CONSTITUTIVE MODELS FOR CONCRETE

W. F. CHEN?
School of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN 47907,U.S.A.

H. SUZUKIS
Institute of Structural Engineering, University of Tsukuba, Saku~-mum Niiha~~n Ibaraki-ken, 300-31Japan

(Received 12 June 1979; received for publication 13 September 1979)

Abstract-In a recent work, the strain-hardening theory of plasticity has been utilized to formulate a complete
stress-strain relationship for concrete material under general threedimensional stress states up to the ultimate
stress condition. No attempt has been made to model more accurately the behavior of fractured concrete, once the
&mate ~ndition or fracture criterion is exceeded. Herein, an extended fo~ulation which includes the
constitutive relationships of fractured concrete is described. The extension considers both the kinematics of
crack development under a tensile type of failure and the limited plastic flow before crush under a compressive
type of failure, The dual representation of concrete behavior in terms of stresses as well as strains at the ultimate
or fracture state along with a sudden stress drop which results in local stress redistribution after cracking or crushing
are the essential features of this continued development.

this surface, further discontinuity and additions irre-

With the present state of developmentof computer pro-
grams, inadequate material models are often one of the
major factors in limiting the capability of structural
analysis. This is especially true for concrete where
general constitutive equations simply do not exist. Due
to the increased use of triaxially-loadedconcrete struc-
tures such as concrete floating vessels, off-shore plat-
forms and submergedstructures, the formulationof such
general equations is of prime importance.
In the previous work, the concrete is treated as a
continuous isotropic linearly elastic-plastic strain har-
dening-fracture material. The initial discontinuous sur-
face, loading surfaces and fracture surface of concrete
are pos~at~[S,71. According to this approach, the
stresses in a structure under operational condition are
expected to be in the initial discontinuous range such
that creep behavior can be expected to be characterized
as linear and viscoelastic and formation of microcracks
can be minimized,i.e. one may expect to avoid fatigue.
This initial discontinuoussurface is the limitingsurface
for elastic behavior. The elastic limit is defined here as
the initial discontinuous surface similar to the fracture
surface but a certain distancewithinthe fracture surface.
Figure 1 shows a trace of these two extreme sur-
faces together with subsequent loading surfaces in a
two-dimensionalprincipalstress plane. Whenthe state of
stress lies within the initial discontinuous surface, the
material is assumed to be linear elastic and the linear
eiastic constitutiveequations can be applied.
When the material is stressed beyond the initial dis-
continuous or elastic limit surface, a subsequent new
discontinuous surface called the loading surface is
developed. This new surface replaces the initial dis-
continuous surface. If the material is u~oaded from and
reloaded within this su~equent loading surface, no ad-
ditional irrecoverable deformation will occur until this
new surface is reached. If strainingis continued beyond
;Prof’roer of Structural Engineer@
23
coverable defo~ation result. In other words, at each
stage of the history of loading there exists a loading
surface in stress space containing all states of stress
which can be reached by elastic changesand any strain-
ing beyond this surface is accompanied by the irre-
coverable plastic deformation. Beyond the elastic limit,
the normality co~ition or the so-calledassociated tlow
rule is assumed to govern the post-yielded stress-strain
relations for concrete. Matrix constitutive equations
based on the concept of subsequentloadingsurface and
associated flow rule have been derived[6,7j and elastic-
plastic-fracture solution of concrete splitting cylinder
tests has been obtained usingthe computer modell8].
A crush and crack surface called f~ct~e surface in
terms of stresses is also postulated to define the com-
plete collapse for the yielded concrete. The fracture
surface is defined as the outermost extreme of the load-
ing surface. Once the fracture surface is reached, the
material is assumed to crack or crush depending upon
the nature of the stress states.
In the case of tensile stress states which include,
tension-compressionstates, a crack is assumedto occur
bi”basquent
loading
e
surfocrs s
Fii. 1. Loadingsurfacesof concretein biaxialstressplane.
24 W. F. CHENand H. SUZUKI
in a plane normal to the direction of the offending
maximum principal stress or strain and the maximum
tensile stress across this crack drops suddenly to zero.
However, material parallel to the crack is still capable of
carrying stress according to the uniaxial or biaxial stress
conditions prevailing parallel to the crack. On further
loading, the crack may close so that compressive stress
can be transmitted across the fissure or further cracks
may develop before or after the closing of the previous
crack. To simplify the analysis, the commonly used
approach is essentially to replace the current elastic-
