M.Sc.B.Kalemi 2016 Numericalmodellingandassessmentofcircularconcrete-Filledsteeltubularmembers PDF

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/313635083
NUMERICAL MODELLING AND ASSESSMENT OF CIRCULAR CONCRETE-

FILLED STEEL TUBULAR MEMBERS
Thesis · February 2016

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10565.45280
CITATIONS READS
0 997
4 authors:
Bledar Kalemi Yadong Jiang

Università Degli Studi Roma Tre National University of Ireland, Galway
3 PUBLICATIONS 2 CITATIONS 17 PUBLICATIONS 49 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
José Miguel Castro Ricardo Monteiro

University of Porto Istituto Universitario di Studi Superiori di Pavia
130 PUBLICATIONS 535 CITATIONS 78 PUBLICATIONS 355 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
ITERATE View project
ASSESSMENT OF THE PROBABILITY OF LOC EVENTS IN STEEL STORAGE TANKS UNDER SEISMIC LOADING View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Bledar Kalemi on 12 February 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

NUMERICAL MODELLING AND
ASSESSMENT OF CIRCULAR
CONCRETE-FILLED STEEL TUBULAR
MEMBERS
A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements

for the Master Degree in
Earthquake Engineering &/or Engineering Seismology
By
Bledar Kalemi
Supervisors: Prof. Dr. Jose Miguel Castro and Dr. Ricardo Monteiro
March, 2016
Istituto Universitario di Studi Superiori di Pavia

The dissertation entitled “Numerical modelling and assessment of concrete-filled steel tubular
members”, by Bledar Kalemi, has been approved in partial fulfilment of the requirements for
the Master Degree in Earthquake Engineering.
Dr. Jose Miguel Castro … … ………
Dr. Ricardo Monteiro… …… ……

Abstract
ABSTRACT
This dissertation aims at understanding the behaviour of circular concrete-filled steel tubular members
and finding a proper simplified numerical model for modelling this type of structural members under
lateral loading or lateral loading combined with axial load. Two numerical models are investigated,
namely detailed 3D numerical modelling using the software ABAQUS and 2D numerical modelling
with distributed plasticity approach using the software OpenSees. Both finite element models are
validated by comparing the results with experimental test data. The detailed 3D numerical model has
shown to be accurate in predicting the behaviour of circular CFST columns while the 2D numerical
model using OpenSees with uniaxial material properties always underestimates the lateral capacity of
the members. Prior research studies attributed this difference to enhancement of concrete properties
due to the confinement effect of steel tube on the concrete core. It is shown in the 2D numerical results
that even by accounting for confinement effects, using several proposed confined concrete models
available in the literature, there is still underestimation of the lateral capacity of circular CFST
members. Detailed 3D numerical models show that this over-strength in the ultimate lateral capacity
of circulars CFST members is attributed not only to the concrete confinement effect but also to the
change of steel properties due to the bi-axial stress state developing in the steel tube. Finally, a
simplified 2D numerical model using OpenSees with modified material properties based on 3D
models is suggested and validated through comparison with experimental results.
Keywords: circular concrete filled steel tubes; rubberized concrete; simplified numerical model;
distributed plasticity; bi-axil stress state; over-strength
i
Acknowledgements
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge and thank all the important people who have supported me, not only
during the development of this dissertation thesis, but throughout my Master’s studies.
First, I would like to thank my supervisors, Dr. José Miguel Castro and Dr. Ricardo Monteiro for their
support and guidance during the period of my master thesis development. Thank you for your time and
energy you spent in discussions and meetings.
I would like to thank all professors of MEEES master in University of Patras and IUSS of Pavia for
teaching me.
I would like to thank my colleague Yadong Jiang for working with me and supporting me with 3D
numerical data.
I would like to thank my colleague Antonio Silva for supporting me with experimental data.
I would like to thank all my colleagues of my office for sharing ideas and the conversations we had.
I would like to thank all my friends and classmates that I meet during my master studies in Patra,
Pavia and Porto. It has been a very wonderful time.
Finally, I would like to thank my family and my friends in Albania. Thank you for supporting me all
the time that I was studying abroad.
ii
Index
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................................ i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................................... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................iii
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................................ v
LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................................ vii
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Behaviour of CFST .................................................................................................................... 1
1.1.1 General ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.1.2 Behaviour under axial compression ................................................................................. 2
1.1.3 Behaviour under axial tension ......................................................................................... 2
1.1.4 Behaviour under bending ................................................................................................. 3
1.1.5 Behaviour under torsion ................................................................................................... 3
1.2 CFST solutions........................................................................................................................... 4
1.2.1 Common CFST ................................................................................................................ 4
1.2.2 Other CFST solutions ...................................................................................................... 4
1.3 Research goals and objectives.................................................................................................... 5
2 LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................................................. 6
2.1 Experimental studies .................................................................................................................. 6
2.2 Numerical studies....................................................................................................................... 8
2.3 Proposed confined concrete models ........................................................................................... 9
2.3.1 Hu et al. [2003] for CFST members under axial load ...................................................... 9
2.3.2 Hu et al. [2005] for CFST members under axial load combined with bending ............. 11
2.3.3 Liang and Fragomeni [2009].......................................................................................... 12
3 TEST CAMPAIGN ......................................................................................................................... 15
3.1 Description of the test campaign and specimens ..................................................................... 15
3.1.1 Specimen definition ....................................................................................................... 15
3.1.2 Material properties ......................................................................................................... 16
3.1.3 Test setup ....................................................................................................................... 17
3.2 Test results and discussions ..................................................................................................... 18
3.2.1 Test results ..................................................................................................................... 18
3.2.2 Influence of the axial load level ..................................................................................... 20
3.2.3 Influence of concrete type .............................................................................................. 20
4 NUMERICAL MODELLING AND BEHAVIOUR ASSESSMENT OF THE TEST SPECIMENS
22
4.1 Detailed 3D numerical modelling in ABAQUS of test specimens under monotonic lateral
loading 22
4.1.1 Mesh, boundary conditions and surface contact interaction .......................................... 22
4.1.2 Material model for structural steel ................................................................................. 24
iii
Index
4.1.3 Material model for concrete ........................................................................................... 26

4.1.4 Results of 3D numerical modelling and comparison with test results ........................... 28
4.2 Simplified 2D modelling in OpenSees of test specimens under monotonic lateral loading using
uniaxial material properties .................................................................................................................. 30
4.2.1 Assumptions................................................................................................................... 30
4.2.3 Material model for concrete and rubberized concrete.................................................... 31
4.2.4 Mesh sensitivity study.................................................................................................... 32
4.2.5 Results of numerical modelling and comparison with test results ................................. 34
4.3 Comparison between two numerical model analysis results with test results.......................... 36
4.4 Simplified 2D modelling in OpenSees of test specimens under monotonic lateral loading using
confined concrete properties ................................................................................................................. 38
4.4.1 Material models ............................................................................................................. 38
4.5 Over-strength phenomenon ...................................................................................................... 41
4.5.1 Confined concrete .......................................................................................................... 41
4.5.2 Bi-axial stress state of the steel tube .............................................................................. 41
4.6 Simplified 2D modelling in OpenSees of test specimens under cyclic lateral loading using
uniaxial properties ................................................................................................................................ 42
4.6.2 Material model for concrete and rubberized concrete.................................................... 43
5 SIMPLIFIED 2D NUMERICAL MODELLING OF TEST SPECIMENS USING MODIFIED
MATERIAL PROPERTIES ................................................................................................................. 46
5.1 Behaviour assessment of CFST members based on 3D detailed models................................. 46
5.1.1 Concrete material ........................................................................................................... 46
5.1.2 Structural steel ............................................................................................................... 47
5.2 Results of simplified 2D numerical modelling of specimens under monotonic lateral loading
using modified material properties ....................................................................................................... 48
6 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH ............................................................................. 51
6.1 Summary and conclusions ....................................................................................................... 51
6.2 Future research ......................................................................................................................... 52
7 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................ 53
iv
Index
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1.1. Schematic failure modes of steel tube, concrete and CFST .....................................1
Figure 1.2. Behaviour of CFST under axial compression ..........................................................2
Figure 1.3. Schematic failure modes of steel tube, concrete and CFST under axial tension ......2
Figure 1.4. Schematic failure modes of steel tube, RC member and CFST under bending .......3
Figure 1.5. Schematic failure modes of steel tube, RC member and CFST under torsion .........3
Figure 1.6. Examples of CFST solutions ....................................................................................4
Figure 1.7. Examples of alternative CFST solutions ..................................................................5
Figure 2.1. Equivalent uniaxial stress-strain curve for confined concrete ................................10
Figure 2.2. Cross-section of CFST columns .............................................................................11
Figure 2.3. Stress-strain curve for confined concrete proposed by Liang and Fragomeni [2009]
...........................................................................................................................................13
Figure 3.1. Stress-strain curves of structural steel obtained from coupon test .........................16
Figure 3.2. Steel box used to fix the specimen’s base ..............................................................17
Figure 3.3. Detail used to fix circular CFST .............................................................................17
Figure 3.4. Test setup ................................................................................................................18
Figure 3.5. Cyclic loading protocol ..........................................................................................18
Figure 3.6. Test results ..............................................................................................................19
Figure 3.7. Outwards local buckling of steel tube ....................................................................20
Figure 3.8. Fracture of steel tube ..............................................................................................20
Figure 3.9. Moment-drift curves for different concrete types under lateral monotonic loading
and no axial load ...............................................................................................................21
Figure 3.10. Moment-drift curves for different concrete types under lateral monotonic loading
and 15% axial load ............................................................................................................21
Figure 4.1. Mesh and geometry of the 3D model in ABAQUS ................................................23
Figure 4.2. Cross-section mesh of concrete in ABAQUS ........................................................23
Figure 4.3. Scaled initial imperfection ......................................................................................23
Figure 4.4. Lateral force-drift curve of the initial imperfection amplification factors .............23
Figure 4.5. Steel stress-strain curve comparison between coupon test and numerical model ..25
Figure 4.6. Stress-strain curve of concrete in compression used in 3D numerical model ........27
Figure 4.7. Stress-train curve of concrete in tension used in 3D numerical model ..................27
Figure 4.8. Comparison of moment-drift curves of ABAQUS results with test results ...........28
Figure 4.9. Stress-strain curve for structural steel used in OpenSees .......................................30
Figure 4.10. Comparison between steel stress-strain curves of coupon test with the ones used
in 2D numerical analysis with monotonic lateral loading ................................................31
v
Index
Figure 4.11. Stress-strain curve for concrete in compression used in OpenSees .....................31
Figure 4.12. Stress-strain curves of concrete and rubberized concrete used in 2D numerical
model.................................................................................................................................32
Figure 4.13. Member discretization in OpenSees .....................................................................33
Figure 4.14. Fibre element cross-section discretization of circular CFST in OpenSees ..........33
Figure 4.15. Comparison between different cross-section mesh types used in OpenSees .......33
Figure 4.16. Comparison of moment-drift curves between test results with OpenSees using
uniaxial material................................................................................................................34
Figure 4.17. Comparison of moment-drift curves between test, ABAQUS and OpenSees
results ................................................................................................................................36
Figure 4.18. Comparison of moment-drift curves between test results and OpenSees with
confined concrete properties .............................................................................................39
Figure 4.19. Lateral stresses due to confinement ......................................................................41
Figure 4.20. Yielding of steel under bi-axial stresses ...............................................................42
Figure 4.21. Steel tube stresses in different points of perimeter ...............................................42
Figure 4.22. Steel02 constitutive stress-strain model ...............................................................43
Figure 4.23. Comparison between steel stress-strain curves of coupon test with the ones used
in 2D numerical analysis with cyclic lateral loading ........................................................43
Figure 4.24. Comparison of hysteretic moment-drift curves of test results with OpenSees
using uniaxial material ......................................................................................................44
Figure 5.1. Confined concrete stress- drift curve ......................................................................46
Figure 5.2. Modified steel stress-strain curve for specimen CR-RuC15%-219-3-15% ...........48
Figure 5.3. Comparison of moment-drift curves between test results, ABAQUS and OpenSees
with modified material properties .....................................................................................49
vi
Index
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 3-1. Specimens summary ................................................................................................15
Table 3-2. Comparison between nominal and real yielding strength of structural steel...........16
Table 3-3. Concrete compressive strength ................................................................................16
Table 3-4. Comparison of ultimate moment capacity of members with and without axial load
...........................................................................................................................................20
Table 3-5. Comparison of ultimate moment capacity between 5%RuCFST and StdCFST .....21
Table 3-6. Comparison of ultimate moment capacity between 15%RuCFST and StdCFST ...21
Table 4-1. Comparison of moment capacity between ABAQUS and test results at a drift level
of 4% .................................................................................................................................29
Table 4-2. Comparison of energy index between ABAQUS and test results at a drift level of
4% .....................................................................................................................................29
Table 4-3. Steel properties used for calibration of tri-axial stress-strain curve ........................31
Table 4-4. Comparison of moment capacity between OpenSees with uniaxial material
properties and test results at a drift level of 4% ................................................................35
Table 4-5. Comparison of energy index between OpenSees with uniaxial material properties
and test results at a drift level of 4% .................................................................................35
Table 4-6. Comparison of moment capacity at 4% drift between test, ABAQUS and OpenSees
with uniaxial material properties results ...........................................................................37
Table 4-7. Comparison of energy index at 4% drift between test, ABAQUS and OpenSees
with uniaxial material properties results ...........................................................................37
Table 4-8. Confined concrete compressive strength from different models of literature .........38
Table 4-9. Comparison of moment capacity at 4% drift between test results and OpenSees 2D
with confined concrete properties .....................................................................................40
Table 4-10. Comparison of energy index at 4% drift between test results and OpenSees 2D
with confined concrete properties .................................................................................40
Table 5-1. Summary of compressive strength of confined concrete for all specimens ............47
Table 5-2. Summary of modified steel yield stress for all specimens ......................................48
Table 5-3. Comparisons of moment capacity for 4% drift between test, ABAQUS and
simplified model ...............................................................................................................50
Table 5-4. Comparisons of energy index for 4% drift between test, ABAQUS and simplified
model.................................................................................................................................50
vii
Chapter 1. Introduction
1 INTRODUCTION
In the last decade, the use of concrete filled steel tubes (CFST) has increased mainly in
seismic resistance constructions, high-rise buildings, bridge peers, arch bridges, electrical
poles etc.
Concrete filled steel tubes (CFST) take advantage of combining concrete and steel materials
to provide high seismic resistance structural properties such as high strength, high ductility
and large energy absorption capacity.
1.1 Behaviour of CFST
1.1.1 General
In a CFST member, the concrete core prevents the steel tube from inward buckling and
increases stability, stiffness and the capacity of the element. On the other hand, the steel tube
acts as longitudinal and transverse reinforcement, prevents concrete spalling and provides
concrete confinement, which puts it under a tri-axial stress state. Figure 1.1 illustrates in a
schematic way the failure modes of a steel tube, a concrete column and of a CFST element in
compression.
In economic terms, steel tube is used as formwork, which leads in reduction of the manpower,
time and constructions costs.
Figure 1.1. Schematic failure modes of steel tube, concrete and CFST
1
1.1.2 Behaviour under axial compression

