ASIAN JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING (BHRC) VOL. 17, NO.

1 (2016)
PAGES 67-74

BEHAVIOUR OF CONCRETE ENCASED STEEL COMPOSITE

SHORT COLUMN SUBJECTED TO UNIAXIAL STATIC LOADING
S.S. Vivek, D. Anjali, and G. Dhinakaran
School of Civil Engineering, SASTRA University, Thanjavur 613401, India
Received: 18 March 2015; Accepted: 20 August 2015

ABSTRACT
Composite structures play a major role in the design and construction of multi-storeyed
buildings. It has positive prospects like, high strength, corrosion resistance, combined
utilisation of both the material properties, etc. In present work, an experimental study was
made on the behaviour of concrete encased I-shape steel short columns under axial
compression was considered. The mineral admixture namely metakaolin (MK) was added
15% as replacement of cement for developing self compacting concrete (SCC) specimens.
The experimental programme was developed with the two composite specimens namely, one
composite short column specimen with conventional vibrated reinforced cement concrete
(CVC) and the another composite short column specimen with reinforced self compacting
concrete (SCC) with M60 grade as per ACI code. The significance of the investigation was
to examine maximum compressive load of composite short column under static loading
conditions by varying the high strength concrete type. The comparison of structural
behaviour of CVC and SCC composite short columns was obtained. Finally the load
displacement curve and stress strain curve was plotted to study and compare the behaviour
of both types of short composite columns.

Keywords: Metakaolin; conventionally vibrated concrete; self compacting concrete; static

loading; short column.
1. INTRODUCTION
Composite member consists of a hot rolled or built-up structural steel shape either with
concrete filled or encased by Reinforced Cement Concrete (RCC). Concrete encased
composite structures have more positive effect than concrete filled tubes columns. They are
best suited to resist repeated earthquake loading, high stiffness so that the bending stress as
well as deflection are lesser, reduced beam depth, storey height. Cost of formwork was
lesser compared to RCC construction, easy structural repair , modification and maintenance,
structural steel has considerable scrap value at the end of useful life, more usage of materials

E-mail address of the corresponding author: vivek@civil.sastra.edu (S.S. Vivek)

68

S.S. Vivek, D. Anjali, and G. Dhinakaran

and environmental friendly fire proofing and high ductility. Self compacting concrete (SCC)
was a high performance concrete that does not require an external vibration. It has the
fluidity property compared to conventional concrete. Advantages of SCC were lesser
workers on construction site, much easier placing of concrete etc. mineral admixture and
chemical admixtures were used as optimized dosage to increase the workability and strength
of concrete. Ali et al. [1] made a study on strength and ductility of concrete encased
composite beams. Ben and Ehab [2] investigated on the performance of axially restrained
concrete encased steel composite columns at elevated temperatures.
Cheng et al. [3] made experimental study on behaviour and strength of concrete-encased
composite beamcolumns with T-shaped steel section under cyclic loading. Cengiz and
Serkan [4] studied the behaviour of reinforced and concrete-encased composite columns
subjected to biaxial bending and axial load. Pinned end conditions were achieved in tested
specimen. Weng et al. [5] made a study on shear strength of concrete encased composite
structural members. Weng et al. [6] had done the comparisons of concrete-encased
composite column strength by the provisions of ACI code and AISC specification. Mahbuba
et al. [7] studied the behaviour of partially encased composite columns with high strength
concrete. Mirza et al. [8] investigated comparative strength analyses of concrete-encased
steel composite columns with ACI 318-02 [9], AISC(LRFD) [10] and Euro code 4 [11].
Pedro and Cheng [12] investigated behaviour of bi-axially loaded concrete-encased
composite columns. Chandrakant et al. [13] investigated the use of admixtures in SCC and
their proportions; ratio of powdery materials and plasticizers was studied. It was observed
that 10% to 15% of powdery content improved the strength of SCC at the age of 28 days.
Ramanathan et al. [14] studied the rheology of SCC by powder content and poly
carboxylates ethers subjected to low and high temperatures. Cheng et al. [15] studied
relative rigidity approach for design of concrete-encased composite columns. Ellobody and
Young [16, 17] made an investigation on simulation of concrete encased steel composite
columns at elevated temperatures and for eccentrically loaded steel composite columns.

2. EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS
2.1 Materials
Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) of ASTM Type I [18] was used in this study. The mineral
admixture added with cement was Metakaolin and was obtained from Chennai. Locally
available river sand with a down size of 4.75 mm conforming to grading Zone III was used as
fine aggregate and crushed granite stones of 12.5 mm down size were used as coarse
aggregates and their particle size distributions confirmed to the requirements of ASTM C33
[19]. Super plasticizer was used to obtain sufficient workability for the mixes. TEC MIX 550
and 640 were used as super plasticizer and stabilizer to maintain cohesiveness of the mix.
2.2 Mix design
The concrete mix design was done as per ACI 211.1-91 [20] method for concrete with a
characteristic compressive strength of 60 MPa and the mix proportion for conventionally
vibrated concrete was 1:1.35:2.19 and for self compacting concrete was 1:1.954:1.598 with a
w/b ratio of 0.40.