plastic material stiffness matrix by an instantaneous
elasticity matrix which reflects the sudden change of
stiffness from the current state to an orthotropic elastic
state. The details of the mechanics of sudden release of
the tensile stress across the crack and subsequent redis-
tribution of this stress to adjacent material immediately
after the formation of a crack are not considered in this
early development [5,6,8].
In the case of multiaxial compressive states, after the
peak crushing stress, the material disintegrates and stress
drops suddenly to zero. In [5-71, as in the tensile state case
the crushing of concrete is modeled approximately by
simply reducing the current material stiffness to a relatively
small value of zero without considering the sudden stress
release for the crushed concrete. This implies that after
crushing, the peak state of compressive stress remains
constant for increasing strain to allow local stress redistri-
bution to occur. Thus, under uniaxial stress condition, this
stress-strain model at crushing exhibits a horizontal stress
plateau after peak or crushing stress.
Herein, a refined formulation considering two types of
fracture mode is proposed: tensile fracture and com-
pressive fracture. The refined formulation considers both
the kinematics of crack development and subsequent
stress release across the crack under a tensile type
of fracture and the limited plastic flow before crush
under a complete stress release after crushing under a
compressive type of fracture. Further, it has been in-
creasingly recognized in recent times that the failure for
concrete under multiaxial stress may be characterized by
a dual criterion of fracture and flow [12]. Under biaxial
compression, for example, concrete can flow like a duc-
tile material on the failure surface before reaching its
crushing strains. The assumption made in this early
development that concrete crushes completely once the
failure surface, expressed solely in terms of stress in-
variants, is reached is rather rough, but a fair first
approximation. Herein, the dual representation of con-
crete behavior in terms of stresses as well as strains at
the ultimate state along with the refined cracking and
crushing models is the’essential feature of this continued
development.
2. UNIAXIALSTRESS-STRAINCURVE
The stress-strain characteristics of concrete under
general multi-axial stress states adopted in the present
formulation can best be explained from the uniaxial
stress-strain curve shown in Fig. 2. The concrete is
considered to be a linear elastic, plastic, strain (or work)
hardening, and fracture material in compression as well
as in tension. The modulus of elasticity in the elastic
range is assumed to be the same for both tensile and
compressive stress states. The transition compressive
and tensile stresses from elasticity to plasticity are -f‘
and f, respectively. At stress level -f:, the concrete
becomes perfectly plastic until crushing occurs at a
c
Compcssion I-)
Fig. 2. Idealized uniaxial stress-strain curve for concrete.
compressive strain of -E,. The concrete is assumed to
have a limited tensile strength of f: and limited tensile
strain of E,. When the tensile stress or strain exceeds its
limiting value f: or E,,a crack is assumed to occur in a plane
normal to the direction of the offending stress or strain.
Unloading and reloading (line BH in the figure) in the
plastic range follow the initial elastic modulus E The
transition stresses from strain hardening plasticity to
perfectly plastic flow in compression, which will even-
tually lead to crushing of concrete, is -f: and the
transition to brittle fracture in tension which will lead to
cracking is f:. These limiting stresses are called fracture
stresses of concrete.
In the following the concrete stress-strain relation-
ships under general stress states are developed in four
parts: elasticity, plasticity, fracture criteria and frac-
tured concrete.
3.ELASTICCONCRETR
For elastic concrete, it is assumed that, initially, con-
crete is an isotropic homogeneous linear elastic material
and its stress-strain relations are described completely
by two elastic constants, Poisson’s ratio Y and Young's
modulus E. The elastic limit envelope (or initial dis-
continuous envelope (or surface)) in general stress space
is obtained by simply scaling the fracture envelope (or
surface) down to a size where uniaxial yield (or dis-
continuous) point corresponds to about 3040% of uni-
axial strength.
The general equations defining the initial yield surface
with material constants will be given later when the more
general case of defining loading function is presented in
what follows.
4. PLASTICCONCRRTR
For plastic concrete, a strain-hardening plasticity
model as proposed previously in Ref.[5] is used here to
describe the nonlinear irreversible stress-strain response
of concrete material. A brief description of this model
has been given in the Introduction of this paper.
On the basis of biaxial experimental data, a loading
function for concrete of the following form has been
proposed in[51.
In compression-compression domain (d/J, 5 -6 I,
and I, 5 0)
Jz+$I,
f(Vij) =
~ = 72.
(1)
l-$Z,
 Constitutive ma ldels for concrete 25

In tension-compression or tension-tension domain Table I. The parameters defining the loading function