In a concrete filled steel tube column under axial compression, the only failure is caused by
outwards buckling of the steel tube, while the concrete behaviour is more ductile. Figure 1.2
shows the comparison made by Han et al [2007] of the behaviour of steel tube, RC column
and CFST without reinforcement, where fcu is the maximum compressive strength of concrete,
fy is the steel yielding strength, D is the outer diameter of steel tube and t is the wall thickness
of tube. It can be seen in Figure 1.2 (a) that CFST has bigger axial compression capacity even
compared to the simple summation of the steel tube and RC capacities. CFSTs have a ductile
behaviour and this can be seen from Figure 1.2 (b), where axial strength versus axial
shortening is plotted.
Figure 1.2. Behaviour of CFST under axial compression
1.1.3 Behaviour under axial tension

Few studies have been conducted for CFST under axial tension, one of them by Han at al
[2007] and the schematic failure mode is shown in Figure 1.3. Steel tube diameter in the
middle of specimen gets smaller under pure tension, while concrete failure is characterised by
a transverse crack, which divides it into pieces. In CFST, concrete prevents the reduction of
the steel tube diameter while the steel tube contributes to a uniform distribution of the tensile
stresses in concrete, so there are more cracks with smaller width.
Figure 1.3. Schematic failure modes of steel tube, concrete and CFST under axial tension
2
1.1.4 Behaviour under bending

Figure 1.4 shows the schematic failure modes of steel tube, reinforced concrete member and
CFST subjected to bending. The failure of the steel tube results from inward buckling. In RC
members the failure can result from concrete crushing in the compression zone while in the
tension part horizontal or diagonal shear cracks can develop. In CFSTs the failure is
characterised by outward buckling of the steel tube in the compression zone and concrete
crushing, while in the tensile part, the crack’s width and distance between cracks is smaller in
comparison to RC members.
Figure 1.4. Schematic failure modes of steel tube, RC member and CFST under bending
1.1.5 Behaviour under torsion

Figure 1.5Figure 1.4 shows the schematic failure modes of steel tube, reinforced concrete
member and CFST subjected to torsion. For a CFST under torsion the compressive force is
resisted by concrete while the steel tube carries the tensile force. It can be seen from Figure
1.5 that concrete prevents torsional buckling of steel tube, while the steel tube prevents
development of torsional cracks in concrete.
Figure 1.5. Schematic failure modes of steel tube, RC member and CFST under torsion
3
1.2 CFST solutions
1.2.1 Common CFST

Figure 1.6 (a) shows the cross sections of the three most common types of CFST elements,
namely circular concrete-filled steel tube (CCFST), square concrete filled steel tube (SCFST)
and rectangular concrete-filled steel tube (RCFST) where D and B are the outer dimensions of
steel tube and t is wall thickness of tube. CCFST provides much more confinement to the
concrete core in comparison to SCFST and RCFST solutions. The advantage of square and
rectangular CFST is their shape, which makes the construction of joints much easier in
comparison to circular CFST. Figure 1.6 (b) shows some other cross sectional shapes that are
used for aesthetical purposes.
Figure 1.6. Examples of CFST solutions
1.2.2 Other CFST solutions

Apart from typical CFST, Figure 1.7 shows some alternative CFST cross-sections. Double
skin concrete-filled steel tube CFDST, as shown in Figure 1.7 (a), is made by two steel tubes
and concrete sandwiched in between. CFDST has higher fire resistance in comparison to
typical CFST, as the inner tube is protected from sandwich concrete. Another advantage is
that different types of materials can be used for the inner and outer tubes. Figure 1.7 (b) shows
concrete encased CFST, which consists of an RC member with an inner CFST. The RC
member provides fire resistance to the inner CFST, prevents steel from corrosion and delays
local bucking. The inner tube provides extra confinement to the inside concrete core and
increases the ultimate member capacity. These members are used mainly in China in high rise
buildings and in bridges. Figure 1.7 (c) shows CFSTs with inner structural steel or
reinforcement used to increase the resistance and ultimate capacity of the member. Figure 1.7
(d) shows stiffened square or rectangular CFSTs. For thinned wall tubes with high strength
steel, local buckling of walls can be a problem, so transverse or longitudinal stiffeners can be
welded to steel tube in order to improve the strength and ductility of the composite member.
Sometimes steel bars can be welded between stiffeners to increase the tying force.
4
Figure 1.7. Examples of alternative CFST solutions
1.3 Research goals and objectives

The goal of this dissertation is to find a simplified method for modelling circular CFSTs in
finite element software such as OpenSees. In order to calibrate the 2D model, test results are
needed, but it is not always feasible to have them as it is expensive and takes a lot of time to
test every specimen that someone may need during designing CFST members, so a reliable
3D model will be needed for generating results.
Several circular CFST were tested at the Earthquake Engineering Laboratory of the Faculty of
Engineering University of Porto under monotonic and cyclic lateral loading with various
levels of axial loads. A validation of 3D numerical modelling using ABAQUS finite element
software will be made regarding the test results. Based on 3D numerical analysis and test
results, the material properties of steel and concrete will be calibrated in order to take into
account the three dimensional effects, so they can be used in a simplified 2D numerical
modelling using OpenSees.
5
Chapter 2. Literature review
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Experimental studies
A significant amount of experimental research studies on concrete filled steel tubes have been
performed over the past decades. Some of them will be described below.
O’Shea and Bridge [1997] conducted axial compression tests on thin walled square and
circular steel sections with or without concrete infill. For the specimens with concrete infill
there was no bonding between steel and concrete. For square tubes O’Shea and Bridge [1997]
found that the change of buckling mode can results in a higher load capacity for the thin-
walled steel tube component compared to the unfilled bare steel tube. Test results indicated
that strength enhancement increased from 45% when width-to-thickness ratio was 57 to 67%
when the ratio was 131. For circular tubes with D/t ratio varying from 59 to 220 O’Shea and
Bridge [1997] presented that the concrete infill had little effect on the local buckling strength
of the steel tube under compression as the dominant buckling mode of circular sections is
outwards, “elephant’s foot” buckling mode. They concluded that the strength increase was not
coming directly from the change of buckling mode, but infill concrete allowed the steel to
better develop its behaviour beyond the nominal yield strength.
Schneider [1998] conducted an experimental and analytical study on short concrete filled steel
tubes. Fourteen specimens with different width-to-tube’s wall thickness ratio were considered,
varying from 17 to 50. The length of specimens was 4 to 5 times the diameter of circular tubes
or width of square tubes. The author pointed out that circular steel tube offered more post-
yield axial ductility compared to the ones with square or rectangular section. Circular CFST
showed significant confinement effects while the square and rectangular CFST did not offer
significant confinement effects to concrete core beyond the yield load of composite column.
Varma et al. [2002] tested 16 three-quarter scaled CFST beam-column specimens. Eight
specimens were tested under monotonic loading and eight under cyclic loading. The results
indicated that cyclic loading did not have significant influence on the stiffness or strength of
CFST beam–columns. However, it caused a more rapid decrease of the post-peak moment
resistance. According to the authors, the moment capacity of high-strength CFST beam–
columns can be predicted with reasonable accuracy using the American Concrete Institute
(ACI) code provisions for composite columns.
Sakino et al. [2004] carried out five years of research on concrete-filled steel tube columns.
The authors tested a total of 114 specimens with different cross-section shapes, width-to-
6
thickness ratio and concrete strength. From the results, it was concluded that the difference
between ultimate strength and nominal squash load of CFST, provided by concrete
confinement, can be estimated as a linear function of tube yield force.
Giakoumelis and Lam [2004] tested 15 short CFST columns with circular section and
compared the test results with Eurocode 4 and American Code. The authors found out that the
Eurocode 4 provides a good prediction of the axial strength of concrete-filled steel tube
columns with the biggest difference on axial capacity of 17% compared with experimental
results, while by using ACI the biggest difference was 35%.
Elchalakani et al. [2008] performed cyclic bending tests using a constant amplitude loading
history on different CFST specimens with diameter-to-thickness ratios (D/t) ranging from 20
to 162. The results indicated that cyclic loading has a considerable effect on the strength of
CFST beams, particularly for those made of slender tubes. The low cycle fatigue for compact
and non-compact circular hollow section specimens was increased by at least 1.5 times from
concrete filling. The authors pointed out that the ratio between the seismic and static
slenderness limits was ranging between 0.5 and 1.0, where a low ratio was associated with
higher ductility demands and vice versa.
Han et al. [2011] conducted an experimental campaign of 117 specimens. The test specimens
were divided into four groups: Group 1: 72 short columns under axial compression; group 2:
9 short columns to investigate the influence of different loading methods; Group 3: 12 short
beam columns under axial compression combined with bending; Group 4: 24 columns under
axial compression to investigate the influence of slenderness. Circular, square and rectangular
cross-sections were chosen as they are the most popular cross sections used in engineering.
Regarding the rectangular specimens, the depth was chosen two times the width. The height
of specimens was chosen to be three times the diameter of circular sections or three times the
width of square sections. Type 304 austenitic steel according to Australian/New Zealand
Standard was used for preparation of cold form specimens. The authors introduced a
confinement factor (ξ) to represent the composite action between steel tube and infill
concrete. The main conclusions of this test campaign were: i) CFSTs under bending moment
and axial compression had an enhancement in strength and stability compared with bare steel
tubes and no inward buckling occurred at CFSTs; ii) Stub columns with larger D/t or B/t ratio
are generally less ductile than specimens with lower D/t or B/t ratio; iii) Members with higher
cross-section slenderness ratios exhibited lower capacity.; iv) There was a trend that CFST
filled with higher strength concrete to be less ductile; v) The higher the confinement factor is,
the higher the strength of the member becomes; vi) Design codes, namely EC4, AISC, DBJ
and AS5100 underestimate the load-carrying capacities of CFST columns under axial load or
combined axial with bending moment.
In the last few years, research has been conducted in rubberized concrete which utilizes the
discarded tires to replace part of concrete aggregate. According to the studies, it was
demonstrated that rubberized concrete can increase the ductility and deformability of the
concrete, but at the same time there is a significant reduction of compressive strength. From
previous studies performed by Xue et al. [2013] it was concluded that the average damping
7
ratio of rubberized concrete columns is larger in comparison with normal reinforced concrete
columns, which can lead into smaller seismic forces due to increased damping.
Recently, Silva et al. [2015] conducted an experimental campaign, which consisted of 36

specimens, 4 of the specimens were with standard concrete while 32 were with rubberized
concrete, with an aggregate substitution ratio of 5% and 15%. Different cross-sections were
used and the specimens had a total length of 2m with 1.35m clear length in bending.
Specimens were tested under monotonic and cyclic lateral loading, half of them with no axial
load and the other half with an axial load about approximately 15% of the member’s axial
capacity. Different width-to- thickness ratios were considered, varying from 20 to 60. S235
and S275 steel grades were used for the steel tube’s material. The authors concluded that,
even though rubberized concrete strength is significantly lower than standard concrete, there
was no significant change on the lateral capacity of CFSTs, where CFSTs with 5% rubberized
concrete behaved almost the same as standard CFSTs, while CFST with 15% rubberized
concrete had a lateral strength reduction 5-7% in comparison to standard CFSTs. Test results
for circular CFSTs were compared to Eurocode 4 and it was showed that Eurocode 4 is
conservative by around 24%. The experimental campaign carried out by Silva et al. [2015]
will be explained in more detail in Chapter 3.
2.2 Numerical studies

