Construction and Building Materials 94 (2015) 172180

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Constitutive modeling of plain concrete subjected to cyclic uniaxial

compressive loading
Marco Breccolotti , Massimo Federico Bongli, Antonella DAlessandro, Annibale Luigi Materazzi
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, via G. Duranti, 93, 06125 Perugia, Italy

h i g h l i g h t s g r a p h i c a l a b s t r a c t

 A constitutive model able to describe

damage accumulation in plain
concrete is presented.
 It is based on the work of Sima et al.
 Several modications have been
introduced to improve the damage
accumulation strategy.
 Any kind of compression stress cycles
can be investigated.
 Comparison with experimental tests
allowed the validation of the
proposed method.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The paper presents a constitutive modeling for concrete in compression that takes into account the dam-
Received 28 October 2014 age increment for constant and variable amplitude stress cycles. It is based on the model proposed by
Received in revised form 6 April 2015 Sima et al. modied to improve the damage accumulation strategy. The method makes use of the envel-
Accepted 29 June 2015
ope theory and can potentially be used for fatigue analysis. The comparison with experimental tests
results available in literature and tests carried out by the Authors allowed the validation of the constitu-
tive model.
Keywords:
2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Concrete
Cyclic loading
Constitutive modeling
Compression damage

1. Introduction For instance, the maximum permitted stress level in structural

The concrete damage mechanism under compressive stresses
is still not well understood and most of the provisions on
fatigue strength adduced by codes and standards are often
based on experimental data without an exhaustive scientic
background.
Appropriate damage accumulation theory is still lacking and
frequently a worst case scenario of repeated loads is considered.
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: marco.breccolotti@unipg.it (M. Breccolotti), federico.bongli@
strutture.unipg.it (M.F. Bongli), adalessandro@strutture.unipg.it (A. DAlessandro),
annibale.materazzi@unipg.it (A.L. Materazzi).
design under serviceability condition is usually a xed value
dened as the concrete fatigue limit. Generally it is set equal to
55% of the static compressive strength [1] to avoid signicant
mechanical damage to the material.
Among the general theories today available, the envelope con-
cept foresees that unload and reload paths can develop only under
or along the stressstrain envelope curve. According to the same
concept, the strain accumulation under constant amplitude stress
cycles produces failure when the envelope is reached. The damage
accumulation with increasing plastic deformations which occurs
cycle after cycle constraints the stressstrain path to move toward
the tail of the envelope curve. In this situation the higher brittle-
ness of high strength concrete, characterized by a ductility smaller

