CEMENT and CONCRETERESEARCH. Vol. 10, pp. 395-402, 1980. Printed in the USA.

0008-8846/80/030395-08502.00/0 Copyright (c) 1980 Pergamon Press, Ltd.

CONTINUOUS DAMAGE MODEL FOR LOAD-RESPONSE

E S T I M A T I O N OF C O N C R E T E

K.E. L l a n d
D i v i s i o n of B u i l d i n g M a t e r i a l s
D e p a r t m e n t of C i v i l E n g i n e e r i n g
U n i v e r s i t y of T r o n d h e i m
N - 7 0 3 4 T r o n d h e i m NTH, N o r w a y

(Communicated by G. Fagerlund)
(Received Jan. 25, 1980)
ABSTRACT
E s t i m a t i o n of the s t r e s s - s t r a i n r e l a t i o n s h i p for c o n c r e t e
in u n i a x i a l t e n s i o n is d o n e b y m e a n s of a s e m i e m p i r i c a l
damage model. The d a m a g e is a m e a s u r e of the r e l a t i v e
p o r t i o n of p o r e s a n d c r a c k s in the m a t e r i a l . The model
is r e l a t e d to s t r e s s - s t r a i n c u r v e s p u b l i s h e d by E v a n s and
M a r a t h e (3).

Spennings- t~yningssammenhengen for b e t o n g u t s a t t for en-

a k s i a l s t r e k k b e l a s t n i n g er f r e m s t i l t ved h j e l p a v e n semi-
empirisk skade-modell. S k a d e n er et m~l for d e n r e l a t i v e
a n d e l p o r e r og s p r e k k e r i m a t e r i a l e t . M o d e l l e n er r e l a -
t e r t til e k s p e r i m e n t e l l e s p e n n i n g - t ~ y n i n g s k u r v e r p u b l i -
s e r t av E v a n s og M a r a t h e (3).

Introduction
The a i m of the p r e s e n t p a p e r is to get an e s t i m a t i o n of the
s t r e s s - s t r a i n r e l a t i o n s h i p for c o n c r e t e in u n i a x i a l t e n s i o n . For
this p u r p o s e the g e n e r a l C o n t i n u o u s D a m a g e M e c h a n i c s i n t r o d u c e d
by J a n s o n a n d H u l t (7) is u s e d to e s t a b l i s h a C o n t i n u o u s D a m a g e
m o d e l for c o n c r e t e . T h i s d a m a g e m o d e l is f o r w a r d l y r e f e r r e d to
as the CDm.
To d e s c r i b e the l o a d - r e s p o n s e of c o n c r e t e m a t e r i a l s one has
to c o n s i d e r t h a t all s u c h m a t e r i a l s c o n t a i n d a m a g e (defects) s u c h
as p o r e s a n d c r a c k s . It is m e r e l y the m e c h a n i c a l l y i n t a c t m a t e r i a l
b e t w e e n t h e s e d e f e c t s w h i c h is a b l e to c a r r y load.
To s t u d y c r a c k i n i t i a t i o n and g r o w t h , eg the F i c t i t i o u s C r a c k
M o d e l (FCM) i n t r o d u c e d by H i l l e r b o r g , M o d ~ e r , and P e t t e r s s o n (4)
c a n be used. In c o n n e c t i o n w i t h the CDm, h o w e v e r , the s t r e s s -
c o n c e n t r a t i o n a h e a d of c r a c k tips, l e a d i n g to c r a c k p r o p a g a t i o n ,
395
396 Vol. lO, No. 3
K.E. L6land

is not d e a l t w i t h . It is just c o n s i d e r e d that d e f e c t s e x i s t and

t h a t the a m o u n t of d e f e c t s i n c r e a s e s by m e a n s of l o a d i n g (strain-
ing), d r y i n g ( s h r i n k a g e c r a c k f o r m a t i o n ) , or e x p o s i n g the c o n c r e t e
to d i f f e r e n t a g g r e s s i v e e n v i r o n m e n t s .
The first w h o i n t r o d u c e d a c o n t i n u o u s d e t e r i o r a t i o n c o n c e p t
of m a t e r i a l s w a s K a c h a n o v (8). He s t u d i e d b r i t t l e c r e e p r u p t u r e .
The p r i n c i p l e is f u r t h e r d e a l t w i t h eg by B r o b e r g (i) and J a n s o n
(6).

