PSI - Issue 28

Boris N. Fedulov et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 28 (2020) 155–161 Fedulov B., Fedorenko A., Jurgenson S., Kantor M., Lomakin E. / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000

158 4

Fig. 4. Metamaterial enforcement.

3. Comparison with conventional plate For the comparison of proposed concept of reinforcement the numerical experiment with three point bending loading up to failure is performed. For modelling of concreate elastoplastic material model has been chosen with pressure dependable [3, 4] Drucker-Prager plasticity criterion [5]. Flow theory with Kolmogorov failure criterion [6] were chosen for nonlinear part of constitutive relations. 0 (1 ) ( ) pl eq C k      , (2)

( ) D d    pl eq



1

(3)

,



where

1(      ), 0( i j i j )

, ij S

     ,

ij 

3 / 2 ij ij S S

D C k  - parameters that

/ 3 ii    ,

,

0 /     ; , ,

0  

ij

ij

ij

have to be determined experimentally. For modelling of reinforcement conventional plasticity model with von Mises criterion has been used. Numerical realization of metal parts were performed using reduced integrated shell elements for new reinforcements and beam elements with circle sections for conventional one. Interaction between metal reinforcements and concreate was realized by means of embedded elements concept [7].

Table 1 shows all necessary constants to perform the analysis. The scheme of loading and results of modelling for conventional plate are shown in fig. 5.