| Literature DB >> 36079441 |
Dapeng Zhao1, Changjun Wang1, Ke Li1, Pengbo Zhang1, Lianyou Cong1, Dazhi Chen2.
Abstract
Engineered cementitious composites (ECC) exhibit ultra-high ductility and post-cracking resistance, which makes it an attractive material in civil engineering. First, a monotonic uniaxial tensile test was performed, considering the effects of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) fiber volume content and water-binder ratio. Then, the effects of the above variables on the tensile characteristics including the tensile stress-strain relationship, deformation capacity, and fracture energy were investigated based on test results; and when the water-binder ratio is 0.28 and the fiber volume content is 2%, the deformation performance of ECC is improved most significantly. Next, combined with damage mechanics theory, the damage evolution mechanism of ECC in monotonic uniaxial tension was revealed, based on which the damage factor and damage evolution equation of ECC were developed and the expressions of model parameters were proposed. Moreover, the comparison between the proposed model and test results demonstrated the accuracy of the proposed model. Finally, to further verify the feasibility of the proposed model, a finite element (FE) simulation analysis of the tensile performance of high-strength stainless steel wire rope (HSSWR) reinforced ECC by adopting the proposed model was compared with test results and the simulation analysis results by using anther existing model, the "trilinear model of ECC". The comparison shows that the proposed model in this paper can predict more accurately.Entities:
Keywords: damage constitutive model; engineered cementitious composites; monotonic uniaxial tensile test; stress–strain relationship; tensile performance
Year: 2022 PMID: 36079441 PMCID: PMC9457215 DOI: 10.3390/ma15176063
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.748
ECC mix proportion.
| Group | Cement | Silica Sand | Fly Ash | Micro-Silica | Water | PVA Fiber | Superplasticizer |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V1R3 | 1.000 | 1.500 | 2.000 | 0.073 | 0.860 | 0.029 | 0.041 |
| V2R3 | 1.000 | 1.500 | 2.000 | 0.073 | 0.860 | 0.044 | 0.041 |
| V3R1 | 1.000 | 1.500 | 2.000 | 0.073 | 0.738 | 0.057 | 0.041 |
| V3R2 | 1.000 | 1.500 | 2.000 | 0.073 | 0.768 | 0.057 | 0.041 |
| V3R3 | 1.000 | 1.500 | 2.000 | 0.073 | 0.860 | 0.057 | 0.041 |
Performance indicators of PVA.
| Fiber | Length | Diameter | Tensile Strength | Elastic Modulus | Elongation | Density |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PVA | 12 | 40 | 1560 | 41 | 6.5 | 1.3 |
Details of specimens and test results.
| Group | Specimen ID |
| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V1R3 | V1R3-1 | 1 | 0.28 | 0.037 | 1.347 | 0.814 | 3.226 | 1.697 | 3.044 |
| V1R3-2 | 0.039 | 2.407 | 0.274 | 3.338 | 2.211 | 3.950 | |||
| V1R3-3 | 0.015 | 1.797 | 0.518 | 3.438 | 1.786 | 3.681 | |||
| V1R3-4 | 0.019 | 1.960 | 0.385 | 2.740 | 1.652 | 2.976 | |||
| V1R3-5 | 0.018 | 2.370 | 0.563 | 2.780 | 2.128 | 3.913 | |||
| Average value | 0.025 | 1.976 | 0.511 | 3.104 | 1.895 | 3.513 | |||
| Standard deviation | 0.011 | 0.439 | 0.204 | 0.324 | 0.257 | 0.471 | |||
| V2R3 | V2R3-1 | 1.5 | 0.28 | 0.072 | 1.746 | 1.254 | 2.867 | 2.498 | 5.705 |
| V2R3-2 | 0.050 | 1.259 | 0.575 | 3.012 | 2.485 | 4.841 | |||
| V2R3-3 | 0.055 | 2.128 | 0.420 | 2.792 | 2.663 | 5.458 | |||
| V2R3-4 | 0.040 | 2.166 | 1.068 | 2.997 | 2.461 | 4.761 | |||
| V2R3-5 | 0.025 | 2.799 | 0.663 | 3.130 | 2.590 | 5.313 | |||
