribute further to making ANSYS a multi-
purpose analysis tool for varied engineering applications.
5.2 Element Types
Selection of proper element types is an important criterion in Finite Element
Analysis. For beam-column joints the Concrete portion was modeled by using a special
element available in the package particularly for Concrete namely SOLID 65 element. The
reinforcement was modeled by using LINK 8 element. The details of both the elements used
in the analysis are explained below briefly.
5.2.1 Solid 65
SOLID 65 elements are used to model reinforced concrete members or reinforced
composite materials, such as fiber glass. This element has eight nodes, with each node having
three translational degrees of freedom in the nodal X, Y & Z directions as shown in Fig. 5.1.
The element may be used to analyze cracking in tension and crushing in compression. The
element itself is used to analyze problems with or without reinforced bars. Up to three rebar
specifications may be defined. The rebar facility can be removed by assigning the volume
ratio as zero.

Fig 5.1 SOLID 65 Element
5.2.2 Link 8
LINK 8 is a spar, which may be used in a variety of engineering applications.
Depending upon the applications, the element may be thought of as a truss element, a cable
element, a reinforcing bar and a bolt. The three-dimensional spar element is having two
nodes and each node having three translational degrees of freedom. This element is capable
203
of plasticity, creep, swelling and stress stiffening effects. The cross sectional area can be
given as the real constant. This element is shown in Fig 5.2.

Fig. 5.2 LINK 8 Element
5.2.3 SOLID 45
SOLID 45 is a three-dimensional brick element used to model isotropic solid
problems. It has eight nodes, with each node having three translational degrees of freedom in
the nodal X, Y & Z directions. This element may be used to analyze large deflection, large
strain, plasticity and creep problems. It has no real constants. This element is illustrated in
Fig 5.3

Fig 5.3 SOLID 45 Element
5.3 Non-Linear Material Model for Concrete
Material plays an important role in ANAYS modeling. Correct values of material
properties have to be given as input in ANSYS. Cube compressive strength and Yield
strength of reinforcing bars are found experimentally and these values are given as inputs.
The challenging task in modeling the Beam -Column joints is the development of the
behavior of concrete. Concrete is purely non-linear material and it has different behavior in
204
compression and tension. The tensile strength of concrete is typically 8% to 15% of the
compressive strength. Fig. 5.4 shows the typical stress-strain curve for normal weight
concrete. In compression, the stress-strain curve of concrete is linearly elastic up to about
30% of the maximum compressive strength. Above this point, the stress increases gradually
up to the maximum compressive strength, and then descends into a softening region, and
eventually crushing failure occurs at an ultimate strain
cu
. In tension, the stress-strain curve
for concrete is approximately linearly elastic up to the maximum tensile strength. After this
point, the concrete cracks and the strength decreases gradually to zero. ANSYS has its own
non-linear material model for concrete. Its reinforced concrete model consists of a material
model to predict the failure of brittle materials, applied to a three-dimensional solid element
in which reinforcing bars may be included. The material is capable of cracking in tension and
crushing in compression. It can also undergo plastic deformation and creep. Three different
uniaxial materials, capable of tension and compression only, may be used as a smeared
reinforcement, each one in any direction. Plastic behavior and creep can be considered in the
reinforcing bars too. For plain cement concrete model, the reinforcing bars can be removed.