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.06.067
0950-0618/ 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 M. Breccolotti et al. / Construction and Building Materials 94 (2015) 172180
Fig. 1. Cycles with constant stress amplitude (left) and cycles with variable stress
amplitude (right).
than that of normal strength concrete, plays a signicant role that
should be reected by the damage accumulation theories.
Several thermodynamical models have been developed but
their hard applicability to solve structural problems and the impor-
tant computational effort required by these models leads to the
necessity of simplied methods which shall be used in design
and assessment works.
In this context the paper presents an improvement of the model
proposed by Sima et al. [2] to better take into account the damage
accumulation during constant and variable amplitude stress cycles.
2. Literature survey
The issues of concrete damage produced by cycling compression
loads and that of concrete fatigue resistance have been studied in
literature by means of experimental investigations, semiempirical
and thermodynamic modeling. Among them, the rst works with
experimental tests on the damage and fatigue of concrete subjected
to cyclic compressive stresses are dated back to the late 60s.
Sinha et al. [3] rst termed the concept of the envelope curve,
that has been dened as the limiting curve within which all
stressstrain curves lie regardless of the load pattern, while
Karsan and Jirsa [4] dened the concept of common point that cor-
responds approximately to the point where the slope of loading
curves changes signicantly. Okamoto et al. [5], Tanigawa and
Uchida [6] and Osorio et al. [7] carried out tests with complete
unload and reload cycles in the post-peak or in the pre-peak region
on concretes having a compressive strength f c from 37 to 63 MPa.
50
40
(N/mm2)
30
20
10
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Fig. 2. Stress r and damage d as a function of the strain value along the envelope
curve.
173
Experimental tests with incomplete unloads and complete
reloads have been performed by Lam [8], Imran and
Pantazopoulou [9] and Bahn and Hsu [10]. While Bahn and Hsu
investigated incomplete unloads from the envelope curve with
random amplitude cycles, Lam carried out tests in the pre-peak
region with unloads up to 0.1 and 0.2 times the concrete compres-
sive strength f c , and Imran and Pantazopoulou performed uniaxial
compressive tests with incomplete unloads in the pre- and
post-peak region for concretes with compressive strengths f c rang-
ing from 20 to 48 MPa.
Semi-empirical and thermodynamic models have been pro-
posed to reproduce the behavior of concretes subjected to cyclic
loads and damage accumulation. Semi-empirical models are based
on theoretical assumptions approximated to simplify calculation
consistently with the results of experimental observations. Bahn
and Hsu [10] proposed a model capable of predicting the response
of concrete samples subjected to random cyclic loads. Petryna et al.
[11] combined two time scales, the micro-scale of instantaneous
structural dynamics (or statics) and the macro-scale of structural
lifetime, developing a phenomenological fatigue damage model
of reinforced concrete able to assess the time-variant reliability
of concrete structures. Zanuy et al. [12], supposing a modication
from the theories for the low-cycle processes, proposed a new
model for the fatigue of concrete in compression by dividing the
fatigue life into ctitious cycles, each representing a constant num-
ber of real load cycles. Stress redistribution has been revealed as a
consequence of concrete stiffness degradation inside the investi-
gated concrete sections. Sima et al. [2] developed a model for the
simulation of the response of concrete subjected to cyclic loadings
both in compression and in tension. Two independent damage
parameters, one for damage in compression and the other for dam-
age in tension, have been introduced to model the deterioration of
concrete under time varying loads. The Authors also proposed a
model for the loops due to cyclic compressive loadings that
depends on the concrete damage accumulation.
Besides semi-empirical ones, thermodynamic models, based on
a theoretical denition of the system variables, have been devel-
oped. Papa and Taliercio [13] developed an anisotropic damage
model for concrete capable of describing the material behavior
both under static and cyclic loading. Lee and Fenves [14] proposed
a plastic damage model for cyclic loading of concrete based on the
fracture energy and on the stiffness degradation in continuum
damage mechanics, using two damage variables for the tensile
and the compressive damage. A simple and thermodynamically
consistent degradation model has been introduced to simulate
the effect of damage on the elastic stiffness and its recovery during
1.25 40
35
1
30
0.75 25
(N/mm2)
20
0.5
15
10
0.25
5
0
6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
x 10
3 3
x 10
Fig. 3. Example of the correspondences between points on the envelope curve and
the plastic strains.
174 M. Breccolotti et al. / Construction and Building Materials 94 (2015) 172180

processes must be evaluated at the structural level using the tan-

gent stiffness matrix as source of damage information. Indeed,

re

Maejawa and El-Kashif [20] separated time-dependent cumulative
nonlinearity from the effect of repetition of strain paths on the
overall damage evolution of concrete elements in compression.

3. Concrete damage modeling

The semi-empirical model proposed in this paper is a develop-

ment of that proposed by Sima et al. [2]. The main changes imple-

mented to this model concern the strategy of damage

un
un

accumulation that has been moved from the unloading branches

to the loading ones, making also non-linear the damage accumula-
tion along the loading branches. The proposed model aims at

Fig. 4. Damage accumulation pattern in the reloading branches: stress cycles

distant from the envelope curve (left) and stress cycles close to the envelope curve
(right).

