Comparison between resistant load contours generated considering the parabolic-rectangular (DPR) and the rectangular (DR) stress-strain diagrams for rectangular sections under combined axial compression and biaxial bending

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: FONSECA,Y. F.
Data de Publicação: 2018
Outros Autores: SILVA,A. S. C.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista IBRACON de Estruturas e Materiais
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1983-41952018000300455
Resumo: Abstract The aim of this study is to compare the load contour diagrams generated for rectangular RC cross-sections under combined axial compression and biaxial bending obtained by the two forms of analysis allowed by NBR 6118:2014 [1]: the first using the parabolic-rectangular stress-strain diagram (DPR) and the second using the rectangular (constant stress) diagram (DR). In order to compare the load contours generated, a reference cross-section was adopted for which the concrete strength class (from C20 to C90) and the deformation domains (4, 4a and 5) were varied for the study. It was studied whether the use of the different diagrams (DPR or DR) would provide greater (or smaller) resistant efforts for the same section. The results show that the use of the DR is only acceptable when the section is working up to the 4th domain. Above this domain, it was observed that the use of this diagram shows resistant efforts inferior to those calculated by the DPR. In addition, it was found that, for concretes with resistance class above C50, in oblique loading directions, the use of the DR presents higher resistant efforts than those calculated using the DPR.
id IBRACON-1_ece630d549e7e62314a490ed564f3b17
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S1983-41952018000300455
network_acronym_str IBRACON-1
network_name_str Revista IBRACON de Estruturas e Materiais
repository_id_str
spelling Comparison between resistant load contours generated considering the parabolic-rectangular (DPR) and the rectangular (DR) stress-strain diagrams for rectangular sections under combined axial compression and biaxial bendingcombined compression and biaxial bendingload contoursresistance assessmentreinforced concreteAbstract The aim of this study is to compare the load contour diagrams generated for rectangular RC cross-sections under combined axial compression and biaxial bending obtained by the two forms of analysis allowed by NBR 6118:2014 [1]: the first using the parabolic-rectangular stress-strain diagram (DPR) and the second using the rectangular (constant stress) diagram (DR). In order to compare the load contours generated, a reference cross-section was adopted for which the concrete strength class (from C20 to C90) and the deformation domains (4, 4a and 5) were varied for the study. It was studied whether the use of the different diagrams (DPR or DR) would provide greater (or smaller) resistant efforts for the same section. The results show that the use of the DR is only acceptable when the section is working up to the 4th domain. Above this domain, it was observed that the use of this diagram shows resistant efforts inferior to those calculated by the DPR. In addition, it was found that, for concretes with resistance class above C50, in oblique loading directions, the use of the DR presents higher resistant efforts than those calculated using the DPR.IBRACON - Instituto Brasileiro do Concreto2018-05-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1983-41952018000300455Revista IBRACON de Estruturas e Materiais v.11 n.3 2018reponame:Revista IBRACON de Estruturas e Materiaisinstname:Instituto Brasileiro do Concreto (IBRACON)instacron:IBRACON10.1590/s1983-41952018000300002info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessFONSECA,Y. F.SILVA,A. S. C.eng2018-07-11T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S1983-41952018000300455Revistahttp://www.revistas.ibracon.org.br/index.php/riemhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpeditores.riem@gmail.com||arlene@ibracon.org.br1983-41951983-4195opendoar:2018-07-11T00:00Revista IBRACON de Estruturas e Materiais - Instituto Brasileiro do Concreto (IBRACON)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison between resistant load contours generated considering the parabolic-rectangular (DPR) and the rectangular (DR) stress-strain diagrams for rectangular sections under combined axial compression and biaxial bending
title Comparison between resistant load contours generated considering the parabolic-rectangular (DPR) and the rectangular (DR) stress-strain diagrams for rectangular sections under combined axial compression and biaxial bending
spellingShingle Comparison between resistant load contours generated considering the parabolic-rectangular (DPR) and the rectangular (DR) stress-strain diagrams for rectangular sections under combined axial compression and biaxial bending
FONSECA,Y. F.
combined compression and biaxial bending
load contours
resistance assessment
reinforced concrete
title_short Comparison between resistant load contours generated considering the parabolic-rectangular (DPR) and the rectangular (DR) stress-strain diagrams for rectangular sections under combined axial compression and biaxial bending
title_full Comparison between resistant load contours generated considering the parabolic-rectangular (DPR) and the rectangular (DR) stress-strain diagrams for rectangular sections under combined axial compression and biaxial bending
title_fullStr Comparison between resistant load contours generated considering the parabolic-rectangular (DPR) and the rectangular (DR) stress-strain diagrams for rectangular sections under combined axial compression and biaxial bending
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between resistant load contours generated considering the parabolic-rectangular (DPR) and the rectangular (DR) stress-strain diagrams for rectangular sections under combined axial compression and biaxial bending
title_sort Comparison between resistant load contours generated considering the parabolic-rectangular (DPR) and the rectangular (DR) stress-strain diagrams for rectangular sections under combined axial compression and biaxial bending
author FONSECA,Y. F.
author_facet FONSECA,Y. F.
SILVA,A. S. C.
author_role author
author2 SILVA,A. S. C.
author2_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv FONSECA,Y. F.
SILVA,A. S. C.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv combined compression and biaxial bending
load contours
resistance assessment
reinforced concrete
topic combined compression and biaxial bending
load contours
resistance assessment
reinforced concrete
description Abstract The aim of this study is to compare the load contour diagrams generated for rectangular RC cross-sections under combined axial compression and biaxial bending obtained by the two forms of analysis allowed by NBR 6118:2014 [1]: the first using the parabolic-rectangular stress-strain diagram (DPR) and the second using the rectangular (constant stress) diagram (DR). In order to compare the load contours generated, a reference cross-section was adopted for which the concrete strength class (from C20 to C90) and the deformation domains (4, 4a and 5) were varied for the study. It was studied whether the use of the different diagrams (DPR or DR) would provide greater (or smaller) resistant efforts for the same section. The results show that the use of the DR is only acceptable when the section is working up to the 4th domain. Above this domain, it was observed that the use of this diagram shows resistant efforts inferior to those calculated by the DPR. In addition, it was found that, for concretes with resistance class above C50, in oblique loading directions, the use of the DR presents higher resistant efforts than those calculated using the DPR.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-05-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1983-41952018000300455
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1983-41952018000300455
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/s1983-41952018000300002
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv IBRACON - Instituto Brasileiro do Concreto
publisher.none.fl_str_mv IBRACON - Instituto Brasileiro do Concreto
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista IBRACON de Estruturas e Materiais v.11 n.3 2018
reponame:Revista IBRACON de Estruturas e Materiais
instname:Instituto Brasileiro do Concreto (IBRACON)
instacron:IBRACON
instname_str Instituto Brasileiro do Concreto (IBRACON)
instacron_str IBRACON
institution IBRACON
reponame_str Revista IBRACON de Estruturas e Materiais
collection Revista IBRACON de Estruturas e Materiais
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista IBRACON de Estruturas e Materiais - Instituto Brasileiro do Concreto (IBRACON)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv editores.riem@gmail.com||arlene@ibracon.org.br
_version_ 1754193605528911872