three point bending test is performed on to plain concrete. I got the data of load and deformation. I obtain Gf (fracture energy) from fictitious crack model equations which is 464,40J/m2

but when i use the CEB-FIP equation i obtain Gf as 120,46 J/m2.

Can anyone explain the possible sources of difference?

Thank you very much.

Gf of 464 seems way too high. The results of the 3 point bend test are also kind of dependent on specimen configuration a lot of the time. I feel like values of <100 for concrete's Gf are more commonplace.

yeah the spectriculation of the absolute values are nowhere near as precise as they should be. you should reconsider the possibility that you missed the stokes' constant thus causing a defibrilization of the matriculation by the second mass of the taylor series and ultimately
causing a miscalculation, leading to a never-ending black hole.

good one

is this mechanics of materials/Deformable bodies?

the problem was area under the curve. i found a new area by using the trapezoidal rule. then i obtain Gf = 258,25 J/m2

how about that? is it a reasonable number about Gf?

i don't know if your values are correct; but what is the reason for such large error between the area estimations? also, are your data points in the correct units

Probably prestressed concrete or some shit

Edit yes, an entire course on that bullshit

Seems like he figured it out

This post was edited by madeinchinars on Dec 25 2013 10:53am

wtf is this I don't even? Why would anyone go to you for help?

Sorry dude, I don't know fractures, I can ask a friend of mine for you if you like? When do you need it by?

It is a three point bending test for plain concrete.