PSI - Issue 11

J.I. Gisbert et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 11 (2018) 428–435

434

7

Author nam

e / Structural Inte

grity Procedia 0

0 (2018) 000–00 0

In reach the t In the s techn In

the model ing plasticity ension failure order to com ame geometr ique analyze figure 10 can

results can b . In contrast, is brittle. pare the num y, but compo d in this pape be seen the

e noticed tha bricks remain erical mode sed by one e r. loading proce

t the plastic in elastic be l with the lab quivalent mat ss for real sam

strains are m havior as thei oratory exper erial, has bee ples, and the

uch higher r compressio iments, an ad n developed continuous a

in the horizo n resistance is ditional conti to be able to nd discrete m

ntal mortar j much higher nuous model evaluate bette odels:

oints, , and with r the

Figure 7: Stress

(MPa) vs Strain (

mm/mm) at the

top of the sample

4.2.

Diagonal Com he final uniax s, and (iii) 33 placement of he figure belo

pression ial compress 6 contacts wi 0.105 mm. w shows the

T node a dis T

ion model ha th fracture su Y stress and P

s: (i) 30624 s rfaces. As the oisson effect

olid elements uniaxial mod at the end of

counting mo el, this one c the loading p

rtar and brick onverges at fi rocess.

units, (ii) 22 rst try, failing

8316 after

Fig

ure 8: Stress in Y

axis (left) and S

tress in X axis (r

ight). (Units in M

Pa)

T incre sudd

he diagonal te asing load. T en failure of t

st shows a gr his fact gener he sample.

owing tensile ates a shear s

stress in the tress between

middle due to brick and mo

the lateral ex rtar that prod

pansion of th uces the surf

e sample und ace sliding an

er the d the