( ) ( )
crack opening and closing. Alliche [15] introduced a new model to un,env un,env un,env re re re

evaluate the damage caused by static and cyclic loading with

increasing amplitude. It is based on damage mechanics and ther-
modynamics and uses a second-order tensor to describe the aniso-

tropic character of the microcracked material. Kra tzig and Po
lling
[16] introduced a new approach to describe the damage caused
by static and cyclic loading with increasing amplitude. The method
relies on damage mechanics and thermodynamics and adopts a
second-order tensor to describe the anisotropic character of the
microcracked material. Wu et al. [17] proposed a damage energy Ere
release rate-based plastic-damage constitutive model for the non-
(pl 0 pl )
linear analysis of plain and reinforced concrete structures. (a)
Macromechanical degradation was described by two damage sca-
lars, one for the tensile damage and the other for the shear damage.
Cicekli et al. [18] introduced in the plastic-damage constitutive
model an anisotropic damage with new plasticity yield and dam- ( )
re re re
( )
re re re
age criterion, in order to better describe the plastic and damage ( )
un,env un,env un,env
behavior of plain concrete. The Authors used two different damage
criteria for modeling different effects under tensile and compres-
sive loadings and took also into account the stiffness recovery

caused by crack opening and closing. Among the thermodynamic

models, there are in literature interesting examples of their appli-
cations to reinforced concrete elements. Kra tzig et al. [19]
observed the interaction between damage-induced local stress
redistribution, load history and global response. In their opinion (rel rel rel)

the correct global conclusions on structural integrity, durability

or reliability can only be drawn for the entire structure under the ( 0 )
complete spectrum of degradation mechanisms. Such degradation (b) pl pl

80
fc
(envenv ) (re re re)
70 un

( )
f c =

un un un
60
75 M
P

50
a

f c

40
=5
0M
Pa

30

20 f = 25
c MPa

10 Epl
( 0 )
0 (c) pl un
0 1 2 c 3 4 5 6
3
x 10 Fig. 6. (a) Cycle with complete unload and reload, (b) Cycle with incomplete unload
and complete reload up to the envelope curve, (c) Cycle with incomplete unload and
Fig. 5. Stressstrain relationships for concrete with different strengths [21]. reload.
 M. Breccolotti et al. / Construction and Building Materials 94 (2015) 172180 175

8 out in recent time by Lim and Ozbakkaloglu [22]. The Authors also
Buyukuzturk and Tseng (1984) performed some evaluations on the existing models to assess their
7 Spooner and Dogill (1975)
Karsan and Jirsa (1969) performances in predicting the concrete behavior comparing their
Bahn and Hsu (1998) predictions with results from experimental tests. Among the avail-
6 Sinha et al. (1964) able models, the stressstrain relationship proposed by Collins
Okamoto (1976)
Tanigawa (1979)
et al. [21] for unconned concrete has been chosen as envelope
5
Proposed model curve for its small error in predicting the axial strain at peak com-
r

4
Sima et al. pressive stress and for its ease of use:
0
fc ne
3 r  1
e0c n  1  e nk
e0c
2
where
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0
un,env n 0:8 f c =17 2

n
Fig. 7. Experimental tting of the relationship between dun and r. e0c f 0c  3
E0  n  1
carefully predicting the damage and the plastic strain accumula- q
tion under general stressstrain cycles, ranging from those having E0 3320 
0
f c 6900 4
constant stress amplitude to cycles with variable stress amplitude
(Fig. 1). 
1 if e 6 e0c
The model is based on the following assumptions: k 0 5
0:67 f c =62 if e > e0c
1. a mutual correspondence exists between the envelope curve The stress and the elastic modulus are expressed in terms of the
points and the damage index as shown for instance in Fig. 2 derived SI unit MPa. This formulation allows to properly take into
0
for a concrete having a compressive strength f c equal to account the lower ductility of high strength concrete, as shown in
36 MPa; Fig. 5. Consequently, the greater damage caused by load cycles in a
2. the damage function is a non-decreasing function; more brittle concrete is also reected.
3. there is no damage increase in the unloading branches; Assuming that the concrete stress r can be expressed as a func-
4. an univocal correspondence exists between the envelope curve tion of the strain and of the damage index d:
points and the plastic strain values as shown for example in
Fig. 3 for the same concrete mentioned at point 1;
r 1  dE0 e 6
5. the damage increase in the reloading branches is not linear. The the damage index d turn out to have the following denition along
damage increases slightly up to the proximity of the envelope the envelope curve:
curve where it begins to grow faster, as shown, for instance,
in Fig. 4. r n1
d1 1  nk 7
E0 e
n  1 ee0
c
The comparison with experimental results taken from the litera-
ture and from tests made for the purpose allowed the calibration An example of damage accumulation along the envelope curve
of the parameters used in the constitutive model. is shown in Fig. 2.

