470 Hydraulic and Civil Engineering Technology VIII

M. Yang et al. (Eds.)

© 2023 The Authors.
This article is published online with Open Access by IOS Press and distributed under the terms
of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC 4.0).
doi:10.3233/ATDE230751

Nonlinear Analysis of Stress-Strain of

Reinforced Concrete Beam in Ansys Using
the Menetrey-Willam Model
V.V. Mestnikov a,1, I.V. Mestnikova a and V.V. Mestnikov a
a
North-Eastern Federal University named after M.K. Ammosov, Engineering and
Technical Institute, Russian

Abstract. This paper presents a study of nonlinear stress-strain analysis of

reinforced concrete beam using the Menetrey-Willam model implemented within
the ANSYS software platform. Reinforced concrete stands as an indispensable
construction material within the realm of civil engineering, and it is of paramount
importance to attain a precise comprehension of its nonlinear response to facilitate
the design of structures that are both secure and optimally efficient. The modeling
of the stress-strain distribution within a solitary-span reinforced concrete beam
was meticulously executed through the utilization of the finite element method as
facilitated by the ANSYS software package. Specifically, SOLID185 finite
elements, in conjunction with the Menetrey-Willam model, were employed to
represent the concrete material, while REINF264 finite elements were enlisted for
the reinforcement, incorporating a bilinear isotropic hardening model.
Subsequently, the computed results were methodically compared to experimental
data obtained by F.J. Vecchio and W. Shim. The numerical computations
demonstrated a commendable concordance with the experimental observations,
with an associated discrepancy of a mere 0.56% in terms of breaking load and a
relatively slight deviation of 7.31% with regard to deflection measurements.

Keywords. Reinforced concrete beam, nonlinear finite element analysis, ANSYS,

Menetrey-Willam concrete model.

1. Introduction

Reinforced concrete constructions are extensively employed in contemporary

construction practices owing to their superior strength attributes and remarkable
resilience. Nonetheless, when orchestrating the design of such edifices, it becomes
imperative to incorporate a meticulous consideration of the nonlinear response
exhibited by reinforced concrete when subjected to diverse forms of loading.
Reinforced concrete emerges as a material that exhibits distinct nonlinear
characteristics, with this nonlinearity becoming evident from the initial stages of
deformation and persisting until the ultimate failure of the structural components [1].
In the examination of the nonlinear response exhibited by reinforced concrete
structures, diverse computational methodologies grounded in the principles of elasticity
and plasticity theory are employed. Among these methodologies, the finite element

1
V.V. Mestnikov, Corresponding author, North-Eastern Federal University named after M.K.
Ammosov, Engineering and Technical Institute, Russian; E-mail: Stroyosenka@mail.ru
 V.V. Mestnikov et al. / Nonlinear Analysis of Stress-Strain of Reinforced Concrete Beam 471

method (FEM) stands out as a highly efficacious and versatile approach, facilitating the
simulation of intricate structural geometries while accommodating the consideration of
a comprehensive spectrum of nonlinear behaviors.
The objective of this research endeavor is to investigate the nonlinear response of a
singularly supported reinforced concrete beam subjected to a concentrated load,
employing the ANSYS software suite, and subsequently, to juxtapose the outcomes of
computational analysis with empirical experimental observations.

2. Statement of the Problem

In this article, a single-span reinforced concrete beam C3 is calculated, tested by the

authors F.J. Vecchio and W. Shim [2], which is a re-test of the experiments of the
authors B. Bresler and A.C. Scordelis [3]. The reinforcement diagram and dimensions
are shown in figure 1. The beam has a total length of 6.840 m, a height of 0.552 m and
a width of 0.152 m.
To simulate the behavior of the reinforced concrete beam, the Finite Element
Method (FEM) was employed within the framework of the ANSYS software suite. The
Finite Element Method, a powerful numerical technique widely used in engineering,
allows for the decomposition of intricate structural entities into numerous elemental
components. This decomposition involves subdividing the complex structure into
discrete elements, such as triangles or quadrilaterals in 2D or tetrahedra and hexahedra
in 3D, depending on the dimensionality of the problem.
The advantage of employing FEM in structural analysis lies in its ability to handle
complex geometries, material properties, and loading conditions. Engineers can gain a
detailed understanding of how a reinforced concrete beam behaves under various
scenarios, helping them optimize its design for safety and efficiency. FEM simulations
also assist in identifying potential weak points, stress concentrations, and areas
requiring reinforcement, ultimately leading to more robust and reliable structures.
To construct a model of a reinforced concrete beam, the following categories of
finite elements were employed:
1. SOLID185 Solid Finite Elements for Concrete. SOLID185 is an 8-node, linear
brick element that is commonly used for modeling three-dimensional solid structures,
including reinforced concrete structures. It is a versatile element that can accurately
simulate the behavior of concrete, as well as other materials like steel, when used in
conjunction with appropriate material properties and boundary conditions. In this
context, we will discuss SOLID185 elements in the context of modeling reinforced
concrete structures.
2. Linear Finite Elements REINF264 for Reinforcement. The REINF264 element
in the ANSYS program is used to add individual fibers to 3-D link, beam, shell, and
solid elements. It is suitable for simulating reinforcing fibers with arbitrary orientations.
Each fiber is modeled separately as a spar that has only uniaxial stiffness. You can
specify multiple reinforcing fibers in one REINF264 element. The nodal locations,
degrees of freedom, and connectivity of the REINF264 element are identical to those of
the base element. It has plasticity, stress stiffening, creep, large deflection, and large
strain capabilities.
472 V.V. Mestnikov et al. / Nonlinear Analysis of Stress-Strain of Reinforced Concrete Beam