NJ2>-+jIl
or I,>O) Tensiotiompression

Compressior+Compression Tensiot?Te.nsion
J*-g2+$I, Zone Zone
= 72
f(Uij) = T (2)

l-+,

where a’, /3’, aT and /3’ are material constants, T is

strain-hardening parameter and

= first stress invariant which corresponds to the mean

stress component of the stress state
J2 = i sijS{j= i oipij - i ofi (3)

= second invariant of deviatoric stresses. (4)

The loading functions, eqns (1) and (2), can be depicted

as the loading surfaces shown in Fig. 1 in the biaxial
principal stress plane and in Fig. 3 in the (I,, vJ2) plane
for the more general case of triaxial stress states. For
T = r. or 7 = T., the loading function corresponds to the
initial discontinuous (yield) or fracture surface in the
stress space, respectively, whereas for T of 7. < T < T,, formulation, the current condition for yielding is deter-
this represents a subsequent loading surface. The con- mined by the maximum value of T = T,,.,~~ which the
stants TO, T., a’, PC, aT and ~3~ are to be determined concrete has already experienced in its prior loading
from the test data. In the present formulation, these history. This value of T,% determines the current loading
constants can be determined from the following three function which controls the condition for yielding.
tests: uniaxial compression, uniaxial tension and equal As to the incremental stress-strain relationships for
biaxial compression tests. Corresponding to each of the elastioplastic behavior of concrete, we assume that
these tests the ultimate strengths fr, fi and fL are the “normality” condition as commonly used in the
determined, respectively. Further, all the initial yield incremental theory of metal plasticity still holds for
values for fc,f, and fbecan be taken to be 30-40% of the plastic concrete. This normality condition (associated
corresponding maximum strength values. From the flow rule) results in the following incremental plastic
numerical values obtained from the above tests, the stress-strain relationship.
parameters (I, @, 7. and T” which define the loading
functions in compression as well as in tension state of
stresses, can be determined directly from the expressions
given in Table 1. in which
In constructing the relationship between stress and
strain increments in the plastic range for general stress
states, one must define (a) the current condition for
yield; (b) the general form of the stress-strain relation-
H’-- gde, = work hardening modulus (6)

ship; and (c) a criterion for work hardening. In the present where

f(q) = F(E~)= effective stress and (7)

Em= $vdcP,dc$ = effective strain. (8)