4. Analytical formulation of the concrete damage model 4.2. Complete unload and reload path from the envelope curve

4.1. Concrete stressstrain envelope curve Based on the extensive work carried out by Sima et al. [2] the
following relationship has been established between the strain of
A wide literature exists on the stressstrain models for uncon- a point on the envelope curve and the corresponding plastic strain
ned and conned concretes. A detailed review has been carried

1 1.4
Spooner and Dogill (1975) Buyukuzturk and Tseng (1984)
Karsan and Jirsa (1969) 1.2 Spooner and Dogill (1975)
Bahn and Hsu (1998) Karsan and Jirsa (1969)
0.8
Sinha et al. (1964) Bahn and Hsu (1998)
1 Sinha et al. (1964)
Okamoto (1976)
Tanigawa (1979) Okamoto (1976)
0.6 Proposed model 0.8 Tanigawa (1979)
Proposed model
re

Sima et al.
R

Sima et al.
0.6
0.4

0.4
0.2
0.2

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
un,env
un,env

Fig. 8. Experimental tting of the relationship between dun and R. Fig. 9. Experimental tting of the relationship between dre and dun;env .
176 M. Breccolotti et al. / Construction and Building Materials 94 (2015) 172180

that would be obtained after a complete unload starting from that Table 1
point (Fig. 6(a)): Compressive strengths of the concretes used for comparisons.
0
eun;env Researcher Compressive strength f c (MPa)
r 0:46  d2un;env  5:43  dun;env 5:98 8
epl Sinha et al. [3] 26.5
Tanigawa and Uchida [6] 40
with dun;env the damage index at the unloading point on the envel- Osorio et al. [7] 37, 46 and 63
ope curve. The previous empirical relation, shown in Fig. 7, is based Okamoto et al. [5] 30 and 40
Bahn and Hsu [10] 36
on the same experimental data collected by Sima but it has been
slightly modied to better represent the behavior of concrete for
high values of dun;env . In particular it has been imposed the passage xc 1 c 2  xc 3
d dpl dre  dpl  16
through the point with coordinates (dun;env ,r) equal to (1, 1). The 1 c2
rational behind this assumption is that for a heavily damaged mate-
where
rial with dun;env very close to 1 the plastic strain epl should coincide
with eun;env . r
x 17
It is assumed that the damage does not increase along the rre
unloading path since no external energy is supplied to the system, The coefcients that govern the damage increase rate c1 ; c2 ; c3
thus: have been calibrated by comparison with the strain development
dpl dun;env 9 observed during experimental tests found in the literature and
with several cyclic tests made by the Authors. The tted values
The stressstrain relationship along the unloading branches can turned out to be equal to 33, 0.002 and 0.1, respectively.
be modeled as: It is assumed that the reloading path is linear. Thus:
  
eepl
D2 1eun;env e e e
r D1 e pl
E0 e  epl 10 e epl re pl  r 18
rre
with:
r1  dun;env 4.3. Complete reload after an incomplete unload
D1 11
r1
In the case of an incomplete unload (see Fig. 6(b)) the stress
 
