18. Summary of results

These tests, which aim to validate model GLRC_DM and model DHRC, are also used to show a number of these weaknesses. In summary, the roles of tests are as follows:

A:Test only the traction/compression behavior under the condition of uniformity (almost \(\mathrm{1D}\)). Membrane parameters are identified.

B:Test only the cyclic flexure behavior under the condition of uniformity (almost \(\mathrm{1D}\)). The flexure parameters are identified.

C:Test the behavior combining membrane and flexure phenomena under the condition of uniformity (almost \(\mathrm{1D}\)).

D:Test behavior for shear and in-plane distortion

E:Test the flexure and shear coupling in the plane.

F:Test the tensile behavior — pure compression — with « kit_dll » of damagable elastoplastic behavior (GLRC_DM + Von Mises).

G:Test the tensile behavior — pure compression — with « kit_ddl » of damaging elastoplastic behavior (GLRC_DM + Von Mises).

H:Test the behavior in traction-compression with significant stresses to evaluate GLRC_DM and DHRC

I:Test the behavior in alternating flexure with significant stresses to evaluate GLRC_DM and DHRC

J:Test the behavior in traction-flexure alternating with significant stresses to assess the behavior under coupled stresses of GLRC_DMet DHRC

K: Test compression - traction behavior with ALPHA_C =100 for GLRC_DM

L: Test the behavior in pure shear and in-plane distortion with high stresses to evaluate GLRC_DM and DHRC

M: Test the behavior in coupling, flexure and shear in the plane with high stresses to evaluate GLRC_DM and DHRC

N: Test anticlastic flexure behavior with high stresses to evaluate GLRC_DMet DHRC.

O:Test a thermomechanical expansion loading.

In most situations of models A to E, the movements, efforts and moments predicted by model GLRC_DM are represented with a modest error (< 10%) with reference to a multi-layered model, which seems quite satisfactory for a model intended to represent the « global » behavior of a structure. The largest error is observed (~ 25%) when testing the Poisson effect in the damaging phase and when the damage is activated in coupled membrane-flexure. The first defect is less important if we focus more on the energy dissipated in the system and less on movements. The second defect is more annoying and shows that an optimal « global » model should always be adjusted to the main load that one wishes to model: the parameters of the model will be chosen accordingly. The main contribution to the error is probably due to the anisotropy of reinforced concrete not fully taken into account by model GLRC_DM (see [R7.01.32]).

H-I-J-L-M-N models allow direct comparison between behavior models GLRC_DM and DHRC, for a choice of coherent parameters: we note the advantage of accurately representing the position of the steels in the thickness of the plate, of enriching the description of dissipation through the degradation of the steel-concrete bond. But the overall responses of these two models remain quite similar in all loading situations: the thresholds for triggering damage are concomitant, the generalized force-displacement curves are similar; with model DHRC the terms resulting from the Poisson effect coupling seem more realistic.

O modeling makes it possible to validate the use of these models in the context of studies of reinforced concrete buildings with thermal expansion loading.

The two F and G models where « kit » GLRC_DM and Von Mises elastoplasticity are evaluated above all have a demonstrative value of the possibilities offered.