Matrix constitutive equations based on the concept of

subsequent loading surface and associated flow rule have
been derived[6]. A comprehensive review of the plasti-
Fracture surface
defined by ‘\ city theory as applied to concrete mechanics is given
stress components7 in [71.
The effective stress F = f(Ci,)is defined here to be
able to extrapolate from a simple uniaxial compression
test into the multidimensional situation. The initial yield
occurs when the effective stress, F, equals the initial
yield stress, fc, measured in the uniaxial compression
test, With loading continued, the subsequent yielding
occurs and incremental plastic strains in the uniaxial
direction, dclp, as well as in the lateral direction, dc2p =
4
0
d&,‘, are introduced. From the known uniaxial com-
Fii. 3. Loading surfaces of concrete in (I,, VJd space. pressive stress-strain diagram numerical values for f and
26 W. F. CHEN
ep can be calculated respectively based on eqns (7) and
(8). The slope of (F, E,,) curve, H’, is known as work
hardening modulus. A crushing type of fracture occurs
when the effective stress, F, equals the plastic flow
stress, f: and the uniaxial compressive strain reaches the
limit value, E,.
To include the microcrack-continement effect on the
work hardening modulus, H’, in the multi-dimensional
stress situation, the effective stress-strain curve can also
be constructed from a biaxial compression test similar to
that of uniaxial compression test. Since a biaxial stress-
strain expression, expressed in terms of the principal
stress ratio, has been developed in Ref. [ IO], closed-form
expressions for the effective stress-strain curve and
hence the effective work hardening modulus, H’, under a
biaxial stress state may be derived.
Equation (5) which determines the plastic strain in-
crement d&G, together with the elastic Hooke’s law for
the elastic strain increment d&z, give the complete rela-
tion between stress increment, doi,, and strain increment
dE,=dE;+de;.
5. FRACTURECRITERIA
When the state of stress reaches a certain critical
value, concrete will fail by fracturing. Fracture of con-
crete can occur in two different types: (1) the “cracking”
type of fracture occurs when the state of stresses are
either in the tension-tension or tension-compression
state and their value exceeds the limit value; and (2) the
“crushing” type of fracture occurs when the states of
stresses are in the compression-compression state and
their value exceeds the limit value. When concrete cracks
the material only loses its tensile strength normal to the
crack direction but retains its strength parallel to it. On the
other hand, when concrete crushes, the element loses
completely its strength.
To determine the fracture of concrete under multi-
axial state of stresses or strains, a fracture criterion
which defines the limit value must be specified. Most of
the existing fracture (or failure) criteria for brittle
materials are written in terms of stresses, which, in many
cases, are not adequate to predict the failure charac-
teristics of concrete material. In the present formulation,
a dual representation of fracture criterion expressed in
terms of both stresses and strains is used. The dual
criterion has the following forms:
(a) stress criterion
f(Cij) = 7:.
This fracture surface is indicated by the outermost
extreme of the loading surfaces as shown in Fig. 1 for
the special case of biaxial principalstress plane and in Fig.
3 for a general multi-stress state.
(b) Strain criterion
g(Eij)=J*(lij)+!f ($~)ll(s)=(r.')2(~)*
or maximum of the principal strains = E,
in which
Il(&ij)=
&ii
and H. SUZUKI
A,’ is defined in Table I, and E. and E, specify the
maximum ductilities of concrete under uniaxial com-
pressive and tensile loading conditions, respectively. The
fracture surface defined by eqns (11) and (12) in the
biaxial principal strain plane is shown in Fig. 4.
When the stress state in the concrete satisfies either
the stress criterion, eqn (IO), or the strain criterion, eqns
(II) and (12), fracture of concrete is assumed to occur.
6. STRESS-!4TRAINRELATlONSOFFRACTUREDCONCRETE
6.1 General
Recently, the post-fracture behavior of concrete under
biaxial compression state has been reported in Ref. [ I].
The normality flow rule used for plastic concrete without
fracture is not observed in the case of fractured con-
crete. This seems to indicate that the fracture surface for
concrete may not be the limit of a sequence of loading
(9) surfaces as is normally considered to be the case for
metals. This was found to be the case in soil
mechanics[7]. Accordingly, in what follows, the stress-
strain relations of the fractured concrete are developed
using a proper physical model which simulates the kine-
matics of a fractured concrete: crushing type and crack-
ing type.
The term “crushing” is used to indicate the complete
rupture and disintegration of the material under com-
pression type of stress states. After crushing, the current
stresses drop suddenly to zero and the concrete is
assumed to lose its resistance completely against further
deformation. The term “cracking” is used to indicate a
partial collapse of the material across the plane of crack-
ing under tensile type of stress states. An infinite number
of parallel fissures are assumed to occur in the direction
normal to the offending principal tensile stress or strain.
Once a crack has formed, the tensile stress across the
crack drops suddenly to zero and the resistance of the
material normal to the crack direction is reduced to zero
in this direction against further deformation. However,
material parallel to the crack is assumed to carry stress
according to the uniaxial or biaxial conditions prevailing
parallel to the crack. The conditions for further cracks or
opening and closing of the existing cracks will be des-
Fracture surface
rwresented by
(10)
(11)
(12)
Fig. 4. Fracture surface defined by strain components in the
biaxial strain plane.
(13)
 Constitutive modelsfor concrete n

cribed later when the matrix constitutive relationships (either the cracking type or the crushing type) and {u,,}=
for fractured concrete are derived. the released stress vector during fracturing.
The tensile type of stress states (including tension- Crushing type of fracture. It is assumed that at the
compression type) and multi-axial compressive type of instant of crushing, all stresses at the point just prior to
stress states can be defined in the following manner: the crushing are released completely and thereafter the
Referring to Appendix A, it can be shown that when a concrete is assumed to lose its resistance against any
stress state satisfies the condition type of further deformation. This implies that the stress
point 2 in Fig. 5 drops to zero and the slope of line 2-3 is
also zero ([L$ = 0 in eqn (17) and {u,,}= current stress
vJ2s-&I, and IIS0
(I’) vector at the point just prior to crushing).
Cracking type of fracture. A crack is assumed to form
the stress state is of compression type and crushing type in the planes (or surfaces for axisymmetric problems)
of fracture is assumed to occur. Otherwise, it is of tensile perpendicular to the maximum principal tensile stress
type and cracking type of fracture is assumed to occur. direction if the stress fracture criteria controls (eqn lo),
or perpendicular to the maximum principal tensile strain
6.2 Incremental stress-strain relationships direction if the strain fracture criteria controls (eqns 11
The fracture model shown schematically in Fig. 5 is and 12). In order to avoid the complexities of the prob
used here to derive the required incremental stress-strain lem, further restriction pertaining to the crack formation
relationships of fractured concrete. The slopes of lines is introduced herein. Cracks are assumed to form only in
O-l and 2-3 represent the “material stiffness” before and the planes perpendicular to O-xy plane for planar prob-
after the occurrence of fracture respectively. The total lems or only in the axi-symmetrical surfaces for
stresses released are denoted by the stress vector {uo} axisymmetric problems (Fig. 6a).
(line 1-2 in Fig. 5). The released stresses are to be It is further assumed that at the instant of the crack
redistributed to adjacent material of the entire structure. formation, only the normal stress perpendicular to the
The released stresses are assumed to be generated dis- cracked plane and the shear stress parallel to the cracked
continuously from zero to the specified magnitudes at the direction are released and the other stresses are assumed
instant of fracturing. The incremental stress-strain rela- to remain unchanged (see Fig. 6b). It follows that the
tionship after fracturing can be represented by the well- stress states of the cracked material are reduced to (1)
known-relationship - _ _ the unaxial stress states parallel to the cracked direction
for plane stress problems: (2) the biaxial stress states in
Id4 = [DlcIW (16) the cracked and z directions for plane strain problems;
or (3) the biaxial stress states in the cracked and circum-
ferkntial (8) directions for axi-symmetric problems, res-
The total stress change {Au} in the fractured material
pectively.
during this process can be written formally as
Assuming the behavior of the sliced material between
two adjacent cracked planes is linearly elastic, the in-
(17) cremental stress-strain relationships for the cracked
material can be derived. The details are given in Ap-
pendix B. A summary of the results is forthcoming, in
in which [D]= = material stiffness matrix after fracturing the usual notation for stresses and strains.