Figure 1. Reinforcement diagram and beam dimensions.

To model concrete, the Menetrey-Willam model [4], based on the Willam-Warnke

yield surface [5], which includes dependence on three independent invariants of the
stress tensor, is used. The Menetrey-Willam strength criterion makes it possible to
fairly accurately describe the behavior of concrete for a large number of complex stress
states, which is determined by a significant number of parameters, which makes it
possible to adjust the model to the test results [6]. The parameters for the Menetrey-
Villam concrete model were determined according to the recommendations of [7] and
the requirements of SP 63.13330.2018 [8] (compression and tension diagram according
to N.I. Karpenko [9]).
To simulate the reinforcement behavior within the structural analysis, a bilinear
isotropic hardening model was employed. This specific modeling approach, known as
bilinear isotropic hardening, is characterized by the utilization of a stress-strain curve
that exhibits a distinct bilinear response [10]. This curve serves as a critical
representation of the material's behavior, capturing its unique response to applied loads
and deformation.
The following parameters were used to describe the properties of materials:
For concrete: Young modulus   34  , Poisson's ratio  0,2, density  
2500 /ଷ , compressive strength ௖  35  , tensile strength ௧  2,2  ,
uniaxial compressive strength ௕  42  , dilatation angle   31 ° , ௖௠ 
0,001206; ௖௨  0,002625; Ω௖௜  0,4; Ω௖௨  0,85; Ω௖௥  0,2; ௙௧  101,59 /;
Ω௧௥  0,1.
For reinfrocement: Young modulus   200  , Poisson's ratio  0,3 ,
density   7850 /ଷ , yield strength of reinforcement M10 ௬  315  ,
yield strength of reinforcement M25 ௬  445  , yield strength of reinforcement
M30 ௬  436  , yield strength of reinforcement D4 ௬  600  .
The model consists of 80178 finite elements and 97754 nodes. The finite element
model is presented in figure 2.
 V.V. Mestnikov et al. / Nonlinear Analysis of Stress-Strain of Reinforced Concrete Beam 473

Figure 2. Finite element model of a reinforced concrete beam

In the context of numerically calculating the behavior of a reinforced concrete

beam, the application of the load is effectuated upon the upper metal plate through a
controlled displacement mechanism. This particular approach is adopted due to its
known capability to enhance the convergence rate of the nonlinear problem-solving
process. Consequently, the resultant force experienced by the metal plate is deduced
through meticulous computation based on the support reactions imparted onto it.
To govern the interaction at the interface between the concrete and metal plates, a
contact condition is meticulously prescribed. This condition incorporates a friction
coefficient of 0.45, which plays a pivotal role in characterizing the frictional response
between these two materials. This parameter is critical for the accurate representation
of the contact interactions and resultant behaviors.
The intricate boundary conditions, integral to the computational model, are
thoughtfully illustrated in figure 3. This graphical representation serves as an
indispensable reference, clearly delineating the constraints and limitations imposed on
the system. These boundary conditions play a pivotal role in ensuring the fidelity of the
numerical simulation and provide a comprehensive foundation for analyzing the
reinforced concrete beam's structural response under the applied load and contact
conditions.

Figure 3. Boundary conditions of the calculated problem: A – hinged-fixed support; B – articulated and
movable support; C – load in the form of displacement; D – setting the dead weight of the structure; E –
limitation of movement along the Z axis.

The calculation used automatic step adjustment with a minimum and maximum
number of steps of 50 and 5000, respectively. To solve a system of linear algebraic
equations, a direct solver (Sparse Direct Solver) was used. An asymmetric Newton-
Raphson solver was used. Convergence control for a nonlinear problem is applied by
default – Programm Controlled.