Fig 5.4 Stress Strain Curve for Concrete
5.4 Finite Element Modeling of Beam Column Joints
Modeling is one of the important features in Finite Element Analysis. It takes around
40% to 60% of the total solution time. Improper modeling of the structures leads to the
unexpected errors in the solution. Hence, proper care should be taken for modeling the
structures. A good idealization of the geometry reduces the running time of the solution
considerably. In many situations, a three dimensional structure can easily be analyzed by
considering it as a two dimensional structure without any loss of accuracy. Creative thinking
205
in idealizing and meshing of the structure helps not only in reducing considerable amount of
time but also in reducing the memory requirement of the system. Finite Element modeling of
beam-column joints in ANSYS consist of three stages, which are listed below.
Selection of element type
Assigning material properties
Modeling and meshing the geometry
After going through literature and after several initial trials, the elements for modeling
various materials were finalized and the details of elements used are shown in Table 5.1
Table 5.1 Details of Element
S.No Material ANSYS Element
1 Concrete Solid 65
2. Steel Link 8
3. FRP Sheet Solid 45

The typical views of the reinforcements detailed as per code IS 456:2000 and IS 13920:1993
generated by the Ansys program are shown in Fig. 5.5 and Fig. 5.6 respectively. Typical
views of the control and retrofitted beam column joints generated by the Ansys program are
shown in Fig. 5.7 and Fig. 5.8 respectively.

Fig 5.5 Typical View of Reinforcement Detail as per Code IS 456:2000
206

Fig 5.6 Typical View of Reinforcement Detail as per Code IS 13920:1993

Fig 5.7 Typical View of Model of a Control Beam-Column Joint

207

Fig 5.8 Typical View of Model of a Retrofitted Beam-Column Joint
5.5 Stress-Strain Relationship for Concrete

As per the Ansys concrete model, two shear transfer coefficients, one for open cracks
and other for closed ones, are used to consider the amount of shear transferred from one end
of the crack to other. Following are the input data required to create the material model for
concrete in Ansys.
Elastic Modulus, (E
c
)
Poissons Ratio, ()
Ultimate Uniaxial compressive strength, (f
c
)
Ultimate Uniaxial tensile strength, (f
t
)
Shear transfer coefficient for opened crack, (
0
)
Shear transfer coefficient for closed crack, (
c
)
The equations are used to estimate the values of E
c
and f
t
as follows,
E
c
= 5000 f
c

f
t
= 0.7

f
c

Where, E
c
, f
c
and f
t
are in MPa.
208
Poissons ratio for concrete is assumed to be 0.2 for all the specimens. Damien Kachlakev
et.al. conducted numerous investigations on full-scale beams and the value of the shear
transfer coefficient for opened crack was found to be 0.2 and for closed crack the value was
found to be 1. Even though the above parameters are adequate for the non-linear modeling of
concrete, it is better to give the value of stress and strain in the form of stress-strain curve for
achieving better accuracy in results. A typical stress-strain curve for concrete is shown in Fig.
5.9

Fig 5.9 Simplified Compressive Uniaxial Stress-Strain Curve for Concrete
The stress-strain curve for concrete can be constructed by using the Desayi and Krishnan
equations. Multi-linear kinematic behavior is assumed for the stress-strain relationship of
concrete. It is assumed that the curve is linear up to 0.3 f
c
. Therefore, the elastic stress-strain
relation is enough for finding out the strain value.

1
= f
c
1
/ E
c
= (0.3 f
c
)/ E
c

The Ultimate strain can be found out from the following formula.

0
=

2 f
c
/ E
c

The total strain in the non-linear region is calculated and corresponding stresses for
the strains are found out by using the following formula.

f
c(2 , 3 & 4)
= (E
c
)/(1+ ( /
0
)
2
)
The above input values are given as material properties for concrete to define the non-
linearity.
5.6 Non-Linear Modeling of Steel
Steel reinforcement in the experimental programme consisted of Fe 415 bars.
Properties like youngs modulus and yield stress, for the steel reinforcement used in this
209
FEM study are found out by conducting the required tests on the sample specimens. The steel
for the finite element models is assumed to be an elastic-perfectly plastic material and
identical in tension and compression. Poissons ratio of 0.3 is used for the steel reinforcement
in this study. Fig. 5.10 shows the stress-strain relationship used in the modeling.