For plane stress problems.

Aux

c
Au, = E{b(‘P)Xb(‘4’)}T
i AG,
(18)

For plane strain problems.

(19)

and da, = v(do, + u&)

For axisymmetric problems.
 W. F. CHENand H. SUZUKI

plane strain (rX, and a=) and axisymmetric (ox*and u@)

problems, respectively (see Fig. 6). The dual fracture
criteria as defined by eqns (IO)-(12) are still applicable
for such a concrete. Once the reduced stress state
satisfies one of the fracture criteria, further fracture
(crushing or cracking) is assumed to occur and the direc-
tion of the new cracks are allowed to occur per-
pendicularly to the first cracks. The first cracks and the
new cracks are called here the primary cracks and the
secondary cracks, respectively (see Fig. 7).
Opening and closing of the cracks. If the normal strain
across the existing crack becomes greater than that just
Strain 1st prior to the crack formation, the crack is assumed to be
open, otherwise, it is closed. The normal strain across
Fig. 5. Stress-Strain model of a fractured concrete.
the crack can be calculated by

In eqns (18~(20), cr,, Us, 7Xr;a,, a,, 7rz and oe are the
current stress components at the point just prior to the (22)
formation of a crack and

cos*
Y
Ib(W = sin* Y 1 ,~b’W)l =< sinLY ? .111=1 0 1 0 I
I sinYcosYJ .. ‘. 12sinYcosY.J -- Lo 0 11 (21

in which Y = the angle between the cracked direction
and x-axis as shown in Fig. 6.
6.3 Further cracking or crushing of the cracked concrete
After the formation of initial cracks, the structure can
often deform further without overall collapse. Thus, the
possibility of crack closing and opening and the for-
mation of further cracks may arise. Some probable
sequences for concrete to experience through the entire
loading history are illustrated in Fig. 7. These additional
transition characteristics in the cracked material can be
taken into account throughout the analysis. This is des-
cribed in what follows.
Formation of the secondary cracks. For a cracked
concrete, the stress state reduces to the uniaxial one for
plane stress problems (only a,,) or to the biaxial ones for
Formation of a new set of cracks. It all cracks are
closed in the cracked concrete, it is assumed that the
non-cracked concrete is linearly elastic. For such a
material, the dual criteria for the fracture condition are
directly applicable. Crushing or formation of a new set of
cracks as shown in the lower sketches of Fig. 7 will be
possible, the stress-strain relations are assumed to be the
same as before.
In the following, the incremental stress-strain relations
r-l
I
koncracked
I