Hu et al. [2003] proposed material constitutive models in order to model axially loaded CFST
using the ABAQUS nonlinear finite element software package, by verifying the numerical
results with test results. Three types of cross sections were studied, namely circular sections,
square sections and square sections stiffened with reinforcement ties. Numerical analysis
showed that for circular CFST columns, the steel tubes provide good confining effect to the
concrete, especially when the diameter-to-thickness ratio is smaller than 40. For square CFST,
the tube does not provide large confinement effect to concrete especially when the width-to
thickness ratio is higher than 30. When reinforcing ties are used there is an enhancement in
confinement effect on concrete core. The authors proposed equations for calculation of lateral
confinement pressure (fl) and concrete degradation parameter (k3) as a function of the width-
to-thickness ratio and of the cross section type. Both fl and k3 parameters increase with the
decrease of width-to-thickness ratio. Later on Hu et al. [2005] conducted numerical nonlinear
finite element analyses of CFST members under axial load combined with bending moment.
The authors concluded that the confinement effect is function of the axial load; the larger the
axial load is, the larger the confinement effect becomes. The authors came out with new
expressions for calculating the fl and k3 parameters as a function of the normalized axial load.
Liang and Fragomeni [2009] conducted numerical studies on circular concrete-filled steel
tubular short columns under axial loading. They used a fibre element model which was
verified by comparing the numerical results with experimental results. A new design formula
incorporating concrete confinement effects was proposed for determining the ultimate axial
load of circular CFST columns, which were made of normal and high strength concrete and
steel. The proposed design formula provides a very good estimation of the ultimate axial load
of circular CFST columns. According to the authors, the existing confining pressure models,
which were developed for normal steel, overestimate the lateral confining pressure in high
8
strength steel CFST columns, so a proposal was made of a concrete model with confinement,
which will be discussed in section 2.3.3.
Denavit [2012] conducted a 3 year PhD on characterization and behaviour of steel-concrete

composite members and frames. Part of his research focused on the behaviour and design of
concrete filled steel tubes. The author used a mixed formulation, treating both displacements
and forces as primary variables, allowing for accurate modelling of geometric and material
nonlinearities that arise in a concrete-filled steel tube. Distributed-plasticity beam elements
were implemented in OpenSees and the results were validated to experimental results.
Different models and assumptions were recommended by the author for member behaviour
and member design.
Jiang [2014] conducted numerical research on concrete-filled steel tubes using ABAQUS.
After calibrating the numerical model against test results, a parametric study was conducted
related to cross sectional slenderness ratio and cross-sectional shape. The author concluded
that for circular CFST under axial load, the confinement effect is a function of diameter-to-
thickness ratio. The smaller the ratio the higher the confinement effect, while for square
members the confinement effect is very low almost negligible in comparison to circular
specimens. Under lateral loading, the confinement effect can be also significant but it is not a
function of cross-section slenderness ratio. Due to the constraint provided by concrete, CFST
can carry load even when the local buckling occurs, leading to the achievement of high
ductility. Under cyclic loading, members with 15% normalized axial load behave better than
specimens without axial load.
Liang et al. [2014] conducted numerical research on axially loaded circular concrete-filled
stainless steel tubes using nonlinear finite element analysis based on fibre elements. Steel was
modelled using a full-range three-stage stress-strain relationship presented by Abdella et al.
[2011] based on equations proposed by Quach et al. [2008]. A passive confinement model
was used for confined concrete model. The proposed design model was verified through
comparison with experimental results. The results showed that the three stage steel material
model gave a better match to test results in comparison with the two stage steel model. It was
found that ACI is highly conservative for calculating the ultimate axial strength as it does not
account for the concrete confinement effect neither strain hardening of steel in compression.
The authors pointed out that the confining pressure model proposed by Liang and Fragomeni
[2009] provides conservative prediction of confinement in CFST columns.
2.3 Proposed confined concrete models
2.3.1 Hu et al. [2003] for CFST members under axial load

Hu et al. [2003] proposed an equivalent uniaxial stress-strain curve for confined concrete as
shown in Figure 2.1, where f’c and ε’c are uniaxial compressive strength and strain of
unconfined concrete. The uniaxial Poisson’s ratio υc of concrete was assumed to be 0.2. The
value of ε’c varies from 0.002 to 0.003. The authors used a value 0.003, as suggested by ACI
318 [1999].
9
Figure 2.1. Equivalent uniaxial stress-strain curve for confined concrete
For confined concrete, uniaxial compressive strength f’cc and corresponding strain ε’cc are
higher than those of unconfined concrete. The Equations (2.1) and (2.2) proposed by Mander,
Priestley and Park [1988] are used to estimate the relations between stress and strain of
unconfined concrete with stress and strain of confined concrete.
f 'cc  f 'c k1 f l (2.1)
fl
 'cc   'c (1  k 2 ) (2.2)
f 'c
The constant k1 and k2 were set as 4.1 and 20.5 based on the studies of Richart et al. [1928].
The fl represents the lateral confining pressure around concrete core, caused from steel tube.
The initial elastic modulus of confined concrete Ecc is calculated using Equation (2.3) as per
ACI 1999.
Ecc  4700 f 'cc (MPa) (2.3)
A linear descending line was proposed to model the softening of confined concrete after
reaching the maximum compressive strength f’cc. A k3 constant is defined as concrete
degradation parameter and the descending line of concrete softening is considered to
terminate at a compressive strength f c  k3 f 'cc and concrete strain  c  11 'cc . For defining
the parameters fl and k3, the authors suggested some empirical equations by matching the
numerical results with test results. The two parameters apparently depended on width-to-
thickness ratio (D/t or B/t) and cross-sectional shape. Figure 2.2 shows the CFST cross
sections considered by the authors.
10
Figure 2.2. Cross-section of CFST columns
For circular CFSTs:
f l  f y [0.043646  0.000832( D / t )] for (21.7  D / t  47) (2.4a)
f l  f y [0.006241  0.0000357( D / t )] for (47  D / t  150) (2.4b)
k3  1 for (21.7  D / t  40) (2.5a)
k3  0.0000339( D / t ) 2  0.010085( D / t )  1.3491 for (40  D / t  150) (2.5b)
For unstiffened square CFSTs:
f l  f y [0.055048  0.001885( B / t )] for (17  B / t  29.2) (2.6a)
fl  0 for (29.2  B / t  150) (2.6b)
k3  0.000178( B / t ) 2  0.02492( B / t )  1.2722 for (17  B / t  70) (2.7a)
k 3  0.4 for (70  B / t  150) (2.7b)
2.3.2 Hu et al. [2005] for CFST members under axial load combined with bending
Hu et al. [2005] extended their research for CFST members under axial load combined with bending
moment. Equations (2.8) and (2.2) are used to estimate the relations between stress and strain of
unconfined concrete with stress and strain of confined concrete. In this study they used a value
of 0.002 for ε’c. According to the authors, not all concrete cross-section can maintain a value
of f’c , so they introduced a strength factor k 4  1.0 .
f 'cc  k 4 f 'c k1 f l (2.8)
Other parameters and constants are the same as the previous study except for fl, k3 and k4
which are given as a function of cross-section type and ratio of applied axial load N over the
axial capacity Nu of member, given by the Equations below.
11
For circular CFSTs:
fl  0 0  N / N u  0.23 (2.9a)
f l  f y [0.00859  0.0373( N / N u )] 0.23  N / N u  0.56 (2.9b)
f l  f y [0.0104  0.00333( N / N u )] 0.56  N / N u  0.74 (2.9c)
k3  1  0.304( N / N u ) 0  N / N u  0.23 (2.10a)
k3  1.195  1.152( N / N u ) 0.23  N / N u  0.56 (2.10b)
k3  0.55 0.56  N / N u  0.74 (2.10c)
k 4  0.7  1.304( N / N u ) 0  N / N u  0.23 (2.11a)
k 4  1.0 0.23  N / N u (2.11a)
For unstiffened square CFSTs:
fl  0 0  N / N u  0.34 (2.12a)
f l  f y [0.00517  0.0152( N / N u )] 0.34  N / N u  0.57 (2.12b)
k3  0.87  0.889( N / N u ) 0  N / N u  0.45 (2.13a)
k3  0.508  0.083( N / N u ) 0.45  N / N u  0.57 (2.13b)
k 4  0.42  1.706( N / N u ) 0  N / N u  0.34 (2.14a)
k 4  1.0 0.34  N / N u  0.57 (2.14b)
2.3.3 Liang and Fragomeni [2009]

The confinement provided by the steel tube on the concrete core of CFST columns is passive.
The authors proposed a stress-strain curve which is shown in Figure 2.3.
The concrete stress-strain curve from points O to A is calculated based on the Equations
(2.15) and (2.16) given by Mander et al. [1988], where f’c and ε’c are uniaxial compressive
strength and strain of unconfined concrete, while f’cc and ε’cc are uniaxial compressive
strength and strain of confined concrete.
12
Figure 2.3. Stress-strain curve for confined concrete proposed by Liang and Fragomeni [2009]
Young’s modulus of concrete Ec is given by Equation (2.17) as per ACI 318-11. A strength
reduction factor 0.85   c  1 was proposed by Liang and accounts for the column’s size
effects is given in Equation (2.18), where Dc is concrete core diameter.
f 'cc  ( /  'cc )
c  (2.15)
  1  ( /  'cc ) 
Ec
 (2.16)
Ec  ( f 'cc /  'cc )
Ec  3320  c f 'c  6900 (MPa) (2.17)
 c  1.85Dc 0.135 (2.18)
The equations proposed by Mander et al [1988] for determining compressive strength and
strain of confined concrete were modified by Liang and Fragomeni using a strength reduction
factor  c as follows:
f 'cc   c f 'c k1 f rp (2.19)
f rp
 'cc   'c (1  k 2 ) (2.20)
 c f 'c
Where frp is the lateral confining pressure on concrete and k1 and k2 are taken as 4.1 and 20.5
respectively. The strain of unconfined concrete is given by Equations (2.21).
 c  0.002 for  c f 'c  28(MPa) (2.21a)
 c f c  28
 c  0.002  for 28   c f 'c  82(MPa) (2.22a)
5400
13
 c  0.003 for  c f 'c  82(MPa) (2.21c)
Based on the work of Hu et al. [2005] and Tang et al. [1996], Liang and Fragomeni proposed
a confining pressure model for normal and high strength steel as follows:
2t
f rp  0.7( e  s ) fy for D / t  47 (2.22a)
D  2t
D
f rp  (0.006241  0.0000357 ) fy for 47  D / t  150 (2.22b)
t
Where D and t are the diameter and thickness of steel tube while  e and  s are Poisson’s
ratio of steel tube with and without concrete respectively. Tang et al. [1996] suggested that  s
is taken as 0.5 at maximum strength point and  e is given by Equation (2.23), where  02 is
steel yielding strength.
2
 f'   f'   f' 
 e  0.2312  0.3582 ' e 0.1524 c   4.843 ' e  c   9.169 c  (2.23)
  0.2    0.2    0.2 
3 2
 D  D  D
 'e  0.881 10    2.58  10 4    1.953  10 2    0.4011
6
(2.24)
t  t  t 
The segments AB and BC of the confined concrete stress-strain curve shown in Figure 2.3 are
given by Equations (2.25).
  cu   c 
 c   c f 'cc   f 'cc   c f 'cc  for  'cc   c   cu (2.25a)
  cu   'cc 
 c   c f 'cc for  c   cu (2.25b)
Based on experimental results, Liang and Fragomeni suggested  cu  0.02 , while  c is a

factor accounting for the confinement effect by the steel tube on the post peak strength and
ductility of the confined concrete, which is given by equations (2.26) formulated by Hu et al.
[2005].
 c  1.0 for D / t  47 (2.26a)