| Average value | 0.048 | 2.020 | 0.796 | 2.959 | 2.539 | 5.216 | |||
| Standard deviation | 0.017 | 0.569 | 0.351 | 0.132 | 0.084 | 0.405 | |||
| V3R1 | V3R1-1 | 2 | 0.24 | 0.033 | 3.274 | 0.590 | 4.392 | 1.633 | 7.181 |
| V3R1-2 | 0.043 | 3.508 | 0.425 | 4.067 | 3.050 | 6.808 | |||
| V3R1-3 | 0.048 | 3.538 | 0.495 | 5.256 | 2.008 | 8.270 | |||
| Average value | 0.041 | 3.440 | 0.503 | 4.572 | 2.230 | 7.420 | |||
| Standard deviation | 0.008 | 0.144 | 0.083 | 0.613 | 0.734 | 0.757 | |||
| V3R2 | V3R2-1 | 2 | 0.25 | 0.090 | 2.256 | 1.140 | 3.680 | 2.200 | 6.656 |
| V3R2-2 | 0.066 | 2.960 | 0.811 | 3.949 | 2.682 | 9.934 | |||
| V3R2-3 | 0.088 | 3.074 | 0.665 | 3.884 | 3.705 | 11.000 | |||
| V3R2-4 | 0.040 | 2.462 | 1.476 | 3.769 | 3.350 | 10.140 | |||
| V3R2-5 | 0.053 | 2.574 | 1.265 | 3.655 | 2.940 | 9.344 | |||
| Average value | 0.067 | 2.665 | 1.071 | 3.787 | 2.975 | 9.415 | |||
| Standard deviation | 0.022 | 0.343 | 0.331 | 0.127 | 0.583 | 1.653 | |||
| V3R3 | V3R3-1 | 2 | 0.28 | 0.033 | 2.900 | 1.755 | 3.111 | 4.245 | 10.166 |
| V3R3-2 | 0.092 | 2.216 | 1.908 | 3.477 | 4.298 | 12.673 | |||
| V3R3-3 | 0.092 | 2.033 | 2.317 | 2.883 | 3.808 | 10.053 | |||
| V3R3-4 | 0.075 | 2.256 | 2.110 | 3.309 | 4.108 | 11.764 | |||
| V3R3-5 | 0.055 | 2.827 | 1.910 | 3.390 | 3.929 | 11.065 | |||
| Average value | 0.069 | 2.447 | 2.000 | 3.234 | 4.077 | 11.144 | |||
| Standard deviation | 0.026 | 0.391 | 0.217 | 0.238 | 0.208 | 1.104 | |||
Figure 1Test setup.
Figure 2ECC tensile properties: (a) First cracking strain and stress; (b) Peak strain and stress; (c) Ultimate strain and fracture energy.
Figure 3Stress–strain curves of ECC specimens in tension: (a) V1R3; (b) V2R3; (c) V3R1; (d) V3R2; (e) V3R3.
Figure 4The crack pattern and damage evolution process of the specimens under uniaxial tension.
Figure 5The definition of damage factor of ECC in this paper.
Damage model coefficients.
| Group | V1R3 | V2R3 | V3R1 | V3R2 | V3R3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.5 | 2 | 2 | 2 | |
|
| 0.28 | 0.28 | 0.24 | 0.25 | 0.28 |
|
| 0.997 | 0.877 | 0.915 | 0.844 | 0.784 |
|
| 0.214 | 0.132 | 0.197 | 0.151 | 0.067 |
|
| 0.198 | 0.199 | 0.127 | 0.162 | 0.203 |
|
| 0.138 | 0.045 | 0.004 | −0.090 | −0.090 |
|
| −0.030 | 0.035 | 0.011 | 0.108 | 0.252 |
Test results and damage model coefficients of the verification groups.
| Group |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V-V1R3 | 1 | 0.28 | 0.018 | 2.165 | 0.474 | 2.760 | 1.890 | 0.993 | 0.997 | 0.216 | 0.214 |
| V-V2R3 | 1.5 | 0.28 | 0.033 | 2.483 | 0.864 | 3.063 | 2.526 | 0.915 | 0.877 | 0.141 | 0.132 |
| V-V3R2 | 2 | 0.25 | 0.047 | 2.518 | 1.371 | 3.712 | 3.145 | 0.880 | 0.844 | 0.122 | 0.151 |
| V-V3R3 | 2 | 0.28 | 0.065 | 2.542 | 2.010 | 3.349 | 4.018 | 0.816 | 0.784 | 0.046 | 0.067 |
Figure 6Tensile stress strain curves of: (a) Group V-V1R3; (b) Group V-V2R3; (c) Group V-V3R2; (d) Group V-V3R3.
Figure 7Test setup and 3D FE model of specimens: (a) test setup and specimen details (The Chinese project fund in the picture is not related to the research in this paper); (b) 3D FE model.
HSSWR-ECC Specimen parameter details.
| Specimen ID |
| Test Section Width, | HSSWR Spacing, | HSSWR Diameter (mm) | HSSWR Reinforcement Ratio ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TC1 | 2 | 0.28 | 80 | 50 | 2.4 | 0.28 |
| TC2 | 2 | 0.28 | 70 | 40 | 2.4 | 0.32 |
| TC3 | 2 | 0.28 | 60 | 30 | 2.4 | 0.37 |
| TC4 | 2 | 0.28 | 47 | 20 | 2.4 | 0.48 |
Figure 8Comparison of tensile load-displacement curves of HSSWR reinforced ECC: (a) TC-1 group; (b) TC-2 group; (c) TC-3 group; (d) TC-4 group [23,24,25].