Issue 64

H. Zine Laabidine et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 64 (2023) 186-203; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.64.12

100 120

C1 Exp C1 Num C2 Exp C2 Num

0 20 40 60 80

Full composite No composite

Load (kN)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Mid span deflection (mm)

Figure 11: The load-mid-span deflection curves of the TCC beams C1 and C2 with Triangular notch connections compared with the experimental curves .

200

G1 Exp G1 Num F1 Num F1 Exp

150

Load (kN)

100

50

Full Composite No composite

0

0

20

40

60

80

100

Mid span deflection (mm)

Figure 12: The load-mid-span deflection curves of the TCC beams F1 and G1 compared with the experimental curves . A general comparison of the bending stiffness K TCC and the maximum load are reported in Tab. 5:

F max (kN)

Error (%)

K TCC (N/mm)

Error (%)

N°

Beam

EXP

FEM

FEM/EXP

EXP

FEM

Anal

FEM

Anal

1

A1

87.3

87.64

0.39

1363.25

1336.30

1498.92

-3%

15%

2

B1

105

109.37

4.16

1664.48

1705.59

1642.05

3%

-2%

3

B2

97.5

103.76

6.42

1520.54

1449.89

1609.72

-7%

8%

4

C1

89.7

120.54

34.38

1541.39

1592.81

1791.40

5%

23%

5

C2

110

113.42

3.11

1647.80

1696.77

1797.61

4%

13%

6

D1

80.8

81.82

1.26

1745.52

1701.12

1787.36

-3%

3%

7

F1

174

187.4

7.70

1929.34

2082.22

3492.13

15%

154%

8 19% Table 5: Validation of the main results: strength and stiffness obtained by numerical analysis and the experimental [17]. The first observation is that the FEM curves are on the safe side compared to the experimental curves. G1 201 216.51 7.72 2875.43 3043.10 3254.37 9%

194