Damage Approach for C o n c r e t e in U n i a x i a l Tension

D a m a g e (~), as d e f i n e d by Eq. (i), d e n o t e s the r e l a t i v e p o r -
t i o n of the n o m i n a l f r a c t u r e a r e a (A in Fig. i) w h i c h is not m e c h a -
n i c a l l y intact. This means that damage includes inhomogenities
l i k e p o r e s and all k i n d s of c r a c k s . T h e s e i n h o m o g e n i t i e s will,
b e c a u s e of t h e i r shape, i n i t i a t e c r a c k - p r o p a g a t i o n at a s t r e s s or
s t r a i n level c o n s i d e r a b l y less t h a n the u l t i m a t e s t r e n g t h . The
f i r s t c r a c k s , h o w e v e r , m i g h t be t e m p o r a r i l y s t o p p e d w h e n r e a c h i n g
an a g g r e g a t e p a r t i c l e . T h i s b e c a u s e the h i g h e r e n e r g y level re-
q u i r e d to m a k e the c r a c k p a s s by, or t h r o u g h , the a g g r e g a t e p a r -
ticle.

P
f
J
-""-----_OADLEVEL
COMENTS ~ . . ~ P = 0 P > 0

Damage (pores and

cracks) in the
~ L f = ex- fracture zone.
~tension
of frac-
ture
p~ -, zone
Accumulated

'p
mechanically
intact, and
damaged areas. Q
Types of damage O PORE O PORE
O CRACK

FIG. 1
S c h e m a t i c a l l y s h o w n the F r a c t u r e Zone of a T e n s i o n e d C o n c r e t e
Specimen. A n d e n o t e s N e t A r e a w h i c h is a b l e to T r a n s m i t Force.
A d d e n o t e s D a m a g e d A r e a (incl. P o r e s and C r a c k s ) .

T h e s t r e s s or s t r a i n level w h e r e m i c r o c r a c k i n g b e c o m e s s i g n i -
f i c a n t is r e f l e c t e d in a d e v i a t i o n f r o m l i n e a r i t y in the s t r e s s -
strain relationhsip. T h i s m a t t e r is d e a l t w i t h by d i f f e r e n t a u t h -
ors, eg. E v a n s (2), T o d d (12), S t r o e v e n (ii), and K a p l a n (9). Kap-
lan f o u n d t h a t s t r a i n s at c r a c k i n g and n e a r u l t i m a t e f a i l u r e are
i n d e p e n d e n t of the t y p e s of a g g r e g a t e and w a t e r - c e m e n t r a t i o used,
w h e r e a s s t r e s s e s are not. He t h e r e f o r e s u g g e s t e d t h a t the i n i t i a -
t i o n of c r a c k i n g m a y be m o r e d e p e n d e n t on s t r a i n s t h a n on s t r e s s e s
Vol. lO, No. 3 397
STRESS-STRAIN RELATION, CONTINUOUS DAMAGEMODEL, CONCRETE

W h e n s t r a i n i n g a c o n c r e t e s p e c i m e n in u n i a x i a l tension, damage
w i l l o c c u r w i t h i n the total length of the s t r a i n e d b o d y w h e n strain
(e) is less than the strain c a p a c i t y (ecap). A b o v e this strain
level, d a m a g e w i l l d e v e l o p e in the fracture zone only as shown in
Fig. 2. The e x t e n s i o n of the fracture zone m i g h t be in the o r d e r
of the m a x i m u m gravel grain size (Dmax), b e c a u s e crack f o r m a t i o n
e s s e n t i a l l y takes place in the paste m a t r i x or in the t r a n s i t i o n
zone b e t w e e n p a s t e and gravel.

CONTOURS

-- - - ~ ; OBSERVABLE

: NET ,P:)

An1
/~,,~,~...~<~ Ano ~ An1

1 /
/"1
/
P ,/ /

<

, AL
AL 1 AL2
E L O N G A T I O N

FIG. 2
Net C o n t o u r s of a C o n c r e t e S p e c i m e n in U n i a x i a l Tension,
and w i t h R e f e r e n c e to the L o a d - E l o n g a t i o n Curve.

The d a m a g e f o r m a t i o n is then d i v i d e d into two strain regions.

R e g i o n I, 0 ~ e ! ecap, w h e r e m i c r o c r a c k i n g is in p r o a r e s s w i t h i n
the total v o l u m e of the s t r a i n e d body, and R e g i o n II, eca- < E
e u, (e u d e n o t e s u l t i m a t e strain) w h e r e c r a c k i n g takes p~ace with-
in the f r a c t u r e zone only.