2
D D
 c  0.0000339   0.010085   1.3491 for 47  D / t  150 (2.22b)
t  t 
14
Chapter 3. Test campaign
3 TEST CAMPAIGN
3.1 Description of the test campaign and specimens
3.1.1 Specimen definition

The experimental campaign consisted of testing 16 circular CFST, 12 with rubberized
concrete (RuC) and 4 with standard concrete (Std) as shown in Table 3-1. The specimens had
a total length of 2.0m and a free length of 1.35m in bending. Two different concrete aggregate
replacement ratios,  , of 5% and 15% were considered. Two levels of axial load were
applied, namely 0% and 15% of the axial capacity of the member. Specimens had an outer
diameter D  219mm and a wall thickness t  3mm or t  5mm , corresponding respectively
to low and high cross-section slenderness ratio D / t . Members were tested under monotonic
and cyclic lateral loading.
Specimen designation consists of cross-section type, concrete type, external diameter, tube’s
wall thickness, normalized axial load and lateral load type. For example, CR-RuC15%-219-3-
0%-M, CR is for circular CFST, Ru-15% corresponds to rubberized concrete with 15% of
aggregate replacement ratio, external diameter of specimen is 219 mm, wall thickness of tube
is 3 mm and M is for monotonic lateral load.
Table 3-1. Specimens summary
15
3.1.2 Material properties

(a) Structural steel properties. All steel tubes used were cold formed made with a steel
grade S235 and S275 respectively to C219-3 and C219-5. Table 3-2 shows the comparison
between nominal yielding strength and the real yielding strength obtained from the coupon
test.
Table 3-2. Comparison between nominal and real yielding strength of structural steel
Steel section Nominal fy (MPa) Real fy (MPa) Real fu (MPa)

C219-3 235 309 373
C219-5 275 393.4 488
The full stress-strain curve obtained from the coupon test is shown in Figure 3.1. It can be
easily noticed that S235 is more ductile than S275. The ultimate strength was 373 MPa for
C219-3 and 488 MPa for C219-5.
It is important to mention that the real thicknesses of the specimens were 2.8mm and 4.7mm
instead of 3mm and 5mm. In the numerical analysis the real thickness and the measured yield
strength will be used for steel material.
Figure 3.1. Stress-strain curves of structural steel obtained from coupon test
(b) Concrete steel properties. Two level of aggregate replacement ratio were used, RuC5%
and RuC15%. Only the largest size of aggregate was replaced by used tire’s rubber. It can be
seen from Table 3-3 that the compressive strength of rubberized concrete is reduced in
comparison to the compressive strength of standard concrete. RuC5% has a reduction of
maximum compressive strength about 26% while RuC15% has a reduction of 62%.
Table 3-3. Concrete compressive strength
Concrete type fc (MPa)

StdC 53
RuC5% 39
RuC15% 20
16
3.1.3 Test setup

In order to fix the specimen at the base, a steel box designed by Jiang [2014] was used, which
consists of a 1400×1400×60mm steel base plate and four steel walls with a height of 500mm
and a thickness of 50 mm welded to each other and to the base plate. Additionally, five
stiffeners were welded on the exterior of each box wall, in order to increase the lateral
stiffness of the plates and consequently, of the testing device. Three stiffeners located in the
middle are designed to transfer the lateral force from the steel box to the base plate, while the
remaining ones were aimed at receiving the tensile forces and prevent separation between
adjacent steel walls, as well as reducing the stress demands imposed to the welds. The internal
size of the steel box is 750×750mm, and the base plate is connected to the floor with four
Ø25mm Dywidag rods located at the corners. The internal part of the box has custom made
high strength steel bolts and nuts. Each steel bolt is 100mm long with an additional Ø110mm
hexagon head on one end, to increase the contact area between the bolt and the specimen.
Two Ø110mm steel nuts are used for each steel bolt: one with thickness of 70mm is welded to
the steel wall, to connect with the bolt end, while another with 25mm is placed between the
previous nut and the bolt head, to prevent movement of the bolt during the test. After the
specimen is positioned in the centre of the steel box, steel plates should be placed between the
specimen and the bolts in order to provide proper basal restraint and load transfer, then the
bolts should be unscrewed until the bolt heads have full contact with the steel plates. Finally,
the 25mm nut should be screwed until it reaches the steel wall nut. This box is shown in
Figure 3.2.
The layout of the bolts does not allow lateral restrain of circular CFSTs. Additional steel
plates were welded at the bottom of specimens in order to achieve a fully fixed base, as shown
in Figure 3.3.
Figure 3.2. Steel box used to fix the specimen’s base Figure 3.3. Detail used to fix circular CFST
A vertical actuator with maximum capacity of 750kN was used for applying constant axial
load, which was controlled by a hydraulic system. A horizontal actuator with a maximum
capacity of 500kN was used for monotonic and cyclic lateral loading, fixed at the top of
specimen, as shown in Figure 3.4. The total length of specimens was 2.0m with a clear length
in bending of 1.35m.
17
Figure 3.4. Test setup
The cyclic loading was based on SAC loading protocol, as shown in Figure 3.5. Six cycles
were imposed corresponding to adrift ratio of 0.375%, 0.50% and 0.75%, four cycles with
1.00% drift ratio and two cycles for the remaining level of drift with 1% increment. The
maximum lateral displacement of the horizontal actuator was 300mm, which allowed a
top displacement of  150mm . For specimens with axial load, the maximum applied
displacement was  70mm . The level of lateral load was measured using a load cell and the
imposed top lateral displacement was measured using an internal system. Two inclinometers
were placed on both sides of specimen at the maximum moment location to measure the
rotation.
Figure 3.5. Cyclic loading protocol
3.2 Test results and discussions
3.2.1 Test results

Figure 3.6 shows the test results and it can be seen that all specimens showed a ductile
behaviour.
18
Figure 3.6. Test results
19
All members under monotonic lateral loading developed outward local buckling of the steel
tube at the base of the cantilever, as shown in Figure 3.7Figure 3.7. Outwards local buckling
of steel tube. Members with no axial load under monotonic loading showed very limited or no
strength reduction, even for drift ratios of around 10%. Regarding members under axial load,
they showed a significant increase of capacity in comparison to the ones without axial load.
This can be related to concrete confinement and prevention of concrete tensile cracking.
There is a strength reduction for specimen 6 and 8 but it is not consistent as the concrete
strength is higher than in specimens 2 and 4.
Regarding cyclic loading, the strength degradation of members started for drifts ratios around
3-4%. The failure mode of members with axial load was characterized by significant outward
buckling of the steel tube, while for all members without axial load the failure mode was
characterized by fracture of the steel tube at local buckling position, as shown in Figure 3.8.
Pinching effect was present in all members tested without axial load, while for members with
axial load the pinching effect was present only for the slender member C219-3.
Figure 3.7. Outwards local buckling of steel tube Figure 3.8. Fracture of steel tube
3.2.2 Influence of the axial load level

As illustrated in Figure 3.6, members under axial load showed an increase in strength in
comparison to members without axial load. A comparison of ultimate moment capacity of
members is shown in Table 3-4 where the mean increase of ultimate moment is 13%. This
increase of ultimate capacity can be due to concrete confinement effect and prevention of
tensile cracking of concrete due to axial load.
Table 3-4. Comparison of ultimate moment capacity of members with and without axial load
Specimen Mu,0% (KN*m) Mu,15% (KN*m) Mu,0%/Mu,15%
CR-RuC15%-219-3-M 64.1 73.8 1.15
CR-RuC15%-219-5-M 114.7 134.6 1.17
CR-RuC5%-219-5-M 128 139.1 1.09
CR-StdC-219-5-M 129 142 1.10
mean 1.13
3.2.3 Influence of concrete type

Figure 3.9 and Figure 3.10 show the comparison between different concrete types in the
monotonic moment-drift curve. Even though RuC5% has a reduction of maximum
20
compressive strength by 16% in comparison to StdC, the reduction of ultimate moment

capacity of CFSTs with RuC5% is about 1.5% compared to standard CFSTs. Regarding
CFSTs members with RuC15%, they have a reduction of ultimate moment capacity by 8.4%
compared to standard CFSTs even though the maximum compressive strength of RuC15% is
reduced by 62% compared to StdC.
In Table 3-5 and Table 3-6 are given the comparison of ultimate moment capacity of members
with different types of concrete.
Figure 3.9. Moment-drift curves for different Figure 3.10. Moment-drift curves for different
concrete types under lateral monotonic loading concrete types under lateral monotonic loading
and no axial load and 15% axial load
Even though RuC5% has a reduction of maximum compressive strength by 16% compared to
StdC, the reduction of ultimate moment capacity of CFSTs with RuC5% is about 1.5%
compared to standard CFSTs. Regarding CFSTs members with RuC15%, they exhibited a
reduction of ultimate moment capacity of 8.4% in comparison to standard CFSTs, even
though the maximum compressive strength of RuC15% is reduced by 62% compared to StdC.
Table 3-5. Comparison of ultimate moment capacity between 5%RuCFST and StdCFST
CR-219-5-M
Mu,StC Mu,RuC5%
Axial load (%) Mu,RuC5%/Mu,Stc
(KN*m) (KN*m)
0% 129 127.8 0.991
15% 142 139.1 0.980
mean 0.985
Table 3-6. Comparison of ultimate moment capacity between 15%RuCFST and StdCFST
CR-219-5-M
Mu,StC Mu,RuC15%
Axial load (%) Mu,RuC15%/Mu,Stc
(KN*m) (KN*m)
0% 129 114 0.884
15% 142 134.6 0.948
mean 0.916
21
Chapter 4. Numerical modelling and behaviour assessment of the test specimens
4 NUMERICAL MODELLING AND BEHAVIOUR

ASSESSMENT OF THE TEST SPECIMENS
4.1 Detailed 3D numerical modelling in ABAQUS of test specimens under monotonic
lateral loading
4.1.1 Mesh, boundary conditions and surface contact interaction

(a) Mesh and finite element types. Based on the CFST’s composition, the CFST members
are modelled in ABAQUS with two different parts, namely the concrete core and the steel
tube. Whilst the former is modelled with solid C3D8R finite elements, the latter is modelled
with shell S4R finite elements. Although solid finite elements could be used to model both
parts, a preliminary sensitivity study allowed concluding about the better accuracy of shell
elements for the steel tube, namely in what concerns to the simulation of the local buckling
deformation of the encasing steel tubes under the same element mesh size. Additionally, and
although the global accuracy of members with C3D8R element models could be improved by
increasing the element mesh number, the computational cost attained with the use of shell
elements is lower, as far less nodes are generated in the model. It is important to note that,
although this modelling strategy is applicable for the numerical modelling of CFSTs, some
limitations of the model may arise for CFST with very large thickness steel tubes, in which
the applicability of shell finite elements may be uncertain.
According to the observations made during the experimental tests, the CFST members
showed large values of section curvature at the base level of the column. In the plastic hinge
zone, the tension side of the cross-section exhibited clear plastic deformation of the steel tube
and cracking of the concrete core. On the compression side, separation between both contact
surfaces was able to occur, due to the lack of any constraint to outwards local movements of
the steel tube walls, thus local buckling plastic modes were able to develop. The remaining
length of the specimens did not exhibit noticeable local deformations. In line with these
observations, the members were modelled with a mixed mesh refinement, as shown in Figure
4.1. At the bottom of the column, with a length of one external diameter D of the CFST, a
more detailed mesh is used for both the steel and the concrete core, with 20 finite element
layers along the height. The remaining length of the column, which is expected to remain
under elastic behaviour, is meshed more sparsely, with 15 finite element layers. The cross-
section mesh of the columns is shown in Figure 4.2. A value of 20 was adopted for the
equally spaced divisions along the perimeter of both the concrete core and steel tube cross-
section, and 14 equally spaced divisions along the diameter of the concrete core cross-section.
22
Figure 4.1. Mesh and geometry of the 3D model Figure 4.2. Cross-section mesh of concrete in
in ABAQUS ABAQUS
It has been already documented by Tao et al. [2013] that in the context of stub CFSTs under
compression, the out-of-plane deformation of the steel tube caused by the concrete expansion
plays a similar role to that of initial imperfections of the member. A preliminary validation of
this conclusion was carried out for CFSTs under bending. In the 3D element model, the initial
imperfection of the steel tube was simulated by combining different local buckling modes of
the CFST column. The first three local buckling model shapes of the test specimen CR-
RuC15-219-5-15%-M were determined and combined with different amplitude factors.
Whilst the first mode shape was scaled by a factor μamp, the second and third mode shapes
were scaled by 0.1 μamp and 0.01μamp, respectively. Figure 4.3 shows the scaled initial
imperfection computed in the numerical model, by combining and scaling the three buckling
modes. The numerical analysis of specimen CR-RuC15-219-5-15%-M was conducted with a
scaling factor, μamp, equal to t, t/10, t/100, t/1000 separately and Figure 4.4 shows the lateral
force-deformation behaviour of the member for the different values of μamp.
Figure 4.3. Scaled initial imperfection Figure 4.4. Lateral force-drift curve of the initial
imperfection amplification factors
23
The results depicted in Figure 4.4 allow concluding that the concrete infill contributes to
minimize the influence of the initial CFST imperfection under bending conditions. In line
with these observations, initial imperfections of the members were neglected in all
simulations. Taking advantage of the symmetry of the CFST columns, only half of the
members were numerically modelled, as shown in Figure 4.1. In total, the members were
modelled with 3300 solid C3D8R finite elements and 700 shell S4R finite elements.
(b) Boundary conditions. The members were considered to be fully fixed at the bottom
sections of both the concrete core and the steel tube. At the top section, an imposed lateral
displacement and a constant vertical axial load were applied. It is important to mention that,
due to the way the initial axial load was applied in the tests, P-Δ effects did not develop in the
specimens. Conversely, the axial load applied in ABAQUS followed the movement of the top
cross-section while keeping the direction vertically, which will introduce an additional second
order moment at the base section. In order to accurately model the test’s observation, this
additional moment was converted to additional lateral force at the top when dealing with the
numerical results.
(c) Surface contact interaction. Regarding the contact interaction between the concrete
core and the steel tube, neither sliding nor separation between both surfaces was allowed to
develop for the length of specimen above one CFST diameter, D. This modelling strategy was
based on observations made throughout the experimental tests, namely that neither sliding nor
separation between surfaces had occurred during the flexural test in the upper zone of the
specimen. Thus, for the specified member length, a fully bounded behaviour was assigned to
the surface behaviour between the concrete and the steel. On the other hand, the bottom part
of the specimens exhibited local buckling deformation of the steel tube, which is only
possible if there is separation between the two materials. Thus, for the zone with a dense
mesh, “hard contact” behaviour was assigned in ABAQUS to the normal direction of the
surfaces, allowing for separation, but not penetration, between the two surfaces. For the
tangential component, a Coulomb friction model was adopted for the contact surface, in order
to simulate the friction forces that develop when slippage occurs between the two surfaces. It
has been documented for stub CFST columns under compression loads that the value of
friction coefficient adopted in the simulations does not influence the numerical results
obtained. In the simulations, a value of 0.2 was adopted for the friction coefficient of the
contact surface of the bottom length of the members.
4.1.2 Material model for structural steel

