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

159

Table 1. Mechanical properties.

Concreate

Metal

Tension plasticity limit (kgf/mm 2 ) Compression plasticity limit (kgf/mm 2 ) Failure strain at tension (%) Failure strain at compression (%)

0.5

100 100

50

0.2

7 9

2

Modulus (kgf/mm 2 )

3570

20000

Poison ratio

0.2

0.3

Fig. 5 shows initiation of load onset during loading, it is possible to see that some elements of concreate completely failed and removed from the analysis. This makes possible to see conventional reinforcements represented by beam elements embedded inside the concreate.

Concreate (Drucker‐Prager plasticity model)

Beam elements ‐ reinforcements

Rigid elements

Fig. 5. Modelling of failure of conventional plate (scheme of loading).

Fig.6 shows distribution of equivalent Mises stress along the reinforcements realized by the proposed scheme. Values presented as maximum through the thickness of shell elements used in modelling. Fig. 6 consists of one fourth of the model due to symmetry, with some elements removal to show the stress state of the internal structure of the plate.

Fig. 6. Equivalent Mises stress distribution (kgf/mm 2 ) in proposed plate (some model elements removed from the picture).