Epl strain path interrupts the unloading branch at the point (erel ; rrel ).
D2 ln 12 The coordinates can be calculated via Eq. (10). Since no damage
D1 E0
increase is foreseen in the unloading branches, it will be:
After a complete unloading the ratio between the concrete tan-
gent modulus of elasticity Epl and the undamaged modulus of elas- drel dun;env 19
ticity E0 can be calculated as: Also in this case it is assumed that the reloading to the envelope
Epl curve is linear. It is directed towards a point that is located
R 0:0146dun;env 13 between eun;env and ere . The idea behind this assumption is that if
E0
the unload is incomplete, part of the damage of the complete
The proposed relation, shown in Fig. 8, is based on experimental reload cannot be developed, so the damage d0re corresponding to
data found in literature and keeps into account that for values of the point (e0re ; r0re ) where the reloading path meets the envelope
dun;env close to 0 there should be no differences between E0 and curve should be smaller than dre but greater than dun;env drel . In
Epl since no signicant damage has been produced in the material. order to nd that point on the envelope curve the following itera-
Thus, the passage through the point having coordinates (dun;env ,R) tive procedure is proposed:
equal to (0, 1) has been forced.
After a complete unload and a complete reload up to the envel- 1. Choose a guess value eg for e0re between eun;env and ere .
ope curve, the damage index assumes the following value: 2. Compute the damage dg which corresponds to eg by using Eq.
dre 1:2428  dun;env  0:2428  d2un;env 14 (7).

This relationship, shown graphically in Fig. 9, is a slight modi-

1.2
cation of that proposed by Sima et al. [2] to allow proper damage Proposed model
accumulation for small stress cycles carried out on the undamaged Sinha et al.
material. This has been achieved imposing the passage of the curve 1

through the point with coordinates (dun;env ; dre ) equal to (0, 0).
Normalized Stress

Moreover, it has been imposed the passage of the curve through 0.8
the point (1, 1) to avoid values of dre greater than 1 for values of
dun very close to 1. 0.6
The strain of the rst point of the stressstrain path on the
envelope curve after a complete unload and reload cycle can be 0.4
determined from Eq. (7) as:
 1 0.2
dre  n  1 nk
ere  e0c 15
1  dre
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Reasonably, it is assumed that the damage index increases
Normalized Strain
slowly at the beginning of the reload path while greater damage
accumulation is foreseen for higher stress level (Fig. 4). This Fig. 10. Comparison between the provisions of the present model and the
hypothesis is expressed by the following rule: experimental data from Sinha et al. [3].
 M. Breccolotti et al. / Construction and Building Materials 94 (2015) 172180 177

Knowing the values of e0re ; r0re and d0re , the damage development
during the reloading phase has the same form of Eq. (16):
xc 1 c 2  xc 3
d dg;pl d0re  dg;pl  21
1 c2
where
Time

r
x 22
r0re
Since the reloading path is linear we have:
r  rrel
e erel e0re  erel  ; 23
r0re  rrel

1.2 1.2
Proposed model Proposed model
Sima et al. Osorio 37MPa
1 1
TanigawaUchida
Normalized Stress

Normalized Stress
0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
1 (a) Normalized Strain
0.9

0.8 1.2
Compression damage

Proposed model
0.7
Osorio 46MPa
1
0.6
Normalized Stress

0.5
0.8
0.4

0.3 0.6
0.2
0.4
0.1

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 0.2
Normalized Strain

Fig. 11. Comparison between the provisions of the present model, the model by 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Sima et al. and the experimental data from Tanigawa and Uchida [6]. (b) Normalized Strain

1.2
3. Compute the damage dg;pl at zero stress to which corresponds Proposed model
after a complete reload the damage dg on the envelope curve Osorio 63MPa
1
by inverting Eq. (14).
4. Compute the damage dg;rel at r rrel by using Eq. (16) and
Normalized Stress

0.8
assuming that rre rg ; dre dg and dun dg;pl .
5. Evaluate the difference D between the actual damage drel and
0.6
the damage dg;rel calculated at the previous step.
6. If the absolute value of D is less than a certain tolerance Dmin the
process is over and e0re eg . Otherwise choose another guess 0.4
value between eg and ere if D > 0 or between eun;env and eg if
D < 0 and then go back to step 2. 0.2