First primary cracks formed

Crushed Primary cracks aPm

Secondary cracks formed

5 All cracks closed

First se1 af cracks closCa

Second primary cracks formed
(b)
Fig. 6. Pattern of cracks and stress distribution in a cracked Fig. 7. Opening and closing of existing cracks and formation of
concrete. new cracks in a cracked concrete.
 Constitutive models for concrete
for the fractured concrete are summarized:
(a) For the crushed concrete or for the cracked con-
crete in which more than a single set of cracks are open,
the material stiffness is assumed to be zero for further
loading and the current state of stress at the point just
prior to fracture is assumed to be released completely;
(b) For the cracked concrete in which a single set of
cracks are open, the incremental stress-strain relations
are given by eqns (18), (19) or (20);
(c) For the cracked concrete in which all sets of
cracks are closed, the concrete is assumed to be com-
pletely healed and it behaves as a linear elastic material.
7. FINITE ELEMENT PROGRAMS
Two computer codes have been developed to imple-
ment the proposed material model. The first computer
program called EPFFEP (Elastic-Plastic-Fracture-
Finite-Element-Program) was originally developed at
Lehigh University in 1973141.Subsequently, the program
was updated in 1976 for ERDA for the analysis of
suboceanic structures such as the large shells proposed
for adoption in the Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion
Program (OTEC). Reference[ Ill describes the details of
this program and its implementation on the computer
system CDC 6400. It defines all the input and output of
the program along with an example illustrating a typical
application of EPFFEP modeling. Detail computer al-
gorithm for the constitutive relations of concrete is also
given in the form of flow charts. This program is de-
signed for a special purpose; i.e. although its analysis
capability is bounded within planar or axisymmetric
problems with constant strain triangular elements, this is
intended specifically to model a refined material response
of concrete including its plasticity, dual fracture criterion
and sudden stress release which leads to subsequent
stress redistribution.
In order to make the results of research readily
available in analysis for structural engineers in general, a
second computer program in the form of a subroutine
has also been developed. This subroutine is readily
adaptable for use in any existing or postulated large finite
element analysis conputer program. Many such programs
are now available for engineers to use. In particular, we
have incorporated the subroutines in the nonlinear
structural analysis program called NONSAP-A[3], which
is a modified and extended version of the NONSAP
program originally developed by Bathe, Wilson and Iding
of the University of California at Berkeley[2]. The pro-
gram can be used for conducting linear and nonlinear,
static, and dynamic analysis for a range of complex
structures. Nonlinearities considered in the program in-
clude those of materials, large displacement and finite
strain. A large library of elements is available as well as
an extensive selection of material behavior models.
ReferenceDI describes the development of the present
subroutine. In addition, two numerical examples are also
presented in this report to demonstrate the utility of the
concrete subroutines in finite element analysis.
8. NUMERICAL EXAMPLE
In the following the finite element program EPFFEP is
applied to solve the elastic-plastic-fracture problem of
split cylinder test which is frequently used as an indirect
method for the determination of tensile strength of con-
crete. The elasticity solution of the problem is well-
knownl71. Recently, some plasticity solutions of the
problem, which do not consider the important feature of
29
sudden stress release during fracturing have been
reported[9]. Herein, a further analysis of this problem
using the proposed plasticity and fracture model is given
below.
The upper right quarter of a split cylinder specimen
selected for analysis is shown in Fig. 8, assuming plane
strain condition. The dimensions of the specimen and
material constants used are identical to those of Ref.[8].
The limiting fracture strains used are E, = 0.08% and
E. = 0.0035. The work hardening modulus, H',is taken
from uniaxial compression tests.
The load-deformation curve is shown in Fig. 9. The
corresponding elastic and plastic zones along with the
propagation of cracked and crushed zones are also illus-
trated. The point marked (I), on the curve indicates the
initial yielding of the specimen. At point (I), fracture
initiates at the corner of the rigid punch. Once the
fracture occurs, the sudden release of stresses in the
fractured elements results in an overall load drop. During
the process of stress redistribution from the fractured
elements to adjacent material, the displacement of the
loaded surface is held constant so that the analysis may
simulate the split cylinder test being conducted by an
ideally rigid testing machine, which results in displace-
ment control analysis.The stress redistribution process
leads to decreasing the load which may result in further
fracture and yielding of adjacent elements (solid dots on
line l-2 in Fig. 9). When the released stresses are stabil-
ized, the redistribution is now complete (point 2).
Subsequent further loading follows the line 2-3 until
further fracture occurs at point (3). This is continued
until load point (10) is reached at which the structural
stiffness matrix becomes singular. This indicates the
entire structure constitutes a collapse mechanism.
Therefore the cylinder specimen is now considered to be
completely collapsed. The value of “structural stiffness”
which may be interpreted as the slope of ascending
load-displacement branches as shown in Fig. 9 are seen
reduced steadily as more elements fractured.
It is of interest to compare the ultimate strength of the
present plasticity-fracture analysis with that of previous
P/2
I
Fig. 8. Discretized model used in the finite element analysis.
30 W. F. CHENand H. SUZUKI