For the elastic behaviour range of the steel tube material, a Young modulus Es  200GPa
and a Poisson ratio  s  0.3 were used. Regarding the material inelasticity, a nonlinear
isotropic/kinematic model was adopted, dependent on the yield stress, fy , a set of kinematic
hardening factor, C i , and the isotropic factor,  i . The values of fy, obtained from tensile
coupon tests of steel tube samples, for each test member are shown in Table 3-2. Additionally,
whilst for each parameter C i is the tangent modulus of kinematic hardening behaviour,  i
controls the proportion between the kinematic and isotropic behaviour in the material model.
This means that for a lower value of  i , the material behaves more like a kinematic hardening
material, and for a higher value it is similar to an ideal elasto-plastic material. Given a set C i
and  i , the post-yield behaviour of steel can be defined by Equations (4.1), (4.2) and (4.3).
24
Generally, C i and  i should be derived from symmetric strain cycle experimental data from
steel coupons. However, if limited data is available, these parameters can also be derived from
the experimental stress-strain curve from the first half cycle of a uniaxial tension or
compression test, by integrating between different sets of C i and  i until the combined steel
constitutive law fits well with tests data. This procedure was followed taking into
consideration the results of the material mechanical characterization of the steel tubes with the
number of C i and  i fixed to 1 and values of C  1700MPa ,   10 and C  3700MPa ,
  20 were adopted for steel tube CR-219-3 and CR-219-5, respectively. Figure 4.5 shows
the stress-strain law between the coupon test and the approximated isotropic/kinematic model
used in numerical model.
Ci
i  (1  e  i )
pl
(4.1)
i
  f y   i (4.2)

 pl    (4.3)
Es
Where  is the steel post-yield stress,  ,  pl and  i are the corresponding strain, plastic
strain and backstress, respectively.
Figure 4.5. Steel stress-strain curve comparison between coupon test and numerical model
It should be noted that since the coupon test does not consider the coupon specimen’s
shrinkage during data processing, the material constitutive law of the steel must be converted
to true stress/strain by Equations (4.4) and (4.5) before doing any parameter fitting. Where
 tru and  tru are the true stress and strain while  nom and  nom are the nominal stress and
strain.
 tru   nom (1   nom ) (4.4)
 tru  ln(1   nom ) (4.5)
25
4.1.3 Material model for concrete

Regarding the concrete model, an initial elastic modulus of concrete E c can be calculated
using Equation (4.6) as per ACI-318, where f ' c is in MPa. A Poisson ratio  c  0.2 was
assumed.
Ec  4700 f ' c (4.6)
For the concrete plasticity, the concrete damage plasticity model was adopted, as it is
generally capable of modelling the inelastic behaviour of concrete and other quasi-brittle
materials for various structural members. This model uses isotropic damage elasticity, in
combination with isotropic tensile and compressive plasticity, to represent the inelastic
behaviour of concrete. It also allows the control of stiffness recovery effects during cyclic
load reversals. In this model, key material parameters are required in order to define the
concrete behaviour under a tri-axial stress state, namely the flow potential eccentricity ϵ, the
viscosity parameter μ, the dilation angle ψ, the ratio of the compressive strength under biaxial
loading to uniaxial compressive strength f b 0 / f c 0 , and the ratio of the second stress invariant
on the tensile meridian to that on the compressive meridian Kc. It is important to note that
these parameters could not be obtained directly from testing of concrete cube samples. As
such, the values adopted in the current research are based on the model calibration according
to the test results and existing formulations derived by different authors. In the following
paragraphs, these parameters are detailed.
Concerning the flow potential eccentricity ϵ and the viscosity parameter μ, default values
recommended by ABAQUS were used in the concrete damage plasticity model, namely ϵ =
0.1 and   0 . Additionally, for the dilation angle ψ, a value of 30º was adopted as it fits well
with the test data. The ratio f b 0 / f c 0 is given in Equation (4.7). It is important to note that this
parameter is dependent on the compressive strength of the concrete, which must be in MPa
units in the calculations.
0.075
f b 0 / f c 0  1.5 f 'c (4.7)
Finally, Kc was calculated as per Yu proposal using Equation (4.8). By substituting Equation
(4.6) into Equation (4.7), Kc becomes dependent only on the concrete compressive
strength f ' c .
5.5 f b 0 5.5
Kc   (4.8)
3 f c 0  5 f b 0 5  2 f ' c 0.075
In addition to the aforementioned material modelling parameters, the concrete’s uniaxial post-
yield stress-strain constitutive law, both in compression and tension, must be computed. Since
the concrete damage plasticity model automatically accounts for the confinement effect of the
concrete under a tri-axial stress state, a σ-ε uniaxial constitutive law of unconfined concrete
was adopted, as shown in Figure 4.6. Regarding the tensile material behaviour, the
constitutive law shown in Figure 4.7 is used.
26
Figure 4.6. Stress-strain curve of concrete in Figure 4.7. Stress-train curve of concrete in
compression used in 3D numerical model tension used in 3D numerical model
Based on the proposal of Eurocode 2 for concrete under compression, the material uniaxial
behaviour used in this research may be divided into four stages. Firstly, an elastic range in
which the stress σc, increases linearly with the strain εc, according to the Young modulus Ec,
up to 40% of the yield compressive strength f’c. In the second stage σc increases nonlinearly
with ε until yielding is reached, namely for  c  f ' c and    c , and is given by Equation
(4.9). It is important to note that for higher strain levels, the softening part of the proposal by
Eurocode 2 is governed by the crushing of the concrete, which in turn may cause lateral
expansion of the concrete cube/cylinder test specimen and consequential material spalling.
For obvious reasons, the softening behaviour considered in the code may not be significant in
CFST members, as the encasing steel tube delays the cracking development and prevents the
failure mode that supports the proposal. Thus, the third stage shown in Figure 4.6 was defined
with a linear decrease of σc, with a gradient of -0.04Ec, until 65% of the compressive strength
of the concrete is reached. Finally, for higher levels of strain, the concrete was considered to
have a constant residual strength of 0.65f’c.
c k   2
 (4.9)
f ' c 1  (k  2)
Where:

 (4.10)
c
2 f 'c
c  (4.11)
Ec
1.05Ec  c
k (4.12)
f 'c
Regarding the uniaxial tensile behaviour of the concrete, the maximum stress value in tension
ft was considered as 10% of the compressive strength. Up to this point, the stress-strain curve
increases linearly with the same gradient as the first stage of Figure 4.7. For higher strain
levels softening starts to develop in the material with a tangent slope of Et  0.1Ec , until
reaching 5% of maximum tensile stress. A residual tensile strength  t  0.05 f t of was
adopted in the numerical model.
27
4.1.4 Results of 3D numerical modelling and comparison with test results

A comparison of the ABAQUS results with the test results for specimens subjected to
monotonic lateral loading is shown in Figure 4.8.
Figure 4.8. Comparison of moment-drift curves of ABAQUS results with test results
28
In order to make a fair comparison between ABAQUS and the test results we will compare
the difference of moment capacity at 4% drift level and energy index EI (area under curve) at
4% drift level. The ratio of 4% drift level is chosen as for this level all the members has gone
in plastic behaviour and for members under axial load this is almost the maximum drift
reached during testing of specimens, so in order to have a good comparison for all specimens
the same drift level is chosen.
It can be seen from Table 3-1 that ABAQUS 3D modelling gives good results when
predicting moment capacity at 4% drift level compared to test results with a difference of
1.2% and a standard deviation of 5.7%. If we refer to the energy index EI (area under curve)
at 4% drift ratio shown in Table 4-2 we can see again a good match between ABAQUS and
the test results, with a difference of 1.2% and a standard deviation of 6.7%.
Finally, one can conclude that, overall, the ABAQUS modelling provides good predictions in
terms of lateral capacity of CFSTs comparing with test results. However, it should be noted
that the 3D models are computationally demanding and each analysis takes several hours to
run.
Table 4-1. Comparison of moment capacity between ABAQUS and test results at a drift level of 4%
Mtest MABAQUS
Specimen MABAQUS/Mtest
(KN*m) (KN*m)
1 64.0 60.1 0.939
2 73.7 65.7 0.891
3 114.6 119.5 1.043
4 134.1 124.1 0.925
5 123.0 127.4 1.036
6 135.7 136 1.002
7 124.6 131.3 1.054
8 141.1 143.1 1.014
mean 0.988
st. dev. 0.057
Table 4-2. Comparison of energy index between ABAQUS and test results at a drift level of 4%
EIABAQUS EItest
Specimen EIABAQUS/EItest
(KN*m) (KN*m)
1 204.4 196.7 0.96
2 263.5 230.9 0.88
3 371.4 388.2 1.05
4 420.9 391.0 0.93
5 394.1 418.7 1.06
6 464.2 446.2 0.96
7 400.0 433.9 1.08
8 479.1 472.5 0.99
mean 0.988
st.dev. 0.067
29
4.2 Simplified 2D modelling in OpenSees of test specimens under monotonic lateral

loading using uniaxial material properties
4.2.1 Assumptions
The nonlinear finite element analysis of CFST and RuCFST columns under bending and axial
compression is based on distributed plasticity using fibre element method. The following
assumptions are made in the fibre element formulation:
 There is a perfect bond (full-interaction) between the steel tube and the concrete core.
 Plane sections remain plane after deformation.
 Strain hardening of steel is considered in both compression and tension.
 Local buckling of the steel tube is not considered.
 The effects of concrete creep and shrinkage are not considered.
 The modelling approach cannot directly account for confinement effects such as the
increase of concrete compressive strength due to confinement provided by the steel
tube.
 The contribution of concrete in tension is neglected.