Fig 5.10 Stress - Strain Curve for Steel
5.7 Finite Element Discretization
The first step in finite element analysis after the creation of the model is meshing. In
other words, the model is divided into a number of finite elements. After the application of
loads, stresses and strains are calculated at integration points of these small elements. An
important step in finite element modeling is the selection of the mesh density. A convergence
of results is obtained when an adequate number of elements are used in a model. The
accuracy of the results is directly proportional to the number of elements chosen. However, if
the number of elements goes beyond a limit, the running time to get a solution becomes more
and Convergence problems may also arise. Thus there exist an optimum number of elements
using which one can get reliable and accurate results.
5.8 Application of Loads and Boundary Condition
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. Both the column ends were provided with hinged boundary conditions. At one of the
column ends, a constant load was applied. A transverse load was applied at the free end of
210
the beam. The load applied for model detailed as per code IS 456:2000, which is taken from
experimental investigation for a controlled deflection. Same load was applied in the model
detailed as per code 13920:1993. The material properties for reinforcement concrete are
given in Table 5.2
Table.5.2 Material Properties of Reinforced Concrete
ELEMENT TYPE MATERIAL PROPERTY
Solid 65 Modulus of elasticity 2.5 x 10
10
N/m
2

Passion ratio 0.23
Density 25000 N/m
3

Link 8 Modulus of elasticity 2.1 x 10
11
N/m
2

Passion ratio 0.3
Density 78500N/m
3

During the present study twelve exterior reinforced concrete beam-column joint
specimens were modeled using Ansys software. Out of these twelve models, one had
reinforcement details as per code IS 456:2000 and another had reinforcement details as per
code IS 13920:1993. Third model had reinforcement details as per code IS 456:2000 and was
retrofitted with GFRP sheets. Fourth model had reinforcement details as per code IS
456:2000 and was retrofitted with AFRP sheets. Fifth model had reinforcement details as per
code IS 456:2000 and was retrofitted with CFRP sheets. Sixth model had reinforcement
details as per code IS 456:2000 and was retrofitted with sisal fiber sheets. Seventh model had
reinforcement details as per code IS 456:2000 and was retrofitted with glass-carbon hybrid
fiber reinforced polymer sheets. Eighth model had reinforcement details as per code IS
456:2000 and was retrofitted with carbon-glass hybrid fiber reinforced polymer sheets. Ninth
model had reinforcement details as per code IS 456:2000 and was retrofitted with glass-
aramid hybrid fiber reinforced polymer sheets. Tenth model had reinforcement details as per
code IS 456:2000 and was retrofitted with aramid-glass hybrid fiber reinforced polymer
sheets. Eleventh model had reinforcement details as per code IS 456:2000 and was retrofitted
with carbon-aramid hybrid fiber reinforced polymer sheets. Twelveth model had
reinforcement details as per code IS 456:2000 and was retrofitted with aramid-carbon hybrid
fiber reinforced polymer sheets. Both the ends of column were hinged during the analysis.
Static load was applied at the free end of the cantilever beam. The load was increased in steps
up to a controlled load. Nonlinear analysis was carried out for beam-column specimens. The
211
performance of the retrofitted beam-column joints predicted by the Ansys model was
compared with the experimental results and the details are presented in this chapter.
5.9 Results and Discussion
5.9.1 Ansys Modelling of Beam-Column Joint Specimen Retrofitted with GFRP Sheets
A typical out put of the Ansys modeling for the beam-column joint specimen (BCJ 2)
detailed as per code IS 456:2000 is shown in Fig 5.11. The output of the Ansys modeling for
the beam-column joint specimen (BCJ 5) detailed as per code IS 13920:1993 for a given load
is shown in Fig 5.12. The out put of the Ansys modeling of the beam-column joint specimen
(BCJ 8) detailed as per code IS 456:2000 and was retrofitted with GFRP sheets for the same
given load is shown in Fig 5.13.

