by zhouxinwei » Wed Apr 27, 2016 12:29 am
We believe there has been a bit of confusion on our side. The BeamTetConstraintList with the RebarConcreteInteraction model for large deformation pull-out was working correctly at the end of January using the the RebarConcreteInteraction keyword in the list definition line. At the time, the previous class, that did not include large deformation and pull-out, was kept in the code but not accessible through input commands. Due to a misunderstanding, in a later version of Mars, the keyword RebarConcreteInteractionLD was assigned to the large deformation formulation and the keyword RebarConcreteInteraction to the older small deformation formulation. As such, the Run1.mrs input file that Mohammed attached to this forum started using the wrong formulation not valid for pull-out. If you run that input with the RebarConcreteInteractionLD keyword, it would work correctly. However, we don't want to keep both formulations available because the large deformation works all the times, and there is little extra cost, with respect to the previous formulations. We apologize for the inconvenience and we are fixing this immediately.
We rerun Run1.mrs by changing RebarConcreteInteraction to RebarConcreteInteractionLD and the updated load-displacement history is shown in Figure 1.
Again, we want to keep it simple. There will be only the large deformation formulation available and accessible using the RebarConcreteInteraction keyword.
The issue is fixed in version 2016.3.02.
- Attachments
-
- Figure1.png (11.45 KiB) Viewed 8226 times
Last edited by
zhouxinwei on Thu May 12, 2016 3:43 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: update