A realistic approach to represent the stress-strain curve of structural steel is by using trilinear
material, as shown in Figure 4.9. In OpenSees this can be found as hysteretic material and the
input parameters are the stress and strain of steel for points 1,2 and 3, both for the positive and
the negative direction. Point 1 corresponds to the beginning of yielding while points 2 and 3
are used to define the hardening range.
Figure 4.9. Stress-strain curve for structural steel used in OpenSees
Figure 4.10 shows the comparison between structural steel stress-strain obtained from the
coupon test and the tri-linear stress-strain curve used in numerical modelling of circular
CFST. Elastic modulus for structural steel is Es=200GPa. In the numerical modelling the real
thickness t=2.8mm and t=4.7mm is used, respectively for specimens C219-3 and C219-5. It is
worth mentioning that the ultimate steel strain during the monotonic lateral loading of the
specimens was approximately 12% for C219-3 and 7.5% for C219-5, so the part of the curve
30
where the steel stress of the numerical model is larger than the stress obtained by coupon test
does not influence the results.
(a) C219-3 (b) C219-5

Figure 4.10. Comparison between steel stress-strain curves of coupon test with the ones used in 2D
numerical analysis with monotonic lateral loading
Table 4-3 shows the steel properties used to calibrate the tri-axial stress-strain curve used in
numerical analysis with stress-strain curve from coupon test.
Table 4-3. Steel properties used for calibration of tri-axial stress-strain curve
σ2
Specimen t (mm) σ1 or fy (Mpa) σ3 (Mpa) e1 (%) e2 (%) e3 (%)
(MPa)
C219-3 2.8 309 350.6 401 0.154 2.169 34.17
C219-5 4.7 393.4 439.2 528.5 0.197 1.633 20.79
4.2.3 Material model for concrete and rubberized concrete

The concrete01 material is used to represent the behaviour of both concrete and rubberized
concrete. By using this material, we neglect concrete in tension and we will not consider the
confinement effect in increasing of concrete compressive strength. Figure 4.11 shows the
stress strain curve of concrete where fpc is the compressive strength of concrete cylinder, epc0
is strain at maximum strength, fpsu is concrete crushing strength, epsu is concrete strain at
crushing strength.
Figure 4.11. Stress-strain curve for concrete in compression used in OpenSees
31
The initial elastic modulus of concrete E c can be calculated using expression (4.6) as per ACI-
318. A Poisson ratio  c  0.3 was assumed. Concrete strain at maximum strength  c 0 is
given by expression (4.13). In order to make a fair comparison with 3D numerical modelling
we considered concrete softening with a slope gradient -0.04Ec until the ultimate compressive
strength f ' cu  0.65 f ' c is reached at a corresponding ultimate strain  cu  5.375 c 0 , than the
concrete strength will remain constant. The full curve is given by expressions (4.14), (4.15)
and (4.16).
2 f 'c
 c0  (4.13)
Ec
 2  c  
2
 c ( c )  f ' c  c
    for  c   c 0 (4.14)
  c 0   c 0  
 c ( c )  f ' c 0.04 c   c 0 Ec for  cu   c   c 0 (4.15)
 c ( c )  f ' cu for  c   cu (4.16)
Figure 4.12 shows the stress strain curves of concrete and rubberized concrete material in
compression, used in the numerical model.
Figure 4.12. Stress-strain curves of concrete and rubberized concrete used in 2D numerical model
4.2.4 Mesh sensitivity study

The CFST members are modelled as fixed base cantilevers with a clear length l0=1.35m using
the nonlinearBeamColumn element available in OpenSees, as shown in Figure 4.13. 10
integration points were considered along the element and the integration is based on Gauss-
Lobatto quadrature rule. Second order P-Δ effects are taken into account by using a co-
rotational geometric transformation.
In order to define an accurate cross-section mesh we will study specimen CR-RuC5%-219-5-

15%-M with three different mesh types. In the first case, the cross-section is discretized in 36
32
subdivisions along the circumferential direction for steel and concrete and no subdivisions in
radial direction. In the second case, the cross-section is discretized with 36 subdivisions in
circumferential direction for both, steel and concrete, 5 radial subdivisions for steel and 10
radial subdivisions for concrete. Finally, in the third case the mesh is doubled in comparison
to the second one, so 72 circumferential subdivisions for both materials, 10 radial
subdivisions for steel and 20 radial subdivisions for concrete.
Figure 4.13. Member discretization in Figure 4.14. Fibre element cross-section discretization of
OpenSees circular CFST in OpenSees
Figure 4.15 shows the results for the three cases mentioned above. As can be seen, the second
and third case overlaps each other with a difference of around 0.05-0.1% difference in
moment capacity. For efficiency, the second mesh type will be selected, as shown in Figure
4.14, with 36 circumferential subdivisions for both, concrete and steel, 5 radial subdivisions
for steel and 10 radial subdivisions for concrete.
Figure 4.15. Comparison between different cross-section mesh types used in OpenSees
33
4.2.5 Results of numerical modelling and comparison with test results

Figure 4.16 shows the comparison between the OpenSees results and the test results for
specimens subjected to monotonic lateral loading.
Figure 4.16. Comparison of moment-drift curves between test results with OpenSees using uniaxial
material
34
It can be seen that, for all cases, OpenSees underestimates the moment capacity of CFST. In
order to compare moment capacity and the energy index EI between OpenSees with uniaxial
properties and test results, again a level of 4% drift is considered.
As shown in Table 4-4, OpenSees 2D modelling does not provide very good results in terms
of moment capacity at 4% drift level in comparison to test results, with a difference of 13.1%
and a standard deviation of 5.2%. If we refer to the energy index EI at 4% drift ratio, shown in
Table 4-5, we can see again that OpenSees results have a difference of 10.2% compared to
test results and a standard deviation of 6.2%.
Finally, we can conclude that OpenSees 2D modelling with uniaxial material properties
underestimates the moment capacity of CFST. This can be due to confinement effects and
changing of steel properties due to bi-axial stress state, which will be discussed later in this
dissertation.
Table 4-4. Comparison of moment capacity between OpenSees with uniaxial material properties and test
results at a drift level of 4%
Mtest MOpenSees
Specimen MOpenSees/Mtest
(KN*m) (KN*m)
1 64.0 53.3 0.833
2 73.7 57.5 0.780
3 114.6 105.7 0.922
4 134.1 108 0.805
5 123.0 111.6 0.907
6 135.7 119.5 0.881
7 124.6 114.9 0.922
8 141.1 126.7 0.898
mean 0.869
st. dev. 0.052
Table 4-5. Comparison of energy index between OpenSees with uniaxial material properties and test
results at a drift level of 4%
EItest EIOpenSees
Specimen EIOpenSees /EItest
(KN*m) (KN*m)
1 204.4 177.0 0.866
2 263.5 207.6 0.788
3 371.4 359.1 0.967
4 420.9 357.7 0.850
5 394.1 379.4 0.963
6 464.2 403.2 0.868
7 400.0 389.4 0.974
8 479.1 436.4 0.911
mean 0.898
st.dev. 0.062
35
4.3 Comparison between two numerical model analysis results with test results
Figure 4.17 shows a comparison of moment-drift curves obtained with the 2D OpenSees
models with uniaxial material properties, the ABAQUS models and the test results.
Figure 4.17. Comparison of moment-drift curves between test, ABAQUS and OpenSees results
36
It can be seen that, in all cases, OpenSees underestimates the moment capacity of the
specimens. In terms of values, Table 4-6 shows that ABAQUS has a difference in moment
capacity at 4% drift compare with test results with 1.2% and a standard deviation of 5.7%,
while OpenSees 2D with uniaxial properties has a difference of 13.1% and a standard
deviation of 5.2%. Even in terms of Energy index EI (area under curve) at 4% drift ABAQUS
has a difference compare to test results by 1.2% with a standard deviation of 6.7% while
OpenSees 2D with uniaxial material properties has a difference of 10.2% with a standard
deviation of 6.2%, as shown in Table 4-7.
We can conclude that the ABAQUS 3D numerical modelling provides a very good prediction
of the moment capacity of CFST, while OpenSees 2D with uniaxial properties underestimates
the moment capacity. The reason for this can be concrete confinement effects and biaxial
stress state of structural steel, two issues that will discussed in detail in the next section.
Table 4-6. Comparison of moment capacity at 4% drift between test, ABAQUS and OpenSees with
uniaxial material properties results
Mtest MABAQUS MOpenSees

Specimen MABAQUS/Mtest MOpenSees/Mtest
(KN*m) (KN*m) (KN*m)
1 64.0 60.1 53.3 0.939 0.833
2 73.7 65.7 57.5 0.891 0.780
3 114.6 119.5 105.7 1.043 0.922
4 134.1 124.1 108 0.925 0.805
5 123.0 127.4 111.6 1.036 0.907
6 135.7 136 119.5 1.002 0.881
7 124.6 131.3 114.9 1.054 0.922
8 141.1 143.1 126.7 1.014 0.898
mean 0.988 0.869
st. dev. 0.057 0.052
Table 4-7. Comparison of energy index at 4% drift between test, ABAQUS and OpenSees with uniaxial
material properties results
EItest EIABAQUS EIOpenSees

Specimen EIABAQUS/EItest EIOpenSees/EItest
1 204.4 196.7 177.0 0.96 0.866
2 263.5 230.9 207.6 0.88 0.788
3 371.4 388.2 359.1 1.05 0.967
4 420.9 391.0 357.7 0.93 0.850
5 394.1 418.7 379.4 1.06 0.963
6 464.2 446.2 403.2 0.96 0.868
7 400.0 433.9 389.4 1.08 0.974
8 479.1 472.5 436.4 0.99 0.911
mean 0.988 0.898
st.dev. 0.067 0.062
37
4.4 Simplified 2D modelling in OpenSees of test specimens under monotonic lateral

loading using confined concrete properties
4.4.1 Material models

In this section, 2D numerical analysis will be carried out in OpenSees using different confined
concrete models which were described in Section 2.3. Table 4-8 shows the confined concrete
compressive strength as per different models proposed in the literature. Regarding the
structural steel, the same model adopted before in Section 4.2.2 will be used here.
Table 4-8. Confined concrete compressive strength from different models of literature
f'c Hu et al. [2003] Hu et al. [2005] Liang et al. [2009]

Specimen
(MPa) f'cc (MPa) f'cc/f'c f'cc (MPa) f'cc/f'c f'cc (MPa) f'cc/f'c
1 20 24.4 1.22 14.0 0.70 22.3 1.12
2 20 24.4 1.22 17.9 0.90 22.3 1.12
3 20 27.9 1.39 14.0 0.70 25.3 1.26
4 20 27.9 1.39 17.9 0.90 25.3 1.26
5 39 46.9 1.20 27.3 0.70 47.1 1.21
6 39 46.9 1.20 34.9 0.90 47.1 1.21
7 53 60.9 1.15 37.1 0.70 62.4 1.18
8 53 60.9 1.15 47.5 0.90 62.4 1.18
The table shows that the model proposed by Hu et al. [2005], which is calibrated for CFST
columns under axial load combined with bending, provides smaller compressive strength for
confined concrete in comparison to the unconfined compressive strength.
Regarding the models proposed by Hu et al [2005] and Liang and Fragomeni [2009], it is
worth mentioning that they are calibrated for CFST under axial load without bending
moment. However, they will be used here to check if they provide good results for our
specimens. Both models give an increase in compressive strength of confined concrete.

Figure 4.18 shows the moment-drift curves of 2D numerical models using confined concrete
properties. The three different confined concrete models referred above are taken into
consideration, namely the models proposed from Hu et al [2003], Hu et al [2005] and Liang
and Fragomeni [2009]. The test results are also plotted in order to have a comparison.
It is clear that, even by considering the confinement effect provided by the steel tube to the
concrete core, the 2D numerical model still underestimates the ultimate capacity of the
members. In terms of values, Table 4-9 shows that the 2D OpenSees model with confined
concrete properties still has a difference in moment capacity at 4% drift compared with test
results. The model proposed by Hu et at. [2003] has a difference of 8.5% with a standard
deviation of 4.3%, Hu et al. [2005] has a difference of 12.4% with a standard deviation of
4.2% and Liang and Fragomeni [2009] has a difference of 8.9% with a standard deviation of
4.9%.
38
Figure 4.18. Comparison of moment-drift curves between test results and OpenSees with confined
concrete properties
39
Even in terms of the energy index EI (area under curve), at 4% drift the OpenSees models
with confined concrete properties exhibit a difference in comparison to test results. The model
proposed by Hu et at. [2003] has a difference of 6.7% with a standard deviation of 5.2%, Hu
et al. [2005] has a difference of 10.0% with a standard deviation of 5.2% and Liang and
Fragomeni [2009] has a difference of 7.1% with a standard deviation of 5.6%, as shown in
Table 4-10.
It is concluded that 2D numerical modelling using confined concrete models suggested in

literature underestimates the ultimate moment capacity of CFST columns. The reason for this
can be not only the confined concrete model but also the biaxial stress state of structural steel,
which will be discussed in Section 4.5.
Table 4-9. Comparison of moment capacity at 4% drift between test results and OpenSees 2D with
confined concrete properties
Liang and Fragomeni
Hu et al. [2003] Hu et al. [2005]
[2009]
Mtest
Specimen
(KN*m) MOpenSees MOpenSees MOpenSees
MOpenSees/Mtest MOpenSees/Mtest MOpenSees/Mtest
1 64.0 55.4 0.866 53.1 0.830 54.8 0.856