Fig.5.11 Ansys Model for the Beam-Column Joint Specimen BCJ 2

212

The results of the Ansys analysis are compared with that of the experimental investigation.
The percentage error between experimental results and Ansys results for the M 20 concrete
control and retrofitted (GFRP) beam-column joint specimens are given in Table 5.3
Table 5.3 Percentage Error between Experimental Results and Ansys Results for M 20
Concrete Beam-Column Joint Specimens Retrofitted with GFRP Sheets
Specimen
ID
Code
as per
Retrofitted
by
Deflection as per
experiment in mm
Def. as per
Ansys in mm
% error in
result
BCJ 2 456 NIL 45 42 6.67
BCJ 5 13920 NIL 35 32 8.57
BCJ 8 456 GFRP 13 15 1.33

From Table 5.3, it is seen that the variations between the Ansys results and
experimental results were found to be less than 10 %. Fig. 5.14 shows the load deflection
curve of the beam-column joint specimens BCJ2, BCJ 5 and BCJ 8.

Fig.5.14 Load-Deflection Curve for the Beam-Column
Joint Specimens BCJ 2, BCJ 5 and BCJ 8
213
From Fig 5.14, it is seen that the deflection of the specimen detailed as per code IS
456:2000 is found to be maximum for a given load. The deflection of the beam-column joint
specimen detailed as per code IS 13920:1993 is less than that of the specimen detailed as per
code IS 456:2000. The deflection of the beam-column joint specimen retrofitted with GFRP
sheets is the least for a given load.
A typical out put of the Ansys modeling for the beam-column joint specimen (BCJ
38) detailed as per code IS 456:2000 is shown in Fig 5.15. The out put of the Ansys modeling
of the beam-column joint specimen (BCJ 41) detailed as per code IS 13920:1993 is shown in
Fig 5.16. The out put of the Ansys modeling of the beam-column joint specimen (BCJ 44)
detailed as per code IS 456:2000 and was retrofitted with GFRP sheets is shown in Fig 5.17.


214

Specimen
ID
Code
as per
Retrofitted
by
Deflection as per
experiment in mm
Def. as per
Ansys in mm
% error in
result
BCJ 38 456 NIL 61 56 8.20
BCJ 41 13920 NIL 49 45 8.16
BCJ 44 456 GFRP 30 32 6.25

From Table 5.4, it is seen that the variations between the Ansys results and experimental
results were found to be less than 10 %. Fig. 5.18 shows the load deflection curve of the
beam-column joint specimens BCJ 38, BCJ 41 and BCJ 44.

Fig.5.18 Load-Deflection Curve for the Beam-Column
Joint Specimens BCJ 38 , BCJ 41 and BCJ 44
215
A typical ut put for the Ansys modeling of the beam-column joint specimen (BCJ 74)
detailed as per code IS 456:2000 is shown in Fig 5.19. The out put of the Ansys modeling of
the beam-column joint specimen (BCJ 77) detailed as per code IS 13920:1993 is shown in
Fig 5.20. The out put of the Ansys modeling of the beam-column joint specimen (BCJ 80)
detailed as per code IS 456:2000 and was retrofitted with GFRP sheets is shown in Fig 5.21.


216

Specimen
ID
Code
as per
Retrofitted
by
Deflection as per
experiment in mm
Def. as per
Ansys in mm
% error in
result
BCJ 74 456 NIL 75 70 6.67
BCJ 77 13920 NIL 60 62 3.23
BCJ 80 456 GFRP 52 56 7.15

From Table 5.5 it can be seen that the percentage error is less than 10%. Hence the results of
the Ansys modeling can be used to understand the performance of beam-column joint
specimens made with other grades also which are retrofitted with glass fiber polymer sheets.
Fig. 5.22 shows the load deflection curve of the beam-column joint specimens BCJ 74 , BCJ
77 and BCJ 80.

