Issue 69

M. B. Prince et alii, Frattura ed Integrità Strutturale, 69 (2024) 154-180; DOI: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.69.12

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d) (e) Figure 13: Failure pattern of reference specimen C1R20 [21] (a) Experimental (Schematic), (b) 10 mm mesh, (c) 20 mm mesh (d) 30 mm mesh (e) 40 mm mesh. Reference specimens expected to have pullout failure Bond stress-slip behavior Fig. 14 shows the experimental and finite element bond stress vs. slip behavior of the reference specimen E1R16, whose failure has been predicted as pullout failure. In the finite element analysis, several bond stress-to-slip relationships, i.e., analytical models [2-6], have been considered, as discussed earlier. All the analytical models performed well in predicting the bond stress slip behavior in the elastic regime. The finite element bond stress at peak resistance showed 0.6 ~ 3.3 MPa deviation when compared to the experimental result. The FEM developed using the analytical model by Strum and Visintin [3] showed the most accurate prediction, i.e., 96.7% accuracy in predicting maximum bond stress when compared to that of the experimental result. However, much deviation has been found in the post-peak regime, as evidenced by Fig. 14.

Figure 14: Bond Stress Vs Slip for reference specimen E1R16 [21].

168