ASDConcrete3D AutoRegularization with user-defined Mander-based curves
Posted: Mon Jun 01, 2026 11:38 am
Hello,
I am using ASDConcrete3D with user-defined backbone curves generated from a Mander stress-strain model.
My compression envelope (Ce/Cs) is obtained from a Mander curve, while the tension envelope (Te/Ts) is defined from the cracking strength and includes a residual stress plateau for numerical stability. Damage curves (Cd/Td) are also user-defined.
The stress-strain curves are not derived from experimental fracture-energy data. They are generated analytically from the Mander model and then extended with residual branches to avoid convergence issues after severe damage.
My question concerns the -autoRegularization option.
From the documentation and from Dr. Petracca’s explanations, I understand that when user-defined stress-strain curves are provided, the reference characteristic length should correspond to the specimen length from which the stress-strain data were obtained.
However, in my case there is no physical specimen. The curves are generated numerically from a Mander model.
Therefore:
1. How should the reference length be selected when using Mander-based user-defined curves?
2. Should the same reference length be used for all meshes?
3. Is it acceptable to use AutoRegularization in this situation, or is it more appropriate to disable it and accept some mesh sensitivity?
4. What is the recommended workflow for ASDConcrete3D when the backbone is Mander-based rather than fracture-energy-based?
I performed analyses with element sizes of 0.50 m, 0.25 m and 0.125 m and observed noticeable differences in peak strains, both with and without AutoRegularization. I am trying to understand what should be considered the correct approach.
Thank you.
I am using ASDConcrete3D with user-defined backbone curves generated from a Mander stress-strain model.
My compression envelope (Ce/Cs) is obtained from a Mander curve, while the tension envelope (Te/Ts) is defined from the cracking strength and includes a residual stress plateau for numerical stability. Damage curves (Cd/Td) are also user-defined.
The stress-strain curves are not derived from experimental fracture-energy data. They are generated analytically from the Mander model and then extended with residual branches to avoid convergence issues after severe damage.
My question concerns the -autoRegularization option.
From the documentation and from Dr. Petracca’s explanations, I understand that when user-defined stress-strain curves are provided, the reference characteristic length should correspond to the specimen length from which the stress-strain data were obtained.
However, in my case there is no physical specimen. The curves are generated numerically from a Mander model.
Therefore:
1. How should the reference length be selected when using Mander-based user-defined curves?
2. Should the same reference length be used for all meshes?
3. Is it acceptable to use AutoRegularization in this situation, or is it more appropriate to disable it and accept some mesh sensitivity?
4. What is the recommended workflow for ASDConcrete3D when the backbone is Mander-based rather than fracture-energy-based?
I performed analyses with element sizes of 0.50 m, 0.25 m and 0.125 m and observed noticeable differences in peak strains, both with and without AutoRegularization. I am trying to understand what should be considered the correct approach.
Thank you.