Fig. 5.22 Load-Deflection Curve for M 30 Concrete Specimens Retrofitted with GFRP
217
Fig.5.23 show a typical view of analyzed M 35 concrete beam-column joint specimen
detailed as per code IS 456:2000. Fig.5.23 show a typical view of analyzed M 35 concrete
beam-column joint specimen detailed as per code IS 13920:1993. Fig.5.24 show a typical
view of analyzed M 35 concrete beam-column joint specimen detailed as per code IS
456:2000 retrofitted with glass fiber reinforced polymer sheets.

Fig.5.23 Ansys Model for M 35 Concrete Beam-Column Joint Specimen
Reinforcement Detailing as per IS 456 : 2000

Reinforcement Detailing as per IS 13920 :1993
218

Retrofitted with GFRP Sheets

Fig.5.26 shows the load deflection curve of the M 35 concrete beam-column joint specimens
retrofitted with GFRP sheets.


219



220

retrofitted with GFRP sheets.


Fig.5.31 Ansys Model for the M 45 Concrete Beam-Column Joint Specimen
221



Fig.5.34 show the load deflection curve of the M 45 concrete beam-column joint specimens
retrofitted with GFRP sheets

Fig.5.34 Load-Deflection Curve for M 45 Concrete Specimens Retrofitted with GFRP
222
beam-column joint specimen detailed as per code IS 13920:1993. Fig.5.37 show a the typical

Reinforcement Detailing as per IS 456: 2000

223


retrofitted with GFRP sheets

Fig.5.38 Load-Deflection Curve for M 50 Concrete Specimens Retrofitted with GFRP
5.9.2 Ansys Modelling of Beam-Column Joint Specimen Retrofitted with AFRP Sheets
A typical out put the Ansys modeling for the M 20 concrete beam-column joint
specimen (BCJ 11) detailed as per code IS 456:2000 and was retrofitted with AFRP sheets is
shown in Fig 5.39.
224

Fig.5.39 Ansys Model for M 20 Concrete Beam-Column Joint
Specimen Retrofitted with AFRP Sheet
beam-column joint specimens retrofitted with AFRP sheets are given in Table 5.6
Concrete Beam-Column Joint Specimens Retrofitted with AFRP Sheets
Specimen
ID
Code
as per
Retrofitted
by
Deflection as per
experiment in mm
Def. as per
Ansys in mm
% error in
result
BCJ 2 456 NIL 45 42 6.67
BCJ 5 13920 NIL 35 32 8.57
BCJ 11 456 AFRP 12 13 7.69

results were found to be with in 10 %.The load-deflection curve for the M 20 concrete beam-
column joint specimen retrofitted with AFRP sheets is shown in Fig.5.40

Fig 5.40 Load Deflection Curve for M 20 Concrete Beam-Column Joint
Specimen Retrofitted with AFRP Sheets.
225
code IS 456:2000. The deflection of the beam-column joint specimen retrofitted with AFRP
A typical out put of the Ansys modeling of the M 25 concrete beam-column joint
shown in Fig 5.41.

Specimen
ID
Code
as per
Retrofitted
by
Deflection as per
experiment in mm
Def. as per
Ansys in mm
% error in
result
BCJ 38 456 NIL 61 56 8.20
BCJ 41 13920 NIL 49 45 8.16
BCJ 47 456 AFRP 26 24 7.70

results were found to be less than 10 %.The load-deflection curve for the M 25 concrete
beam-column joint specimen retrofitted with AFRP sheets is shown in Fig.5.42
226

Fig.5.42 Load-Deflection Curve for M 25 Concrete Specimens
Retrofitted with AFRP Sheets

shown in Fig 5.43

Fig.5.43 Ansys Modeling for M 30 Concrete Beam-Column Joint
227
Specimen
ID
Code
as per
Retrofitted
by
Deflection as per
experiment in mm
Def. as per
Ansys in mm
% error in
result
BCJ 74 456 NIL 75 70 6.67
BCJ 77 13920 NIL 60 62 3.23
BCJ 83 456 AFRP 52 55 5.45