Continuous D a m a g e Model (CDm)

B a s e d on the d a m a g e a p p r o a c h mentioned, a c o n t i n u o u s damage
m o d e l (CDm) for c o n c r e t e in t e n s i o n is presented. The d a m a g e and
stress c o n c e p t s used are d e f i n e d by Eq. (i), (2), (3) and Fig. i.

Damage ~ = Ad/A = (A - A n ) / A ............ (i)

 398 Vol. l 0, No. 3
K.E. L6land

Nominal stress ~ = P/A .......................... (2)

Net stress s = P/A n ......................... (3)

where
A = nominal or macroscopically observable area.
A d = accumulated projections o f all e x i s t i n g d a m a g e in t h e
fracture zone, u p o n a p l a n e p e r p e n d i c u l a r to t h e t e n -
sile stress direction.
A n = n e t a r e a w h i c h m i g h t b e t h o u g h t o f as t h e m e c h a n i c a l l y
intact material between defects in t h e f r a c t u r e zone.
P = transmitted force.

Net stress (s) is t h u s a n a r i t h m e t i c m e a n v a l u e of t h e i n t e r -

nal stress distribution acting on the mechanically intact material
(An), a n d is, f o r t h e i n c r e a s i n g s t r a i n c a s e , r e l a t e d to s t r a i n s
as f o l l o w s (see F i g . 3).

s = E c when 0 ! e ! e ........ (4a)

n cap
s = Sy = En eca p when eca p < e S eu ....... (4b)

where eca p denotes the strain level where the nominal stress (o)
r e a c h e s i%s m a x i m u m value (ft), a n d e u d e n o t e s u l t i m a t e strain.
The net modulus of elasticity (E n) is d e f i n e d as

E n = E/(I - ~i ) .................................. (5)

w h e r e ~i is i n i t i a l d a m a g e (existing at the time of loading) and

E is t h e n o m i n a l m o d u l u s of elasticity (the ordinary Young's modu-
lus) c a l c u l a t e d from the linear part of the actual stress-strain
relationship.
The linear relationship between strains and net stresses given
b y Eq. (4) is an a p p r o x i m a t i o n of the real behaviour. Real beha-
v i o u r is r e f l e c t e d by an alternation around the estimated straight
lines. This alternation is c a u s e d b y t h e f a c t t h a t c r a c k s a r e
momentarily stopped when they come across with coarse gravel par-
ticles (as m e n t i o n e d before).
The relationship between nominal stress (o) and net stress
(s) g i v e n b y Eq. (i) to (3) is

o = s(l - ~) ...................................... (6)

To calculate the stress-strain relationship by means of Eq.

(6) the following damage creation concepts are used

~(~) = ~i + CIe8 when 0 ~ e ~ eca p (7a)

~(e) = ~0 + Cz(e - e c a p) when eca p < e ! e u (7b)

w h e r e ~0 d e n o t e s t h e damage at the strain level e c a p, and CI, C2,

and 8 are constants.

For small strain levels only an opening of already existing

defects, in a d d i t i o n to s o m e b o n d f a i l u r e b e t w e e n aggregate and
paste, take place. Increased strain causes propagation of the
Vol. lO, No. 3 399
STRESS-STRAIN RELATION, CONTINUOUS DAMAGEMODEL, CONCRETE

L ~{S}

I z
I
I {~}
cap S T R A I N u

{~}
~ = 1.0

~o 0

{~}

~cap S T R A I N u
LOAD {~}

The case ft
analysed

m
{E}
o
z b

cap S T R A I N u

FIG. 3
Net Stress (s), Damage (~), a n d N o m i n a l S t r e s s (o) r e l a t e d
to S t r a i n f o r a Concrete Specimen in Uniaxial Tension.

f i r s t c r a c k s , a n d as t h e s t r a i n s i n c r e a s e f u r t h e r , a n i n c r e a s i n g
a m o u n t o f c r a c k s s t a r t to p r o p a g a t e . Eq. (7a) is a t h e o r e t i c a l
estimation of this damage creation theory. Eq. (7b), f o r s t r a i n s
l a r g e r t h a n eca:), is c h o s e n to b e l i n e a r in o r d e r to g e t a m a t h e -
matically simpl~ description o f the d e s c e n d i n g b r a n c h o f the
stress-strain curve.
The constants Ci, C2, a n d 8 c a n b e determined from actual
bondary conditions as s h o w n b e l o w .
Requiring maximum stress (ft) at s t r a i n c a p a c i t y (Sca p) in
a d d i t i o n to h o r i s o n t a l t a n g e n t to the o-e c u r v e at s t r a i n c a p a -
s i t y (ecap), y i e l d s Eq. (8) a n d (9) f o r d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f CI a n d 8.

