v1.01.370 PLEXU10 - Validation of slippery and rubbing cables in CALC_EUROPLEXUS

Summary:

Mechanisms for modeling slippery and rubbing cables have been added in EUROPLEXUS.

This series of tests validates the call of CALC_EUROPLEXUS to these functionalities with prestress calculated in Code_Aster or not, but also contributes directly to their validations in EUROPLEXUS.

Sliding cables:

The modeling of sliding cables is done only by a link (LCAB GLIS). This link, inspired by Code_Aster load RELA_CINE_BP, calculates the kinematic relationships between concrete and cable by leaving free the movement of each cable node in the direction tangent to the cable path. In order to take into account major deformations and major landslides, this connection is updated at each time step.

Rubbing cables:

The modeling of the friction cables is done using the same connection as for the sliding cables. Specific discrete elements are used to model friction. Connections must also be made on the nodes of discrete elements that are not common with cable elements. This link is activated by the LCAB FROT syntax.

Modeling A: Validation of the call to the link EPX LCAB GLIS (reproduction of the bm_str_lcab_glis test).

Modeling B: Validation of the correct consideration of an initial state of prestress with the connection LCAB GLIS.

C modeling: Tensioning a sliding cable in EPX (Code_Aster reference).

D modeling: Validation of the call to the link EPX LCAB FROT, (reproduction of the bm_str_lcab_frot_amor test). This test contributes to the validation of LCAB FROT in EPX, it provides a reference value for tightening a friction cable with anchor recoil.

E modeling: Reproduction of the bm_str_lcab_frot test

F modeling: Validation of Code_Aster/ EPX chaining with friction cables.

• 1. Description
  • 1.1. Geometry, mesh, and model
  • 1.2. Material properties
• 2. Modeling A
  • 2.1. Boundary conditions and loads
  • 2.2. Details
  • 2.3. Tested sizes and results
• 3. B modeling
  • 3.1. Boundary conditions and loads
  • 3.2. Details
  • 3.3. Tested sizes and results
• 4. C modeling
  • 4.1. Boundary conditions and loads
  • 4.2. Details
  • 4.3. Tested sizes and results
• 5. D modeling
  • 5.1. Friction material
  • 5.2. Boundary conditions and loads
  • 5.3. Comparison of voltage profiles
  • 5.4. Tested sizes and results
• 6. E modeling
  • 6.1. Friction material
  • 6.2. Tested sizes and results
• 7. F modeling
  • 7.1. Boundary conditions and loads
  • 7.2. Details
  • 7.3. Tested sizes and results
• 8. Synthesis