From the Table 5.8 it can be seen that the percentage error is less than 10%. The load-
deflection curve for the M 30 concrete beam-column joint specimen retrofitted with AFRP
sheets is shown in Fig.5.44

Fig.5.45 show a typical view of analyzed M 35 concrete beam-column joint
specimen detailing as per code IS 456:2000 retrofitted with aramid fiber reinforced polymer
sheets.
228


retrofitted with AFRP sheets

Fig.5.46 Load-Deflection Curve for M 35 Concrete Beam-Column Joint
Specimens Retrofitted with AFRP Sheets


229
detailing as per code IS 456:2000 retrofitted with aramid fiber reinforced polymer sheets.

Fig.5.47 Ansys Model of M 40 Concrete Beam-Column Joint


230



231



232
5.9.3 Ansys Modelling of Beam-Column Joint Specimen Retrofitted with CFRP Sheets
specimen (BCJ 14) detailed as per code IS 456:2000 and was retrofitted with CFRP sheets is
shown in Fig 5.53.

Specimen Retrofitted with CFRP Sheet
The results of the Ansys analysis arre compared with that of the experimental
investigation. The percentage error between experimental results and Ansys results for the M
20 concrete beam-column joint specimens retrofitted with CFRP sheets are given in Table
5.9
Table 5.9 Percentage Error between Experimental Results and
Ansys Results for M 20 Concrete Beam-Column Joint Specimens
Specimen
ID
Code
as per
Retrofitted
by
Deflection as per
experiment in mm
Def. as per
Ansys in mm
% error in
result
BCJ 2 456 NIL 45 42 6.67
BCJ 5 13920 NIL 35 32 8.57
BCJ 14 456 CFRP 11 10 9.10

From Table 5.9, it is seen that the variations between the Ansys results and
experimental results were found to be less than 10 %.The load-deflection curve for the M 20
concrete beam-column joint specimen retrofitted with CFRP sheets is shown in Fig.5.54
233

Fig 5.54 Load Deflection Curve M 20 Concrete Beam-Column Joint
Specimen Retrofitted with CFRP Sheets.
shown in Fig 5.55.

234
The results of the Ansys analysis arre compared with that of the experimental investigation.
beam-column joint specimens retrofitted with CFRP sheets are given in Table 5.10
Concrete Beam-Column Joint Specimens Retrofitted with CFRP Sheetts
Specimen
ID
Code
as per
Retrofitted
by
Deflection as per
experiment in mm
Def. as per
Ansys in mm
% error in
result
BCJ 38 456 NIL 61 56 8.20
BCJ 41 13920 NIL 49 45 8.16
BCJ 50 456 CFRP 22 20 8.69

results were found to be less than 10 %.The load-deflection curve for the M 25 concrete
beam-column joint specimen retrofitted with CFRP sheets is shown in Fig.5.56


235
shown in Fig 5.57.

The results of the Ansys analysis arre compared with that of the experimental investigation.
beam-column joint specimens retrofitted with CFRP sheets are given in Table 5.11
Concrete Beam-Column Joint Specimens Retrofitted with CFRP Sheets
Specimen
ID
Code
as per
Retrofitted
by
Deflection as per
experiment in mm
Def. as per
Ansys in mm
% error in
result
BCJ 74 456 NIL 75 70 6.67
BCJ 77 13920 NIL 62 60 3.23
BCJ 86 456 CFRP 42 39 7.14

From the Table 5.11 it can be seen that the percentage error is less than 10%. Hence
the results of the Ansys modeling can be used to understand the performance of beam-
column joint specimens made with other grades also which are retrofitted with carbon fiber
reinforced polymer sheets.The load-deflection curve for the M 30 concrete beam-column
joint specimen retrofitted with CFRP sheets is shown in Fig.5.58
236


detailing as per code IS 456:2000 retrofitted with carbon fiber reinforced polymer sheets.