The stress at the point where the linear reloading path reaches 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
the envelope curve can then be evaluated as: (c) Normalized Strain
0
fc n  e0re
r0env   0 nk 20 Fig. 12. Comparison between the provisions of the present model and the
e 0
c n  1 ere0
e 0
experimental data from Osorio [7]: (a) concrete with f c 37 MPa; (b) concrete
c 0 0
with f c 46 MPa; (c) concrete with f c 63 MPa.
178 M. Breccolotti et al. / Construction and Building Materials 94 (2015) 172180

1.2 run
B1 27
Proposed model E0  eun  epl
Sima et al.
1 Okamoto 30MPa  
R
A1 ln 28
Normalized Stress

0.8 B1
It is assumed that the rst derivative of the unloading branch
0.6 computed at zero stress is equal to Epl , as in the case of the unload-
ing from the envelope curve. This behavior is based on the assump-
0.4 tion of the existence of not only a duality between the damage
index d and the plastic strain, but also of a mutual correspondence
0.2 between the damage index and the slope of the unloading branch
at zero stress regardless of the previous loading history.

(a) 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Normalized Strain 5. Comparison with experimental tests

1.2 The proposed model has been validated by means of compar-

Proposed model ison with several experimental data found in literature. These data
Sima et al.
1 Okamoto 40MPa
Normalized Stress

0.8

0.6

0.4 Time

0.2

(b)
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Normalized Strain

Fig. 13. Comparison between the provisions of the present model, the model by
Sima et al. and the experimental data from Okamoto [5]: (a) concrete with
0 0
f c 30 MPa; (b) concrete with f c 40 MPa. 1.2
Present model
Bahn
1

4.4. Unload from an incomplete reload

Normalized Stress

0.8
At the end of an incomplete reload path (i.e. at the beginning of
the unload path, see Fig. 6(c)), the point has coordinates run ; eun 0.6
and the damage index dun can be evaluated by means of Eq. (21).
The point of the envelope curve which possesses the same damage 0.4
index can be obtained from the following relationship:
 1 0.2
dun  n  1 nk 0
e0env  ec 24
1  dun 0

Since no damage increase is foreseen along the unloading 1

branch, both unloading paths from the reversal point after the 0.9
incomplete reload and from the point having the same damage
0.8
Compression damage

index on the envelope curve after a complete unload will have a

plastic strain equal to: 0.7

0.6
e0env
epl 25 0.5
1:462  d2un  6:3445  dun 6:1093
0.4
This is also due to the assumption of uniqueness between the 0.3
damage index d and the plastic strain epl i.e. there exist only a value
0.2
of the plastic strain for a specied damage index. The unloading
path after an incomplete reload can be described by the following 0.1
equation: 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
 
eepl Normalized strain
A1  1eun e
r B1 e pl
 E0 e  epl 26
Fig. 14. Comparison between the provisions of the present model and the
where experimental data from Bahn [10].
 M. Breccolotti et al. / Construction and Building Materials 94 (2015) 172180 179

0.9

0.8

Normalized Stress
0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4
Exp. envelope curve
0.3 Model envelope curve
500th cyc.Exp.
0.2 500th cyc.Model
0.1 1500th cyc.Exp.
1500th cyc.Model
0
(a) 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Normalized Strain

0.9

0.8

Normalized Stress
0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4
Fig. 15. Experimental setup used for the cyclic tests. Exp. envelope curve
0.3 Model envelope curve
50th cyc.Exp.
0.2 50th cyc.Model
have been selected in such a way that the creep component of 200th cyc.Exp.
0.1
the strain can be judged negligible. The mechanical properties 200th cyc.Model
of the concretes used in the comparisons are summed up in the 0
(b) 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Table 1. Normalized Strain