BEHAVIOUR OF CONCRETE ENCASED STEEL COMPOSITE SHORT COLUMN...

69

2.3 Composite materials and specification

Two numbers of composite short columns were considered for this experimental study. Both
columns CVC and SCC were short columns having slenderness ratio of 12 as per BS 5400Part 5-2 [21], leff/b 30. The primitive materials utilized to enhance the composite column
specimens were normal weight concrete, smooth and deformed longitudinal reinforcing bars.
Hot rolled I- shaped structural steel, deformed lateral ties. Specimen properties were
tabulated in Table 1.
Table 1: Properties of composite column, fcu = 60 MPa

Short Column
CVC
SCC

Cross Section (mm)

As (mm2)

Ties

100x100

4T12

4R8/2L

Steel section
Structural
Steel I-section

Ac (mm2)

Ass (mm2)

9840

158

Where
T = high grade deformed bar and the number follows indicate the diameter in mm
R = mild steel and the number follows indicate the diameter in mm
As = longitudinal reinforcement.
Ac = Area of composite column
Ass = area of encased steel column.
2.4 Details of I section and reinforcement
I shape steel plates of 25mm (width) x 25mm (depth) x 3mm flange and web thickness 3mm
used as composite column specimen. The I shape steel section was obtained by taking a mild
steel plates of 3 mm x 3 mm into milling machine to remove square portions of the solid
section from both sides of the steel plates until getting the desired I shape. The column were
cast vertically with encased of structural I section and fabricated reinforcement. 4 numbers of
12mm diameter bars were used as longitudinal reinforcement and 4 numbers of 8mm dia with
two legged ties, 100 mm x100 mm (B x D) cross section chosen with 350 mm length (L).
2.5 Coupon test
Ultimate strength at which the structural steel would fail is obtained from conducting tensile
test on a standard specimen called coupon. In the present study, the coupon test was
conducted on the specimen of steel plate in order to find out the yield stress of the material
used for fabrication of an I-section [see Fig. 1 and 2].

Figure 1. Specimen for Coupon Test

Figure 2. Coupon test on UTM

70

S.S. Vivek, D. Anjali, and G. Dhinakaran

2.6 Fabrication and form work

I shape was obtained using welding of steel plates in the machine shop. Preparation of
mould for a short column of inner dimensions 100 mm x 100 mm x 350 mm. The
reinforcement consists of 4 numbers of 12 mm diameter bars with two legged vertical ties
was used [Fig. 3 and Fig. 4].

Figure 3. Preparation of composite short column with I section and reinforcement

Figure 4. Experimental test set up for short composite column

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Coupon test
Steel plate and two different diameters of steel rods were tested to assess the yield and
ultimate strength. From the results, it was understood that only marginal difference was
observed between yield and ultimate strength in the case of steel plate. In the case steel rods
the difference between these strength values was significant because of its circular cross
section. Yield and ultimate strength of steel plate and steel rods used in the present work is
given in Table 2.

BEHAVIOUR OF CONCRETE ENCASED STEEL COMPOSITE SHORT COLUMN...

71

Table 2: Coupon test

Specimen
Steel plate
12 mm rod
8mm rod

Yield strength in MPa

521
414
250

Ultimate strength in MPa

540
620
350

3.2 Behaviour of CVC short composite column

According to the Eulers column pinned condition was used. The CVC column was placed on
the universal testing machine with 1000 kN capacity. Generally pinned end conditions were
preferred to place the load exactly at CG of the specimen. For pinned condition 8 mm base
plate and 18 mm thickness of ball was used. Then the base plate was grooved at a certain
depth to place and affix a ball in correct manner. The preliminary adjustments were done and
the start button was pressed to apply the load to specimen. Loading rate applied as 75 kN/min
and the load was applied gradually to the concrete encased composite column specimen. The
initial crack was appeared at 25 kN load and the ultimate load at failure was noted as 40 kN.
The machine was stopped after spalling and crushing of concrete [Fig. 5 and Fig. 6].
45
40

35

Load (kN)

30
25
20

15
10
5
0
0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

Deflection (mm)

Figure 5. Load vs deflection curve for CVC composite short columns

Figure 6. Failure of CVC- short composite column

S.S. Vivek, D. Anjali, and G. Dhinakaran

72

3.3 Behaviour of SCC Short composite column

The similar procedure was followed to SCC column. The initial hairline crack was appeared
at 186 kN and the ultimate load at failure was 196 kN. It was under stood that the load at the
first crack in SCC column was 7 times the value of CVC column. This shows that bonding
developed between concrete and I section was pucca in SCC column and lack of bonding
was noticed in CVC column and was responsible for its failure at early load. Similarly, the
ultimate load of SCC column was found to be approximately 5 times the load carrying
capacity of CVC column due to the same reason as mentioned earlier [Fig. 7 and Fig. 8].