8 : ~/(i - ~ - ~) ................................ (8)

1

where
I : ft/(En~cap)
CI : [ (i - ~. )/(I + 8) ]e -8 .......o............ (9)
z cap
Further, defining final fracture (~ = 1.0) at u l t i m a t e s t r a i n
(Eu), yields the following equation for determination o f C2.

C2 : (i - ~ 0 ) / ( s u - ecap) ........................ (i0)

Fig. 3 shows a summary of the CDm for concrete in u n i a x i a l

tension. The linear estimation of the stress-strain relationship
400 Vol. l 0, No. 3
K.E. L~land

is r e l a t i v e l y rough, but w h e n d e a l i n g w i t h load-response and car-

r y i n g c a p a c i t y it is a fair a p p r o x i m a t i o n .

Initial Damage
I n i t i a l d a m a g e (~i), d e f i n e d as the d a m a g e e x i s t i n g at the
time of testing, is a f u n c t i o n of load h i s t o r y , d r y i n g ( s h r i n k a g e
c r a c k f o r m a t i o n ) , e n v i r o n m e n t a l effects, and i n i t i a l p o r e volume.
In this p a p e r o n l y the time i n d e p e n d e n t c a s e is c o n s i d e r e d . Thus
w i r e p r e s e n t s a c e r t a i n d a m a g e v a l u e w h i c h e x i s t s at the time of
loading, and not c h a n g i n g w i t h i n the d u r a t i o n of the test. An
e s t i m a t e of ~i m i g h t then be d e t e r m i n e d e q u a l to the p o r o s i t y of
the c o n c r e t e .

Ultimate Strain
To use the C D m one has to get i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t u l t i m a t e
s t r a i n (e u) in a d d i t i o n to the a s c e n d i n g b r a n c h of the a c t u a l
s t r e s s - s t r a i n curve. E n e r g y c o n s i d e r a t i o n s in c o n n e c t i o n to the
m o d e l and w i t h a p p l i c a t i o n to e x p e r i m e n t a l s t r e s s - s t r a i n c u r v e s
p u b l i s h e d by E v a n s & M a r a t h e (3), i n d i c a t e that it m i g h t be p o s s -
ible to e s t i m a t e the d e s c e n d i n g b r a n c h of the s t r e s s - s t r a i n rela-
t i o n s h i p from the a s c e n d i n g b r a n c h only.
W h e n a c o n c r e t e s p e c i m e n , w i t h a c e r t a i n length, is s t r a i n e d
in u n i a x i a l tension, the s p e c i f i c e n e r g y c o n s u m e d in m i c r o - c r a c k
f o r m a t i o n w i t h i n the w h o l e s t r a i n e d b o d y is d e f i n e d as f o l l o w s
(see Fig. 4).

Hmc = ft(ecap - E*) .............................. (ii)

where
e* = ft/E

The s p e c i f i c e n e r g y c o n s u m e d in f u r t h e r c r a c k i n g of the frac-

ture zone (with the e x t e n s i o n of Dma x) is d e f i n e d as

H c = 0.5 ft(eu - ecap) L/Dma x ................ (12)

{~}

ft

~9
E" Eca p U
S T R A I N

FIG. 4
E n e r g y c o n s i d e r a t i o n s in c o n n e c t i o n w i t h CDm. Hmc d e n o t e s e n e r g y
c o n s u m e d in m i c r o c r a c k i n g , and H c d e n o t e s e n e r g y c o n s u m e d in fur-
ther c r a c k i n g of the f r a c t u r e zone.
Vol. lO, No. 3 401
STRESS-STRAIN RELATION, CONTINUOUS DAMAGE MODEL, CONCRETE

The ratio between these energies is t h e n given as

R = Hmc/Hc = 2- (Dmax/L) (eca p - e~)/(e u - eca p) (13)

A p p l i c a t i o n of this t h e o r y to the e x p e r i m e n t a l s t r e s s - s t r a i n c u r -
ves g i v e n by E v a n s and M a r a t h e (3) i n d i c a t e s t h a t the e n e r g y - r a t i o
R, is a l m o s t c o n s t a n t i n d e p e n d e n t of the w a t e r - c e m e n t , and a g g r e -
gate-cement-ratios used. This m i g h t be e x p l a i n e d by the fact that
c r a c k i n g takes p l a c e e s s e n t i a l l y in the p a s t e m a t r i x , and f u r t h e r
t h a t the g r a v e l p a r t i c l e s are a l m o s t e v e n l y d i s t r i b u t e d w i t h i n this
matrix.
It is t h e n possible to c a l c u l a t e ultimate strain as

