260
8 Response of UHPCC-FST Subjected to Low-Velocity Impact
y
x
z
Symmetry planes
10mm
Displacement load
0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008
0
2
4
6
8
10
Tensile strength (MPa)
Strain
Test data (Ren et al. 2018)
Numerical simulation
(a)
(b)
Fig. 8.19 Single element simulation a FE model b Comparison of uniaxial tensile stress–strain
curve, reprinted from Wu et al. (2019), copyright 2020, with permission from Elsevier
8.5 Numerical Simulation
8.5.1 Present Test
8.5.1.1 FE Model
To further understand the performance of UHPCC filled steel tubes under transverse
impact load, in this section, a FE model is established by using the commercial FE
program Hypermesh/LS-DYNA, as shown in Fig. 8.20. The 3D solid element is
Fig. 8.20 FE model of the drop hammer impact test, reprinted from Wu et al. (2019), copyright
2020, with permission from Elsevier
8 Response of UHPCC-FST Subjected to Low-Velocity Impact
y
x
z
Symmetry planes
10mm
Displacement load
0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008
0
2
4
6
8
10
Tensile strength (MPa)
Strain
Test data (Ren et al. 2018)
Numerical simulation
(a)
(b)
Fig. 8.19 Single element simulation a FE model b Comparison of uniaxial tensile stress–strain
curve, reprinted from Wu et al. (2019), copyright 2020, with permission from Elsevier
8.5 Numerical Simulation
8.5.1 Present Test
8.5.1.1 FE Model
To further understand the performance of UHPCC filled steel tubes under transverse
impact load, in this section, a FE model is established by using the commercial FE
program Hypermesh/LS-DYNA, as shown in Fig. 8.20. The 3D solid element is
Fig. 8.20 FE model of the drop hammer impact test, reprinted from Wu et al. (2019), copyright
2020, with permission from Elsevier