92
kips

I And Numerals In 0 RepresentThe

Loading Steps Corresponding1 ? Those Shown

r Cmdted Or Cfushed Eiement

f Yiided Element
p Unloaded Element
V Elastic Element

I I I I I
+ 0.5 I 2x&n.
a/2

Fig. 9. Correlation between load-displacement curve and spreading of yielded zone and propagation of fractured
zone for a split cylinder Test.

analysis for which the values of material stiffness for
fractured elements are simply reduced to zero. This
implies that in the earlier model the material after frac-
ture is allowed to flow while the fracture stress is held
constant for further loading. The ultimate strength of the
present solution is 1.516f:w where w is the width of the
punch. The solution obtained previously assuming
infinite ductility is 2.81 f:w[8]. The present fracture
modeling of concrete results in a cylinder strength
reduction of about 46%. Such a significant reduction-in
strength is caused primarily by the sudden release of
stresses in the fracturing elements.
9. SUMMARYANDCONCLUSIONS
The nonlinear fracture characteristics of concrete
behavior under general three-dimensional stress states
are idealized as follows:
(a) For an elastic concrete or for a cracked concrete,
linear elasticity theory is used:
(b) For a yielded untracked concrete, work-hardening
theory of plasticity is used;
(c) For a concrete at its peak stress, dual represen-
tation of fracture condition in terms of both stresses and
strains is used;
(d) For a fractured concrete, the sudden release of
stresses during fracturing is considered; and
(e) For a cracked concrete, the opening and closing of
tensile cracks are traced and their softened and direc-
tional behavior is considered.
Two finite element computer codes have also been
developed to implement the material model proposed. A
numerical finite element solution to the problem of split-
ting cylinder test is presented. It is found that the
behavior and strength of a structure made of fracturing
material differs significantly from that of a material with a
large ductility. The strength of the former structure is
found considerably reduced, compared with that of the
latter case. This is caused primarily by the sudden
release of stresses in the fractured elements during their
fracturing either in the form of cracking type or the
crushing type.
REFERENCES
E. Andenaes, K. Gerstle and H-Y. Ko, Response of mortar
and concrete to biaxial compression. Engng Mech. Div.
ASCE, lOJ(EM4),515-525(Aug.,1977).
2. K. J. Bathe, E. L. Wilson and R. H. Iding, NONSAP-a
structural analysis programfor static and dynamic response
of nonlinear system. SESM Rep. No. 73-3. Department of
Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, Cali-
fornia (1974).
3. T. Y. Chang and W. F. Chen, Extended NONSAP program
for OTEC structural systems.ERDA Rep. No. OW-2682-7
(Fritz Engng Lab. Rep. No. 414.7, Lehigh University, Beth-
leham, Pennsylvania), (1976).
4, A. C. T. Chen and W. F. Chen, Constitutive relations of
concrete and punch-indentation problems. Fritz Engng Lab.
Rep. No. 360.1I, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
(May, 1973).
A. C. T. Chen and W. F. Chen, Constitutive relations for
concrete. J. Engng Me& I)ru. ASCE lOl(EM4). 465-481
(1975).
A. C. T. Chen and W. F. Chen, Constitutiveequationsand
punch-indentationof concrete. 1. Engng Mech. Div. AXE
lOl(EM6),88%5'06 (1975).
W. F. Chen, Limif Analysis and Soil Plasticify. Elsevier.
Amsterdam, The Netherlands(1975).
 Constitutive models for concrete 31

8. A. C. T. Chen and W. F. Chen, Nonlinear analysis of compression, tensioncompression or tension-tension zone. It is

concrete splitting tests. Compuf. Structures 6(6), 451457 further assumed that under a given hydrostatic pressure (fr =
(1976). - const. 10). the stress state inside the circumscribed circle of
9. W. F. Chen and T. Y. P. Chang, Plasticity solutions for AABC is in compressioncompression zone, and otherwise it is
concrete splitting tests. Engng Me& Diu. AXE, 104(EM3), in tensiowompression or in tension-tension zone. Referring to
691-704 (1978). Fig. IO, it is apparent that
10. T. C. Y. Liu, A. H. Nilson and F. 0. Slate, Biaxial stress-
strain relations for concrete. .I Structural Div. ASCE,
98(STS), 1025-1034 (1972).
II. H. Suzuki and W. F. Chen, EPFFEP program for OTEC
structural systems. ERDA Rep. No. OM-2682-8 (Frifz Engng It follows that the criteria for defining stress states in different
Lab. Rep. No. 414.8). Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Penn-
sylvania (1976). zones are as follows: If I, 10 and @I 5 Iz( i.e. I, 10 and
12. H. C. Wu, Dual failure criterion for plain concrete. /. Engng VJz~-Il/~3, the stress state P lies in compression-com-
Mech. Du. AXE 2M(EM6) (1974).
pression zone; if I, 5 0 and IGj-,l> (zl, i.e. I, I 0 and dJz >