2 73.7 62.2 0.844 59.9 0.813 60.9 0.826
3 114.6 110.5 0.964 105.5 0.921 109.7 0.957
4 134.1 117.3 0.875 110.9 0.827 115.9 0.864
5 123.0 115.2 0.937 110.4 0.898 115.3 0.937
6 135.7 128.0 0.943 122.1 0.900 128.3 0.945
7 124.6 117.7 0.945 113.3 0.909 118.0 0.947
8 141.1 134.0 0.950 128.9 0.914 134.5 0.953
mean 0.915 mean 0.876 mean 0.911
st. dev. 0.043 st. dev. 0.042 st. dev. 0.049
Table 4-10. Comparison of energy index at 4% drift between test results and OpenSees 2D with
confined concrete properties
Liang and Fragomeni
Hu et al. [2003] Hu et al. [2005]
[2009]
EItest
Specimen
(KN*m) EIOpenSees EIOpenSees EIOpenSees
EIOpenSees/EItest EIOpenSees/Mtest EIOpenSees/EItest
1 204.4 181.7 0.889 174.4 0.853 180.5 0.883

2 263.5 222.1 0.843 211.9 0.804 217.9 0.827
3 371.4 370.6 0.998 354.8 0.955 368.5 0.992
4 420.9 380.9 0.905 361.4 0.858 376.8 0.895
5 394.1 387.2 0.982 372.6 0.945 387.3 0.983
6 464.2 422.8 0.911 423.2 0.912 423.2 0.912
7 400.0 395.2 0.988 381.4 0.954 395.8 0.989
8 479.1 454.5 0.949 439.3 0.917 456.0 0.952
mean 0.933 mean 0.900 mean 0.929
st. dev. 0.052 st. dev. 0.052 st. dev. 0.056
40
4.5 Over-strength phenomenon

The over-strength phenomenon that was highlighted in the previous sections can be mainly
attributed to the effect of the interaction between the steel tube and the concrete core. Almost
all research studies that have been conducted in the past attribute it to tri-axial stress state of
concrete core resulting from concrete confinement provided by the steel tube, but it is shown
from 3D numerical analysis that also the bi-axial stress state of steel tube plays an important
role.
4.5.1 Confined concrete

Figure 4.19 shows the equilibrium of stresses generated in transversal direction of CFST
member under axial compressive loading. Concrete under an axial compressive stress state
tries to shorten and expand laterally by applying lateral pressure  l to the steel tube. The steel
tube prevents concrete dilation by applying the same amount of pressure but with opposite
direction to the concrete core introducing a tri-axial stress state condition.
Figure 4.19. Lateral stresses due to confinement
Concrete under a tri-axial stress state enhances its maximum compressive strength and
corresponding strain. Additionally, the ultimate concrete strength and strain are increased
significantly in comparison to unconfined concrete, as it was already shown in Chapter 2.
4.5.2 Bi-axial stress state of the steel tube

Due to the lateral pressure,  l , applied from concrete, the steel tube in transversal direction is
in pure tension with transversal tensile stresses,  s,t , as shown in Figure 4.19. By imposing
bending moment to the column, if we look at the stresses in the longitudinal direction, part of
steel tube will be under compression and the other part under tension. The steel tube will not
be subjected to pure compression or tension but to a bi-axial stress state, tension-tension and
compression-tension.
According to the maximum distortion-energy theory (often associated with names of Huber,
von Mises, or Hencky), the steel yielding stresses of members under bi-axial stress state will
be modified, as shown in Figure 4.20. In the current CFST case, the yield stress of the steel in
the tension zone will be higher in comparison to the uniaxial yield stress, while in the
compression zone the compressive yield stress of the steel will be lower than the uniaxial
yield stress.
41
Figure 4.20. Yielding of steel under bi-axial stresses
In the 2D numerical model it is not possible to capture the bi-axial stress state effect but in
detailed 3D numerical model this is possible. For example, regarding specimen CR-RuC15%-
219-5-0%-M, which has an axial yield stress of 393MPa, the yield stress in the tension zone is
increased up to 420 MPa while in the compression zone it is decreased to 380 MPa, as shown
in Figure 4.21.
Uniaxial stress
Real stress
Figure 4.21. Steel tube stresses in different points of perimeter
4.6 Simplified 2D modelling in OpenSees of test specimens under cyclic lateral loading
using uniaxial properties
The same assumptions made in 2D numerical modelling of test specimens under monotonic
lateral loading will be considered also for cyclic loading. The distributed plasticity approach
will be used for modelling the members.
42

The structural steel was modelled in OpenSees using Steel02, a uniaxial Giuffre-Menegotto-
Pinto steel material with isotropic strain hardening. The stress-strain behaviour of Steel02 is
shown in Figure 4.22. Initial elastic modulus of steel is considered E0  200GPa ; b is the
strain hardening ratio;  y and  y are the steel yielding stress and corresponding strain.
Figure 4.22. Steel02 constitutive stress-strain model
Figure 4.23 shows the comparison between structural steel stress-strain obtained from the
coupon test and the stress-strain curve used in numerical modelling of circular CFST under
cyclic loading. For members C219-3 a yield stress of 340MPa and a strain hardening ratio of
0.0011 were adopted, while for members C219-5 a yield stress of 422MPa and a strain
hardening ratio of 0.0033 were considered to represent the steel behaviour.
(a) C219-3 (b) C219-5

Figure 4.23. Comparison between steel stress-strain curves of coupon test with the ones used in 2D
numerical analysis with cyclic lateral loading
4.6.2 Material model for concrete and rubberized concrete

The same concrete material model, Concrete01, that was used in 2D numerical analysis of
CFST members under monotonic lateral loading was used also for 2D numerical analysis of
test specimens under cyclic lateral loading.
43

Figure 4.24 shows the comparison of moment-drift curves obtained with the 2D OpenSees
model with uniaxial material properties and the test results of specimens under cyclic loading.
Figure 4.24. Comparison of hysteretic moment-drift curves of test results with OpenSees using uniaxial
material
It can be seen for all specimens that there is an underestimation of the moment capacity of
44
members under cyclic loading, which is due to the over-strength phenomenon that was
already discussed in Section 4.5. Another limitation of the OpenSees model using the
distributed plasticity approach is that it cannot simulate the local buckling of the steel tube.
Hence, there is no strength degradation in the moment-drifts curves, obtained with the
numerical models. Additionally, the model is also unable to reproduce the pinching effects
for members without axial load.
For all the reasons mentioned above it is possible to conclude that 2D numerical modelling
of CFST members using a distributed plasticity approach with uniaxial material properties
does not provide a realistic representation of the behaviour of this type of members,
especially when they are subjected to flexural loading conditions.
45
Chapter 5. Simplified 2D numerical modelling of test specimens using modified material properties
5 SIMPLIFIED 2D NUMERICAL MODELLING OF TEST

SPECIMENS USING MODIFIED MATERIAL PROPERTIES
5.1 Behaviour assessment of CFST members based on 3D detailed models
5.1.1 Concrete material

Based on detailed models we can obtain an estimate of the maximum strength of confined
concrete f’cc , which is the minimum value after the peak compressive strength is reached. For
example, Figure 5.1 shows the confined concrete stress versus drift for the specimen CR-
RuC15%-219-3-15%. For this case the maximum confined concrete compressive strength
considered for simplified 2D modelling is f 'cc  29MPa . Defining the compressive strength
in this way means that there is no concrete softening considered after concrete reaches its
maximum strength.
Figure 5.1. Confined concrete stress- drift curve
In the proposed confined concrete model, initial elastic modulus of confined concrete will be
the same as unconfined concrete given from Equation (4.6). Confined concrete strain at
maximum compressive strength will be calculated from Equation (5.1), while the full stress
strain curve is given from Equations (5.2) and (5.3). After the concrete reaches the maximum
compressive strength, it keeps the same strength until failure.
2 f ' cc
 cc 0  (5.1)
Ec
46
 2   cc  
2
 cc ( cc )  f ' cc  cc
    for  cc   cc 0 (5.2)
  cc 0   cc 0  
 cc ( cc )  f 'cc for  cc   cc 0 (5.3)
Table 5-1 provides the values of maximum compressive strength of confined concrete
material to be used in the simplified 2D numerical models.
Table 5-1. Summary of compressive strength of confined concrete for all specimens
No. Specimen f'c (MPa) f'cc (MPa) f'cc/f'c
1 CR-RuC15%-219-3-0%-M 20 30 1.50
2 CR-RuC15%-219-3-15%-M 20 29 1.45
3 CR-RuC15%-219-5-0%-M 20 35 1.75
4 CR-RuC15%-219-5-15%-M 20 36 1.80
5 CR-RuC5%-219-5-0%-M 39 60 1.54
6 CR-RuC5%-219-5-15%-M 39 60 1.54
7 CR-StdC-219-5-0%-M 53 75 1.42
8 CR-StdC-219-5-15%-M 53 75 1.42
It can be seen that members without axial load have almost the same increase in maximum
compressive strength in comparison to members with axial load, due to confinement. it is also
possible to observe that the increase of concrete compressive strength due to confinement
effect is larger for CFST members with low strength concrete.
5.1.2 Structural steel

As mentioned in Section 4.4, steel properties under biaxial stress-state change, by increasing
of yield stress of the steel in the tension zone and reducing of yield stress of steel in the
compression region. In numerical modelling, it is more practical to define the same yield
stress for steel in tension and compression. In ABAQUS, the moment carried by the steel tube
can be obtained for different drift levels, as well the yield moment of steel tube and the
corresponding drift level. In order to find the modified yield stress of steel, we have to model
the bare steel tube in 2D numerical model in OpenSees and changing the steel yield stress
until the moment of the steel tube from 2D numerical analysis matches the yield moment of
steel tube defined from ABAQUS. This will be the modified yield stress of steel, which will
account for bi-axial stress conditions.
The hysteretic material available in OpenSees, with a tri-linear behaviour, will be used for
modelling the steel material. Not only the yielding point will be modified but also point 2 and
3 of the curve shown in Figure 4.9 will be shifted with the same value as the shift of yield
point. For example, regarding specimen CR-RuC15%-219-3-0%-M with a uniaxial yield
stress f y  309MPa , the corresponding modified yield stress will be f y ,mod  337MPa , so
also the other part of curve will be shifted by 28MPa, as shown in Figure 5.2.
47
Figure 5.2. Modified steel stress-strain curve for specimen CR-RuC15%-219-3-15%
Table 5-2 lists the values of modified yield stress of the steel material to be used in the
simplified 2D numerical models in OpenSees.
Table 5-2. Summary of modified steel yield stress for all specimens
No. Specimen fy (MPa) fy,mod (MPa) fy,mod/fy

1 CR-RuC15%-219-3-0%-M 309.0 337.0 1.09
2 CR-RuC15%-219-3-15%-M 309.0 309.0 1.00
3 CR-RuC15%-219-5-0%-M 393.5 422.0 1.07
4 CR-RuC15%-219-5-15%-M 393.5 393.5 1.00
5 CR-RuC5%-219-5-0%-M 393.5 422.0 1.07
6 CR-RuC5%-219-5-15%-M 393.5 408.0 1.04
7 CR-StdC-219-5-0%-M 393.5 420.0 1.07
8 CR-StdC-219-5-15%-M 393.5 404.0 1.03
It can be seen that, for a member subjected to axial load, the increase in steel yield stress is
lower in comparison to members without axial load. Members C219-5 without axial load have
almost the same increase of around 7%.
5.2 Results of simplified 2D numerical modelling of specimens under monotonic lateral

loading using modified material properties
Figure 5.3 shows the moment-drift curves for all specimens using simplified 2D numerical
modelling in OpenSees with modified material properties and distributed plasticity approach.
For comparison purposes, the test results and 3D numerical modelling results are also plotted.
48
Figure 5.3. Comparison of moment-drift curves between test results, ABAQUS and OpenSees with modified
material properties
49
It can be seen that, overall, the proposed simplified numerical model provides good results.
As shown in Table 5-3, the simplified model has a difference of 2.4% in terms of moment
capacity at 4% drift in comparison with the test results, with a standard deviation of 5.1%,
while comparing with ABAQUS results the difference is 1.2% with a standard deviation of
1.4%. Even in terms of energy index, EI (area under curve), at 4% drift the simplified model
has a difference compared to test results by 1.8% with a standard deviation of 6.2% while
compared to ABAQUS results the difference is 0.6% with a standard deviation of 1.4% as
shown in Table 5-4.
It is therefore possible to conclude that the proposed simplified 2D numerical modelling

distributed plasticity approach in OpenSees with modified material properties provides good
predictions of moment capacity of circular CFST columns under monotonic lateral loading,
with or without axial loading.
Table 5-3. Comparisons of moment capacity for 4% drift between test, ABAQUS and simplified model
Mtest MABAQUS MOpenSees