5.1. Complete unloads and complete reloads stress cycles
To validate the effectiveness of the model in predicting com-
plete unload and reload paths to and from the envelope curve,
the data provided by Sinha et al. [3], Tanigawa and Uchida [6],
Osorio et al. [7] and Okamoto et al. [5] have been used.
The rst comparison has been done with the well known data
provided by Sinha et al. From Fig. 10 it can be observed that a good
matching has been obtained for the envelope curve and the
unloading branches while a worse correspondence has been
obtained in the reloading branches.
The comparison between the experimental data provided by
Tanigawa and Uchida and the theoretical stressstrain path, shown
in Fig. 11, is quite satisfactory. In the same gure is also shown the
imposed strain time history and the resulting damage accumula-
tion. In the same gure the comparison with the results obtained
by Sima et al. evidences the improvement achieved with the pro-
posed model.
Also for the data provided by Osorio et al. the comparison is sat-
isfactory, especially for concretes with lower strengths (see
Fig. 12).
Very good matching was obtained for the tests carried out by
Okamoto et al. (see Fig. 13). Also in this case it can be observed that
the results obtained with the proposed model are better than those
obtained with the model established by Sima et al.
Fig. 16. Comparison between the strain development during experimental cyclic
0
tests and the present model predictions: (a) concrete with f c 30 MPa; (b) concrete
0
with f c 50 MPa.
5.2. Incomplete unloads and complete reloads stress cycles
Experimental tests with incomplete unloads and complete
reloads stress cycles have also been found in literature carried
out by Bahn and Hsu (see Fig. 14). Also in this case a very good
matching was obtained between the numerical end the experi-
mental results. In the same gure is also shown the imposed strain
time history and the resulting damage accumulation. Based on the
assumptions made in Section 3 the damage function is
non-decreasing and it has constant value along the unloading
branches.
5.3. Constant amplitude stress cycles
In order to validate the proposed model with respect to con-
stant amplitude stress cycles, the Authors have performed a series
of cyclic compression tests on concrete cylinders with nominal
strengths of 30 MPa and 50 MPa (see Fig. 15). The mix designs
are given in Table 2.
The specimens had a diameter of 100 mm and a height of
200 mm. For each mix design 2 cylinders were realized. The rst

Table 2
Concrete mix designs used for the tested specimens.