250

Load(kN)

200
150
100
50
0
0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

Deflection (mm)

Figure 7. Load vs Deflection curve for SCC Composite short columns

Figure 8. Failure of SCC- short composite column

Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank the Vice Chancellor of SASTRA
University for having provided experimental facilities in the School of Civil Engineering to
do this research work and also for the continuous support and encouragement given
throughout this research work.

BEHAVIOUR OF CONCRETE ENCASED STEEL COMPOSITE SHORT COLUMN...

73

4. CONCLUSIONS
Based on the above experimental programme on short composite columns, the following
important conclusions were made as follows:
In the case of steel plate, only marginal difference between yield strength and ultimate
strength was noticed.
The CVC composite short column subjected to first crack at much earlier load. Failure at
first crack was noticed in SCC composite short column at seven times greater load than
CVC column.
The short composite column of CVC obtained axial load of 156 kN whereas SCC column
got higher value of 760 kN, when tested at the age of 28 days of curing.
The strength attained by CVC short composite column was only 19.5% of the total
strength of SCC short composite column at the age of 7 and 28 days of testing.
Hence it was suggested that SCC could be best suited for composite steel column which
are to be used industries.

REFERENCES
1. Ali AA, Sadik SN, Abdul-Sahib WS. Strength and ductility of concrete encased
composite beams, Engineering and Technology Journal, No. 30, 15(2012) 2701-14.
2. Ben Young, Ehab Ellobody. Performance of axially restrained concrete encased steel
composite columns at elevated temperatures, Engineering Structures, 33(2011) 245-54.
3. Cheng-Chih Chen, Jian-MingLi, Weng CC. Experimental behaviour and strength of
concrete-encased composite beamcolumns with T-shaped steel section under cyclic
loading, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 61(2005) 863-88.
4. Cengiz Dundar, SerkanTokgoz. Behaviour of reinforced and concrete-encased
composite columns subjected to biaxial loading and axial load, Building and
Environment, 43(2008) 1109-20.
5. Weng CC, Yen SI, Chen CC. Shear strength of concrete-encased composite Structural
members, Journal of Structural Engineering, No. 127, 10(2001) 1190-97.
6. Weng CC, Yen SI. Comparisons of concrete-encased composite column strength
provisions of ACI code and AISC specification, Engineering Structures, 24(2002) 59-72.
7. Mahbuba Beguma, Robert GD, Alaa EE. Behaviour of partially encased composite
columns with high strength concrete, Engineering Structures, 56(2013) 1718-27.
8. Mirza SA, Lacroix EA. Comparative strength analyses of concrete-encased steel
composite columns, Journal of Structural Engineering, 130(2004) 1941-53.
9. The American Concrete Institute (ACI 318-02). Building Code Requirements for
Structural Concrete (ACI 318-02) and Commentary (ACI 318R-02) (2001).

74

S.S. Vivek, D. Anjali, and G. Dhinakaran

10. American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC). Performance of the AISC LRFD
Specification in Predicting the Capacity of Eccentrically Loaded Single-Angle Struts.
11. EN 1994-1-1 (2004) (English): Eurocode 4: Design of composite steel and concrete
structures Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings [Authority: The European
Union Per Regulation 305/2011, Directive 98/34/EC, Directive 2004/18/EC].
12. Pedro RM, Cheng-Tzu TH. Behaviour of biaxially loaded concrete-encased Composite
columns, Journal of Structural Engineering, 123(1997) 1163-71.
13. Chandrakant Mehetre U, Pradnya Urade P, Shriram Mahure H, Ravi K. Comparative
study of properties of self compacting concrete with metakaolin and cement kiln dust as
mineral admixtures, International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology,
No.2, 4(2014) 37-52.
14. Ramanathan P, Baskar I, Muthupriya P, Venkatasubramani R. Performance of selfcompacting concrete containing different mineral admixtures, KSCE Journal of Civil
Engineering, No.17, 2(2013) 465-72.
15. Weng CC, Yen SI, Wang HS. A Relative rigidity approach for design of concreteencased composite columns, Journal of the Chinese Institute of Engineers, No. 30,
4(2007) 621-33.
16. Ehab Ellobody, Ben Young. Numerical simulation of concrete encased steel composite
columns, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 67(2011) 211-22.
17. Ehab Ellobody, Ben Young. Investigation of concrete encased steel composite columns
at elevated temperatures, Thin-Walled Structures, 4(2010) 597-608.
18. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). Standard specification for
Portland Cement, ASTM C150/C150M-12, ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
PA DOI: 10.1520/C0150_C0150M-12.
19. ASTM C33/C33M-13. Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregates, ASTM
International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2013.
20. American Concrete Institute (ACI). Standard practice for selecting proportions for normal,
heavyweight and mass concrete, ACI 211-91(1991) Farmington Hills, MI, USA.
21. BS 5400-2:2006. Steel, concrete and composite bridges, specification for loads, British
standards Institution.
22. Ehab Ellobody, Ben Young, Dennis Lam. Eccentrically loaded concrete encased steel
composite columns, Thin-Walled Structures, 49(2011) 53-65.