Specimen MABAQUS/Mtest MOpenSees/Mtest MOpenSees/MABAQUS
1 64.0 60.1 60.7 0.939 0.948 1.010

2 73.7 65.7 65.6 0.891 0.890 0.998
3 114.6 119.5 119.2 1.043 1.040 0.997
4 134.1 124.1 121.6 0.925 0.907 0.980
5 123.0 127.4 123.9 1.036 1.007 0.973
6 135.7 136 135 1.002 0.995 0.993
7 124.6 131.3 126.7 1.054 1.017 0.965
8 141.1 143.1 141.6 1.014 1.004 0.990
mean 0.988 0.976 0.988
st. dev. 0.057 0.051 0.014
Table 5-4. Comparisons of energy index for 4% drift between test, ABAQUS and simplified model
EItest EIABAQUS EIOpenSees

Specimen EIABAQUS/EItest EIOpenSees/EItest EIOpenSees/EIABAQUS
1 196.7 204.4 196.4 0.962 0.961 0.998

2 230.9 263.5 229.5 0.876 0.871 0.994
3 388.2 371.4 394.5 1.045 1.062 1.016
4 391.0 420.9 391.9 0.929 0.931 1.002
5 418.7 394.1 410.9 1.062 1.043 0.981
6 446.2 464.2 441.3 0.961 0.951 0.989
7 433.9 400.0 419.6 1.085 1.049 0.967
8 472.5 479.1 474.7 0.986 0.991 1.005
mean 0.988 0.982 0.994
st.dev. 0.067 0.062 0.014
50
Chapter 6. Conclusions and future research
6 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

6.1 Summary and conclusions
The research carried out and presented in this dissertation aimed to understand the behaviour
of circular concrete (rubberized concrete) filled steel tube columns under lateral loads with or
without axial load. After calibrating 3D numerical models in ABAQUS and validating with
test results, a simplified accurate 2D numerical modelling using distributed plasticity was
proposed. The research conclusions are as follows:
 Even though the compressive strength of rubberized concrete is significantly smaller

in comparison to standard concrete, the ultimate capacity of rubberized CFST
members is not significantly lower in comparison to CFST made with standard
concrete.
 Detailed 3D numerical models provide a very good prediction of the behaviour and
ultimate lateral capacity of circular CFSTs subjected to flexural monotonic loading.
 2D numerical models using distributed plasticity with uniaxial materials properties

always underestimate the maximum lateral capacity of circular CFST columns under
monotonic loading.
 The increase of concrete compressive strength due to lateral confinement and the
change of steel properties due to biaxial stress-state conditions play an important role
in estimating the ultimate lateral capacity of circular CFST columns.
 Simplified 2D numerical models using distributed plasticity with modified materials

properties provide a good prediction of the lateral capacity of circular CFST columns
under monotonic loading.
 2D numerical models using distributed plasticity approach with uniaxial materials

properties do not provide a good representation of the hysteretic behaviour of CFST
members subjected to cyclic lateral loading.
51
Chapter 6. Conclusions and future research
6.2 Future research

According to the work and the conclusions presented in this dissertation, future research on
CFST members can be focused on:
 Conducting a parametric study using calibrated 3D numerical models and analysis for
a wide range of variables like normalized axial load, D/t ratios, columns length,
concrete and steel material, and trying to come out with equations for predicting
concrete confinement effects and the change of steel properties under biaxial bending.
 Applying the equations mentioned above to define modified material properties in

order to use them in 2D numerical models using distributed plasticity to conduct
pushover analysis of different moment frames.
 Calibrating the 3D numerical model in ABAQUS for members under cyclic loading by
comparing numerical results with test results. The calibrated model can be used to
generate reliable cyclic behaviour of different CFST members that may be needed in
the design of frames, without need of experimental tests.
 Trying to calibrate 2D numerical models using concentrated plasticity approach in

order to model the cyclic behaviour of CFSTs and applying them in the analysis of
frames subjected to earthquake loading conditions.
52
References
7 REFERENCES
ABAQUS, “ABAQUS Documentation”, Dassault Systèmes Simulia Corp., Providence, RI, USA,
2011
American Concrete Institute (2011). Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-
11) and Commentary. MI, USA: Farmington Hills
Denavit, M.D., Hajjar, J.F. [2012] “Characterization of Behavior of Steel-Concrete Composite
Members and Frames with Applications for Design”, PhD dissertation, University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois.
Elchalakania, M., Zhao, X.L. [2008] “Concrete-filled cold-formed circular steel tubes subjected to
variable amplitude cyclic pure bending,” Engineering Structures, Vol.30, No.2, pp. 287-299.
Eurocode 2 EN 1992-1-1: [2004] Design of concrete structures - Part 1-1: General rules and rules for
buildings (with UK National Application Document), London: British Standards Institution
Giakoumelis, G., Lam, D. [2004] “Axial capacity of circular concrete-filled tube columns,” Journal of
Constructional Steel Research, Vol.60, No.7, pp. 1049-1068.
Han, L.-H., Uy,B., Tao, Zh. [2011] “Behaviour of short and slender concrete-filled stainless steel
tubular columns.” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 67 pp.360–378
Han, L.-H., Li, W., Bjorhovde, R. [2014] “Developments and advanced applications of concrete-filled
steel tubular (CFST) structures: Members.” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 100 pp.211–
228
Han, L.-H.,An, Y.-F. [2014] “Behaviour of concrete-encased CFST columns under combined
compression and bending.” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 101 pp.314–330
Hu, H.-T., Huang, C.-S., Wu, M.-H., Wu, Y.-M. [2003] “Nonlinear analysis of axially loaded
concrete-filled tube columns with confinement effect,” Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol.129,
No.10, pp. 1322-1329
Hu, H.-T., Huang, C.-S., Chen, Zh.-L. [2005] “Finite element analysis of CFT columns subjected to an
axial compressive force and bending moment in combination.” Journal of Constructional Steel
Research, 61 pp.1692–1712
Jiang, Y. [2014] “Experimental and numerical behavior assessment of rubberized concrete-filled steel
tubes.” Master thesis, European School for Advanced Studies in Reduction of Seismic Risk (ROSE
School), University of Pavia, Italy.
53
References
Jiang, Y., Silva, A., Castro, J.M., Silvestre, N., Monteiro, R., [2016] “Numerical modeling of the
monotonic flexural behaviour of circular CFST members” (under submission)
Liang, Q. Q. and Fragomeni, S., [2009] “Nonlinear analysis of circular concrete‐filled steel tubular
short columns under axial loading. “Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 65(12), pp.
2186‐2196.
O’Shea, M.D., Bridge, R.Q. [1997] “Behaviour of thin-walled box sections with lateral restraint.”
Research report no. R739, Department of Civil Engineering, the University of Sydney, Sydney
Australia.
O’Shea, M.D., Bridge, R.Q. [1997] “Local buckling of thin-walled circular steel sections with or
without internal restraint.” Research report no. R740, Department of Civil Engineering, the
University of Sydney. Sydney, Australia.
Patel, V., Ishvarbhai., Liang, Q. & Hadi, M.N.S. [2014] “Numerical analysis of high-strength
concrete-filled steel tubular slender beam-columns under cyclic loading.” Journal of
Constructional Steel Research, 92 pp. 183-194.
Patel, V., Liang, Q. & Hadi, M.N.S. [2014] “Nonlinear analysis of axially loaded cicular concrete-
filled stainless steel tubular short columns” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 101 pp. 9-18.
PEER, “OpenSees: Open system for earthquake engineering simulation”, Pacific Earthquake
Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, CA, 2006
Sakino, K., Nakahara, H., Morino, S., Nishiyama, I. [2004] “Behavior of centrally loaded concrete-
filled steel-tube short columns,” Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol.130, No.2, pp. 180–188
Silva, A., Jiang, Y., Castro, J.M., Silvestre, N., Monteiro, R., [2015] “Monotonic and cyclic behavior
of circular rubberized concrete-filled steel tubes” (submitted for publication)
Schneider, S.P. [1998] “Axially Loaded Concrete-Filled Steel Tubes,” Journal of Structural
Engineering, Vol.124, No.10, pp. 1125-1138.
Tao, Z., Wang, Z. B., and Yu, Q., (2013). “Finite element modelling of concrete-filled steel stub
columns under axial compression”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 89, pp. 121-131
Trahair, N.S., Bradford, M.A., Nethercot, D.A. Gardner, L. [2008] The Behaviour and Design of Steel
Structures to EC3, by Taylor & Francis 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN.
Triantafillou, T.C. Strengthening and seismic retrofitting of structures with composites.
Varma, A.H., Ricles, J.M., Sause, R., Lu, L.W. [2002] “Seismic behavior and modeling of high-
strength composite concrete-filled steel tube (CFT) beam–columns,” Journal of Constructional
Steel Research, Vol.58, No.5-9, pp. 725-758.
Xue, J., Shinozuka, M. [2013] “Rubberized concrete: A green structural material with enhanced
energy-dissipation capability,” Construction and Building Materials, Vol.42, pp. 196-204.
54
View publication stats

M.Sc.B.Kalemi 2016 Numericalmodellingandassessmentofcircularconcrete-Filledsteeltubularmembers PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

M.Sc.B.Kalemi 2016 Numericalmodellingandassessmentofcircularconcrete-Filledsteeltubularmembers PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

NUMERICAL MODELLING AND ASSESSMENT OF CIRCULAR CONCRETE-

Thesis · February 2016

Bledar Kalemi Yadong Jiang

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

José Miguel Castro Ricardo Monteiro

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

ITERATE View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements

Earthquake Engineering &/or Engineering Seismology

Istituto Universitario di Studi Superiori di Pavia

Dr. Jose Miguel Castro … … ………

Dr. Ricardo Monteiro… …… ……

4.1.3 Material model for concrete ........................................................................................... 26

1.1 Behaviour of CFST

1.1.2 Behaviour under axial compression

Figure 1.2. Behaviour of CFST under axial compression

1.1.3 Behaviour under axial tension

1.1.4 Behaviour under bending

1.1.5 Behaviour under torsion

1.2 CFST solutions

1.2.1 Common CFST

Figure 1.6. Examples of CFST solutions

1.2.2 Other CFST solutions

Figure 1.7. Examples of alternative CFST solutions

1.3 Research goals and objectives

Recently, Silva et al. [2015] conducted an experimental campaign, which consisted of 36

2.2 Numerical studies

Denavit [2012] conducted a 3 year PhD on characterization and behaviour of steel-concrete

2.3 Proposed confined concrete models

2.3.1 Hu et al. [2003] for CFST members under axial load

Figure 2.1. Equivalent uniaxial stress-strain curve for confined concrete

f 'cc  f 'c k1 f l (2.1)

Ecc  4700 f 'cc (MPa) (2.3)

Figure 2.2. Cross-section of CFST columns

For circular CFSTs:

f l  f y [0.043646  0.000832( D / t )] for (21.7  D / t  47) (2.4a)

f l  f y [0.006241  0.0000357( D / t )] for (47  D / t  150) (2.4b)

k3  1 for (21.7  D / t  40) (2.5a)

k3  0.0000339( D / t ) 2  0.010085( D / t )  1.3491 for (40  D / t  150) (2.5b)

For unstiffened square CFSTs:

f l  f y [0.055048  0.001885( B / t )] for (17  B / t  29.2) (2.6a)

fl  0 for (29.2  B / t  150) (2.6b)

k3  0.000178( B / t ) 2  0.02492( B / t )  1.2722 for (17  B / t  70) (2.7a)

k 3  0.4 for (70  B / t  150) (2.7b)

f 'cc  k 4 f 'c k1 f l (2.8)

For circular CFSTs:

f l  f y [0.00859  0.0373( N / N u )] 0.23  N / N u  0.56 (2.9b)

f l  f y [0.0104  0.00333( N / N u )] 0.56  N / N u  0.74 (2.9c)

k3  1  0.304( N / N u ) 0  N / N u  0.23 (2.10a)

k3  1.195  1.152( N / N u ) 0.23  N / N u  0.56 (2.10b)

k3  0.55 0.56  N / N u  0.74 (2.10c)

k 4  0.7  1.304( N / N u ) 0  N / N u  0.23 (2.11a)

k 4  1.0 0.23  N / N u (2.11a)

For unstiffened square CFSTs:

f l  f y [0.00517  0.0152( N / N u )] 0.34  N / N u  0.57 (2.12b)

k3  0.87  0.889( N / N u ) 0  N / N u  0.45 (2.13a)

k3  0.508  0.083( N / N u ) 0.45  N / N u  0.57 (2.13b)

k 4  0.42  1.706( N / N u ) 0  N / N u  0.34 (2.14a)

k 4  1.0 0.34  N / N u  0.57 (2.14b)

2.3.3 Liang and Fragomeni [2009]

Ec  3320  c f 'c  6900 (MPa) (2.17)