The microplane material model for concrete, formulated mathematically in the companion paper, is calibrated by material test data from all the typical laboratory tests taken from the literature. Then, the model is verified by finiteelement simulations of data for some characteristic tests with highly nonuniform strain fields. The scaling properties of model M7 are determined. With the volumetric stress effect taken from the previous load step, the M7 numerical algorithm is explicit, delivering ...
+
The microplane material model for concrete, formulated mathematically in the companion paper, is calibrated by material test data from all the typical laboratory tests taken from the literature. Then, the model is verified by finiteelement simulations of data for some characteristic tests with highly nonuniform strain fields. The scaling properties of model M7 are determined. With the volumetric stress effect taken from the previous load step, the M7 numerical algorithm is explicit, delivering in each load step the stress tensor from the strain tensor with no iterative loop. This makes the model robust and suitable for largescale finiteelement computations. There are five free, easily adjustable material parameters, which make it possible to match the given compressive strength, the corresponding strain, the given hydrostatic compression curve, and certain triaxial aspects. In addition, there are many fixed, hardtoadjust parameters, which can be taken to be the same for all concretes. The optimum values of material parameters are determined by fitting a particularly broad range of test results, including the important tests of compressiontension load cycles, mixedmode fracture, tensionshear failure of doubleedgenotched specimens, and vertex effect when axial compression is followed by torsion. Because of the lack of information on the material characteristic length or fracture energy, which can be obtained only by size effect tests on the same concrete, and on the precise boundary conditions and precise gauge locations, the finiteelement fitting of the present test data can hardly be expected to give better results than singlepoint simulations of specimens with approximately homogeneous strain states within the gauge length. Nevertheless, tensile test data with severe localization are delocalized on the basis of assumed material length. Model M7 is shown to fit a considerably broader range of test data than the preceding models M1 M6. © 2013 American Society of Civil Engineers.
The microplane material model for concrete, formulated mathematically in the preceding Part I, is here calibrated by material test data from all the typical laboratory tests taken from the literature. Then the model is verified by finite elements simulations of data for some characteristic tests with highly nonuniform strain fields. The scaling properties of model M7 are determined. With the volumetric stress effect taken from the previous load step, the M7 numerical algorithm is explicit, delivering in each load step the stress tensor from the strain tensor, with no iterative loop. This makes the model robust and suitable for largescale finite element computations. There are 5 free, easily adjustable material parameters, which make it possible to match the given compressive strength, the corresponding strain, the given hydrostatic compression curve, and certain triaxial aspects. Besides, there are many fixed, hardtoadjust, parameters, which can be taken the same for all concretes. The optimum values of material parameters are determined by fitting a particularly broad range of test results, including the important tests of compressiontension load cycles, mixedmode fracture, tensionshear failure of doubleedgenotched specimens, and vertex effect when axial compression is followed by torsion. Because of the lack of information on the material characteristic length or fracture energy, which can be obtained only by size effect tests on the same concrete, and on the precise boundary conditions and precise gauge locations, the finite element fitting of the present test data can hardly be expected to give better results than singlepoint simulations of specimens with approximately homogeneous strain states within the gauge length. Nevertheless, tensile test data with severe localization are delocalized on the basis of assumed material length. Model M7 is shown to fit a considerably broader range of test data than the preceding models M1–M6.