Cu = 2R" (Dmax/L) (ecap - -

a*) + ecap . , . . . , . o . . . . (14)

It is e s s e n t i a l here, h o w e v e r , to n o t e that u l t i m a t e s t r a i n (e u)
as c a l c u l a t e d a b o v e is a f i c t i v e value, and t h a t the real v a l u e
m i g h t be m u c h l a r g e r (see Fig. 5).

Applications of C D m
Fig. 5 d e m o n s t r a t e s the c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n C D m and an e x p e -
r i m e n t a l s t r e s s - s t r a i n c u r v e p u b l i s h e d by E v a n s and M a r a t h e (3).
I n i t i a l d a m a g e (el) is a s s u m e d to be n e g l i g a b l e and the n o m i n a l
m o d u l u s of e l a s t i c i t y (E) is c a l c u l a t e d f r o m the i n i t i a l l i n e a r
p a r t of the curve. It seems that C D m fits the a c t u a l l o a d - r e s p o n s e
f a i r l y well.
To use the C D m for the c o m p r e s s i o n state of s t r e s s e s , t e n s i l e
s t r a i n s at an angel of 90 to the c o m p r e s s i v e s t r e s s d i r e c t i o n h a v e
to be c o n s i d e r e d . Or in g e n e r a l , s t r a i n s in the m a x i m u m t e n s i l e
s t r e s s d i r e c t i o n s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d as w h e n the C D m is used.

MPa)~ CDm.
2.0~ . . . . . . . . . - - - - Real behaviour

m, 1.O

z 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 l.O (0/60)

STRAIN (~)

1.0 . . . .

. o.8
~o.6
0.4 . . . . .

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 (o/oo)

STRAIN (E)
FIG. 5
Nominal Stress (o) and D a m a g e (~) r e l a t e d to S t r a i n s (~).
Calculations w i t h C D m and real B e h a v i o u r a c c o r d i n g to
E v a n s and M a r a t h e (3) .
 402 Vol. lO, No. 3
K.E. L6land

The c o n c l u s i o n drawn by Hughes and C h a p m a n (5), that stress-

strain curves are similar in shape for both t e n s i o n and c o m p r e s -
sion, m i g h t r e i n f o r c e the a s s u m p t i o n that C D m can be used for
compression.
W h e n the time d e p e n d e n t case is considered, it is the ini-
tial damage value (~i) w h i c h is i n c r e a s e d leading to lower long-
time strength, but this is not dealt w i t h in this paper.

Acknowledgement
This is part of a Dr.ing. thesis on l o a d - r e s p o n s e of concret6
and I w o u l d like to thank my s u p e r v i s o r Prof. Odd E. Gj~rv. I
w o u l d also like to thank Dr. Matz M o d ~ e r and Prof. Jan H u l t for
their i n v a l u a b l e critical comments by reading the manuscript.

References

i. H. Broberg, Damage M e a s u r e s in C r e e p Deformation and Rupture,

S w e d i s h Solid Mech. Rep. (1974).

2. R.H. Evans, Struct. Eng. 24, 636 (1946).

3. R.H. Evans, M.S. Marathe, Mat. et Constr., R I L E M Bull. No.i,

61 (1968).

4. A. H i l l e r b o r g , M. M o d ~ e r , P.-E. Petterson, Cem. Concr. Res.

9, 773 (1979).

5. B.P. Hughes, G.P. Chapman, R I L E M Bull. No.30, 95 (1966).

6. J. Janson, Eng. Fract. Mech. 10, 795 (1978).

7. J. Janson, J. Hult, J. M~c. Appl. i, 69 (1977).

8. L.M. Kachanov, Jzv. Akad. Mauk SSSR, Otd. Tekh. Nauk. No.8,
26 (1958).

9. M.F. Kaplan, J. Am. Concr. Inst. 60, 853 (1963).

i0. M. Mod~er, Dr. Thesis, Univ. of Lund, Lund- Sweden (1979).

ii. P. Stroeven, Dr.Thesis, Univ. of Delft, Delft - The N e t h e r -

lands (1973).

12. J.D. Todd, Proc., Inst. of Civ. Eng. 4, 201 (1955).