237
Fig.5.60 shows the load deflection curve of the M 35 concrete beam-column joint
specimens retrofitted with CFRP sheets

Specimens Retrofitted with CFRP Sheets


238




239




240


5.9.4 Effect of Grade of Concrete on Load Carrying Capacity of Beam-Column Joint
Specimens

The effect of grade of comcrete on the load carrying capacity of beam-column joint
specimen has been investigated experimentally and using Ansys software. Experimental
investigation was carried out on nine beam-column joint specimens. Three specimens made
of grade M20, M25and M30 retrofitted with glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) sheets
were tested. The other three specimens made of concrete of grade M20, M25and M30
retrofitted with aramid fiber reinforced polymer (AFRP) sheets. The remaining speciemens
made of concrete of grade M20, M25 and M30 retrofitted with carbon fiber reinforced
polymer (CFRP) sheets.The experimental results were compared with that Ansys results and
the variation in load carrying capacity predicted by Ansys model was found to be 1% to 9%.
241
Hence it is sassumed that the results of the Ansys analysis are reliable. Ansys model was
used to estimate the load carrying capacity of beam-column joint specimens for the concrete
greade of M35, M40, M45 and M50.
The results of the Ansys model and the experimental investigation for the beam-
column joint specimens retrofitted with GFRP sheets are shown in Fig 5.67

Fig 5.67 Load Carrying Capacity Vs Grade of Concrete for
Beam-Column Joint Specimens Retrofitted with GFRP Sheets

From Fig.5.67 it is found that the load carrying capacity of beam-column joint
specimens retrofitted with glass fiber reinforced polymer sheets increases nonlinearly with
respect the grade of concrete. The load carrying capacity of the beam-column joint specimens
retrofitted with GFRP sheets can be estimated using the equation y = -0.0011x
3
+0.1248x
2
-
3.8193x +57.214 were x is the grade of concrete.
column joint specimens retrofitted with AFRP sheets are shown in Fig 5.68
242

Beam-Column Joint Specimens Retrofitted with AFRP Sheets

specimens retrofitted with aramid fiber reinforced polymer sheets increases nonlinearly with
retrofitted with AFRP sheets can be estimated using the equation y = 0.0002x
3
-
0.0166x
2
+0.845x +14.336 were x is the grade of concrete.
column joint specimens retrofitted with CFRP sheets are shown in Fig 5.69

Beam-Column Joint Specimens Retrofitted with CFRP Sheets
243

specimens retrofitted with carbon fiber reinforced polymer sheets increases nonlinearly with
retrofitted with CFRP sheets can be estimated using the equation y = -0.0004x
3
- 0.0538x
2
-
1.5341x + 41.69 were x is the grade of concrete.
The deflection at the free end of the beam-column joint when the applied load was 30
kN were found for various grades of concrete and for various types of wrapping sheets. The
variations of deflection with respect to the grade of concrete are shown in Fig.5.70

Fig.5.70 Deflection Vs Grade of Concrete for
Beam-Column Joint Specimens Retrofitted with FRP Sheets

From the Fig.5.70, it is seen that the deflection at the free end of the beam-column
joints were found to decrease as the grade of concrete increase. It also seen that the changes
in the value of deflection tent to reduce beyond M35 concrete. This shows that grade superior
than M35 may not be required for beam-column joint.
It is also seen that GFRP resulted in maximum deflection where as CFRP gives least
deflection. The percentage reduction in deflection values ranges between 7 % to 47 % when
AFRP sheets are used instead of GFRP sheets. The percentage reduction in deflection values
ranges between 27 % to 75 % when GFRP sheets are replaced with CFRP sheets.

11 - Chapter 5 - Finite Element Analysis Using Ansys

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

11 - Chapter 5 - Finite Element Analysis Using Ansys

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

201

Potrebbero piacerti anche