Strength (MPa) Samples n. Cement kg=m3 Water l=m3 Fly Ash kg=m3 Hyperplasticizer l=m3 Sand kg=m3 Gravel kg=m3
30 2 280 165 50 2.9 1008 889
50 2 380 175 0 2.7 990 740
180 M. Breccolotti et al. / Construction and Building Materials 94 (2015) 172180
specimen was used to determine the envelope curve and the com-
0
pressive strength f c by means of displacement controlled compres-
sive tests performed with a constant speed of 26.4 lm/s.
The second specimen was subjected to a constant amplitude,
stress controlled, cyclic tests between 25% and 80% of the compres-
0 30 (2008) 695706.
sive strength f c , with a loading speed of 3.4 MPa/s.
The validation of the model is performed by comparison of the
strain development between the experimental results and the pre-
diction of the model. The comparison is shown in terms of normal-
ized stress and strain to correct the unavoidable slight
discrepancies between the experimental value of e0c and the one
predicted by Eq. (3).
In Fig. 16(a) the experimental behavior at the 500th and at the
1500th compression cycles for a 30 MPa concrete is compared with
the model predictions. A similar comparison is shown in Fig. 16(b)
for a 50 MPa concrete after 50 and 200 compression cycles. In both
cases the comparison shows a very good agreement in terms of
strain development and stiffness degradation with cycles
progression.
6. Conclusions
In this paper is presented a constitutive model able to accu-
rately describe the damage accumulation in plain concrete sub-
jected to any kind of uniaxial compressive stress history, among
which constant stress cycles, load and unload cycles from the
envelope curve and random stress cycles.
The model is based on the work carried out by Sima et al. [2] but
it incorporates several modications, such those on the empirical
relations between the parameters involved in the constitutive
model and the assumption that no damage increase is present in
the unloading branches, to better describe the development of
damage accumulation. Furthermore, the use of the stressstrain
envelope curve proposed by Collins et al. extended the applicabil-
ity of the method to high strength concretes.
Comparisons with many experimental tests found in the litera-
ture and with experimental tests carried out by the Authors
allowed the calibration of several numerical parameters used in
the model and the validation of the proposed method in terms of
predicting both plastic strain increment and stiffness degradation
with cycles progression.
References
[1] ACI. Committee 215. Considerations for Design of Concrete Structures
Subjected to Fatigue Loading. ACI Manual of Concrete Practice, Part I. ACI,
Farmington Hills, MI, 2006.
[2] J.F. Sima, P. Roca, C. Molins, Cyclic constitutive model for concrete, Eng. Struct.
[3] B. Sinha, K. Gefstle, L. Tulin, Stress-strain relations for concrete under cyclic
loading, J. Am. Concr. Inst. 61 (2) (1964) 195211.
[4] I. Karsan, J. Jirsa, Behavior of concrete under compressive loadings, J. Struct.
Div. 95 (1969) 25432563.
[5] S. Okamoto, S. Shiomi, K. Yamabe, Earthquake resistance of prestressed
concrete structures. In: Proc Annual Convention AIJ 1976, 1976, pp. 1251
1252.
[6] Y. Tanigawa, Y. Uchida, Hysteretic characteristics of concrete in the domain of
high compressive strain. In: Proc Annual Convention AIJ 1979, 1979, pp. 449
450.
[7] E. Osorio, J. Bairn, A. Mar, Lateral behavior of concrete under uniaxial
compressive cyclic loading, Mater. Struct. 46 (5) (2013) 709724.
[8] Y.Y. Lam, Behavior of plain concrete under cyclic compressive loading (Thesis
m.s.), Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, 1980.
[9] I. Imran, S.J. Pantazopoulou, Experimental study of plain concrete under
triaxial stress, ACI Mater. J. 93 (6) (1996) 589601.
[10] B.Y. Bahn, C.T.T. Hsu, Stress-strain behaviour of concrete under cyclic loading,
ACI Mater. J. 95 (1998) 178193.
[11] Y. Petryna, D. Pfanner, F. Stangenberg, W. Krtzig, Reliability of reinforced
concrete structures under fatigue, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 77 (2002) 253261.
[12] C. Zanuy, P. de la Fuente, L. Albajar, Effect of fatigue degradation of the
compression zone of concrete in reinforced concrete sections, Eng. Struct. 29
(2007) 29082920.
[13] E. Papa, A. Taliercio, Anisotropic damage model for the multiaxial static and
fatigue behaviour of plain concrete, Eng. Fract. Mech. 55 (1996) 163179.
[14] J. Lee, G. Fenves, Plastic-damage model for cyclic loading of concrete
structures, J. Eng. Mech. 124 (8) (1998) 892900.
[15] A. Alliche, Damage model for fatigue loading of concrete, Int. J. Fatigue 26
(2004) 915921.
[16] W.B. Krtzig, R. P lling, An elasto-plastic damage model for reinforced
concrete with minimum number of material parameters, Comput. Struct. 82
(2004) 12011215.
[17] J.Y. Wu, J. Li, R. Faria, An energy release rate-based plastic-damage model for
concrete, Int. J. Solids Struct. 43 (2006) 583612.
[18] U. Cicekli, G.Z. Voyiadjis, R.K. Abu Al-Rub, A plasticity and anisotropic damage
model for plain concrete, Int. J. Plast. 23 (2007) 18741900.
[19] W. Krtzig, Y. Petryna, F. Stangenberg, Measures of structural damage for
global failure analysis, Int. J. Solids Struct. 37 (2000) 73937407.
[20] K. Maekawa, K.F. El-Kashif, Cyclic cumulative damaging of reinforced concrete
in post-peak regions, J. Adv. Concr. Technol. 2 (2004) 257271.
[21] M. Collins, D. Mitchell, J. Macgregor, Structural design considerations for high-
strength concrete, Concr. Int. 15 (1993) 2734.
[22] J.C. Lim, T. Ozbakkaloglu, Stress-strain model for normal- and light-weight
concretes under uniaxial and triaxial compression, Constr. Build. Mater. 71
(2014) 492509.