- I,/q3, stress state P lies in tension-compression zone; and if

f, > 0, the stress state P lies in the tension-tension zone.
APPENDIXA
For the special case of a biaxial stress state, the stress vector
Zoning of the stress states
P(q, u2,0), under a given hydrostatic Essure I,( 50). is
The criteria for defining the stress states into three zones-
represented by a point on the straight line AB. Then, it follows
compression-compression, tensiowompression and tension-
tension zones-are given here. that if P is in compression-compression zone ($@/zG(~J),
For an isotropic material, the loading function must be the
one in terms of stress invariants. In the concrete plasticity theory u, 5 0 and ur I 0, or if not, ((G( > /zl), u, . ur 5 0. Generally
presented herein, this is the function of I, and J2. Therefore, any
stress state in concrete is plastically equivalent if it has iden- each of the three zones can be depicted in the (I,, dJ2) space as
tical values of I, and J2. Let us consider principal stress space shown in Fig. 3.
O-o,u2al as shown in Fig. IO. Plane s is represented by I, =O.
APPENDIX B
Axis G is the normal to the rr plane and is represented by
u, = o* = ax. Mechanics of cracked concrete
For a given hydrostatic pressure (I, = constant 5 0), an arbi- The cracked concrete under plane stress condition. The
trary stress state P(u,,uZ,uJ and the uniaxial stress states released stresses (see Fig. 6) can be represented in 0-x’y’
A(I,, O,O), B(0, I,, 0) and C(0,0,I,) lie in the same plane ABC coordinates system as

which is parallel to the ?r plane. Stress vector OP is resolved into

OX, a,*
oY, - 0 (23)
1 Tx’y’Ji 0 I

since a,, and ~~~~~

are vanished after cracks are formed. In global
in which 0-xy coordinates system, expression (23) has the form

(24)

It can be indicated from the above graphical interpretation that

and uXsin the global coordinate system is
the intersections of the plane I, = const. and the loading surfaces
are circles. Hencehe loading surfaces are axisymmetric with
respect to axis ON. Any stress state on the above circle is
uXs= {b’(‘4’)}T 2. (25)
equivalent plastically. It is therefore natural to assume that any
g&ss state on an arbitrary concentric circle whose center axis i 7XY
I
ON passes is also equivalent. For consistency, any equivalent
stress state may lie in the same zone of either of compression- Hence, the released stresses in 0-xy coordinates system are:

(26)

Since a slice between two adjacent cracked planes is subjected

to uniaxial loading along the direction of x’-axis (see Fig. 6), it
follows that incremental stress-strain relationship for a cracked
concrete is

drx
do,. = Eder. = E{b(P)}’ de, (27)
i drxyI
or, in O-xy coordinates system, it becomes

= tb(‘l’)}dux, = E{b(Y)Hb(\Y)}’ (28)

Fig. IO. Zoning of the state of stresses in triaxial stress space.
32 W. F. CHEN and H. SUZUIU

Hence, the total change in stresses after the formation of cracks

is given by eqn (IS).
771~ cracked concrete under plane strain &o~ition. The for-
mula for the released stresses are the same as in the case of
plane stress problems.
After the formation of cracks, the stress state in this case After the formation of cracks, the stress state reduces to a
reduces to biaxial one in x’z plane (see Fig. 6). Then, the b’aaxial one along x’ and 0 directions (see Fig. 6). Hence, we have
incremental stress-strain relationshins of the cracked concrete
can be written as

Referring to the global coordinate system, the following relations

(29) are obtained.

= {b(‘P#du;~ =$-q {b(‘P)j(de,, + A,)

Eliminating do, in the above equations results in

The total change in stresses after the formation of cracks for this
case is given by eqn (19) which can also be obtained by simply &,@ --$$vdex.+de@]=&
replacing E by E/( I - v*) in eqn (I 8).
The cracked concrete under ~i-sy~~~~c condifion. The
formula for the released stresses has the same form as that of The above relationships lead to the expression of the total
planar problems since cracks are assumed to form in an axi- change in stresses after the formation of cracks as given by eqn
symmetrical manner. The released stresses can be represented as
(20).