3. Results

In the context of the numerical analysis performed on the reinforced concrete beam, we
present figure 4, which depicts a graphical representation delineating the
interdependence between the displacement observed at the midpoint of the beam span
and the corresponding applied load. Key findings stemming from this analysis include:
474 V.V. Mestnikov et al. / Nonlinear Analysis of Stress-Strain of Reinforced Concrete Beam

1. The critical failure load for the beam was determined to be 263.5 kN, concurrent
with a deflection magnitude of 41.06 mm noted at the center of the span. It is
noteworthy that the initiation of concrete crushing within the compressed zone was
clearly evident at a load of 234 kN, evident as a conspicuous peak within the graph
encapsulated in figure 4.
2. Distinct reinforcement grades displayed varying mechanical responses to
applied loads, with the M30 reinforcement achieving yield strength at 252.5 kN, the
M25 reinforcement at 263.5 kN, and the M10 reinforcement at 220 kN. The von Mises
equivalent stress distribution in reinforcement is shown in figure 5.
3. Insight gleaned from the deflection-load graph, as depicted in figure 4, reveals
an impressive congruity between numerical calculations and experimental observations,
underscoring the robustness of the computational model employed in faithfully
reproducing the real-world structural response of the reinforced concrete beam.
4. The ultimate failure of the beam, both in numerical simulations and
experimental tests, was ascribed to the failure of the compressed zone within the
reinforced concrete structure. Increasing loads led to the initiation and propagation of
cracks, primarily originating at the tension face. These cracks progressed in width and
adversely affected the overall stiffness of the beam. Figure 6 displays the distribution
of relative plastic deformations within the concrete, which can be interpreted as
indicative of the presence of cracks in the concrete.
5. The calculated breaking load in the numerical analysis stood at 263.5 kN,
closely mirroring the experimental breaking load of 265 kN, manifesting a nominal
error of 0.56% in terms of load prediction accuracy. The deflection at the moment of
destruction in the numerical calculation was 41.06 mm, in the experiment – 44.3 mm.
The error in deflections is 7.31%.

Figure 4. A graph of the displacement at the center of the beam span versus the applied load.

Figure 5. Equivalent stresses in reinforcement at the moment of failure.

 V.V. Mestnikov et al. / Nonlinear Analysis of Stress-Strain of Reinforced Concrete Beam 475

Figure 6. Equivalent relative plastic strains in concrete.

4. Conclusion

The nonlinear analysis conducted on the reinforced concrete beam has yielded valuable
insights pertaining to its mechanical response when subjected to varying loading
conditions. A comprehensive comprehension of the load-deflection characteristics,
crack formation patterns, stress distribution, and ultimate load-carrying capacity plays a
pivotal role in the purview of structural engineers and designers. Such insights are
fundamental to ensuring the safety and optimal performance of concrete structures.
This analytical framework not only aids in the refinement of structural design but also
facilitates judicious decision-making concerning reinforcement strategies and load-
bearing capabilities. The results of our calculations confirm the suitability of the
ANSYS program in combination with the Menetrey-Willam model for effectively
describing the stress-strain behavior of reinforced concrete structures.

References

[1] Arleninov PD, Krylov SB. Current state of nonlinear calculations of reinforced concrete structures.
Seismic Construction. Safety of Structures. 2017;3:50-53.
[2] Vecchio FJ, Shim W. Experimental and Analytical Reexamination of Classic Concrete Beam Tests,
2004, Journal of structural engineering, Vol. 130, No. 3, March 1, 2004.
[3] Bresler B and Scordelis AC. Shear strength of reinforced concrete beams. J. Am. Concr. Inst., 1963:
51–72.
[4] Menetrey P. Numerical analysis of punching failure in reinforced concrete structures. Diss. Ecole
Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, Lausanne.Infoscience. Web. 1994.
[5] Willam KJ & Warnke EP. Constitutive models for the triaxial behavior of concrete. Seminar on
Concrete Structures Subjected to Triaxial Stresses. International Association for Bridge and Structural
Engineering. 19: 1-30.
[6] Karpenko NI, Belostotsky AM, Pavlov AS, Akimov PA, Karpenko SN, Petrov AN. Review of strength
criteria for reinforced concrete structures. Part 2: Developments of foreign scientists. Collection of
Scientific Works of the RAASN. – Moscow, 2020: 290-298.
[7] Dmitriev A, Novozhilov Yu, Mikhalyuk D, Lalin V. Calibration and validation of the menetrey-willam
constitutive model for concrete. Construction of Unique Buildings and Structures. 2020; 88: 8804.
doi:10.18720/CUBS.88.4
[8] SP 63.13330.2018. Concrete and Reinforced Concrete Structures.
[9] Karpenko NI. General Models of Reinforced Concrete Mechanics. Stroyizdat, 1996; pp.416. ISBN 5-
274-01682-0.
[10] Ansys Mechanical APDL Theory Reference. Release 23.1. Canonsburg, 2022. pp. 884.