Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No.

2, 133-147, June 2007 / Copyright © 2007 Japan Concrete Institute 133

Invited paper

Study of New RC Structures Using Ultra-High-Strength Fiber-Reinforced

Concrete (UFC) ― The Challenge of Applying 200 MPa UFC to Earth-
quake Resistant Building Structures
Shunsuke Sugano1, Hideki Kimura2 and Kazuyoshi Shirai3

Received 26 May 2007, revised 9 June 2007

Abstract
This paper describes the seismic behavior of new reinforced concrete (RC) building structures using ultra-high-strength
fiber-reinforced concrete (UFC) with 200 MPa strength. A series of tests of columns and frames in UFC buildings sub-
jected to seismic forces were conducted to obtain basic data of their behavior and to provide guides for design and con-
struction. The test results are summarized as follows. 1) UFC, which is basically a brittle material, could be well confined
with high-strength lateral reinforcements. 2) Stable behavior of columns could be obtained even under very high axial
compression when they were well confined with high-strength lateral reinforcements. 3) Steel-fibers in UFC significantly
enhanced the shear resistance of columns and frames. Analytical investigations indicated that the shear behavior of a
column and a frame can be well evaluated by considering the contribution of steel fibers to the tensile resistance of UFC.

1. Introduction bridge structures as the shrinkage of UFC may cause

Practical use of concrete with the specified design
strength of 100 N/mm2 for high-rise condominiums of
reinforced concrete in Japan began in 1995. However,
higher strength concrete is required to meet demand for
taller buildings, wider living spaces and smaller size
members. The announcement of the planned completion
of a 59-story condominium using concrete with the
specified design strength of 150N/mm2 by August 2008
(Takenaka Corporation 2007) is but one example of the
current trend toward the use of concrete with higher
design strength for building structures.
Ultra-high-strength fiber-reinforced concrete (UFC),
which is said to be able to realize compressive strength
of up to 800 N/mm2, may be one of the promising mate-
rials that can satisfy such demand; however, it has not yet
been applied to buildings due to a lack of fundamental
data and guides for design and construction. According
to a survey of the Japan Concrete Institute (JCI), UFC
with a specified design strength of 150 N/mm2 or higher
has been used for several small-scale bridge structures
since 2002 to extend the span length and reduce the size
of the web section of girders (JCI 2006). The Japan So-
ciety of Civil Engineers (JSCE) has established guide-
lines for the design and construction of structures using
UFC (JSCE 2004). It should be noted that the JSCE
cautions against the use of UFC with deformed bars for
1
Professor Emeritus, Hiroshima University, Japan.
E-mail: sugano@hiroshima-u.ac.jp
2 at 90 degrees Celsius.
Senior Chief Researcher, Takenaka Research and
Development Institute, Japan.
3 and the seismic behavior of columns and frames of UFC,
Associate Research Scientist, Research and
Development Center, Taiheiyo Cement Corporation,
Japan.
cracks resulting from the restriction of the deformed
bars.
Toward the development of new reinforced concrete
structures that utilize UFC with the strength of 200
N/mm2 (abbreviated to “200MPa-UFC”) and their prac-
tical use for buildings, a series of tests have been con-
ducted at Hiroshima University since 2001 to investigate
the seismic behavior of columns and frames in UFC
buildings. First, UFC cylinders were tested in 2001 to
obtain fundamental data on the compressive characteris-
tics of UFC (Obata 2002). Then, rectangular columns
were tested under uniaxial compression forces in 2002
(Kitakaze 2003) and under cyclic lateral forces in 2003
(Joko 2004). Further, interior beam-column subassem-
blages (partial frame) using 200MPa-UFC for both col-
umns and beams were tested in 2004 (Joko 2005). The
bending test of UFC prisms was added in 2006 to inves-
tigate the tensile resistance of UFC (Yamana 2007) since
it was found that the contribution of steel fibers to the
tensile resistance of UFC has a significant effect on the
ductility and the shear resistance of columns and
beam-column subassemblages (Joko 2005).
UFC consists of fine aggregates with a grain diameter
of 2.5 mm or less, premixed powder (cement, silica and
reactive micro-powder), water, superplasticizer and steel
fibers (Fig. 1). It is essential that it be free of coarse
aggregates. Steel fibers with a diameter of 0.10 to 0.20
mm and length of 10 to 20 mm are added to provide
ductility. UFC must be subjected to steam curing to re-
alize the designed high strength. UFC with compressive
strength of 200 N/mm2 requires 48 hours of steam curing
This paper describes the mechanical properties of UFC
as detailed below, based on the results of the
above-mentioned tests.
134 S. Sugano, H. Kimura and K. Shirai / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 2, 133-147, 2007

Premixed powder of axial displacement of the cylinder reading feed-back

signals from displacement transducers.
Fine aggregate
The test cylinders, listed in Table 1, were 100 mm in
Cement and silica diameter and 200 mm in height. The test variables were
Reactive micro powder 1) compressive strength (120, 160, 200 N/mm2) and 2)
type of contained fibers (non-fiber, 2.0 in volumetric
Water percentage (vol.%) of steel-fiber and 3.0 vol.% of or-
Superplasticizer ganic (PVA)-fiber). The steel fiber was 0.2 mm in di-
ameter and 15 mm long while the PVA fiber was 0.3 mm
in diameter and 15 mm long. The tensile strengths of the
Steel fiber steel fiber and PVA fiber were 3000 N/mm2 and 880
Diameter: 0.10-0.25 mm N/mm2, respectively. The PVA fiber was used in this test
Length: 10-20 mm for reference. All the test cylinders were subjected to
Ten. strength 3000 N/mm2 steam curing in which the period and the temperature
were determined in accordance with the design com-
48 hours at 90 degrees C for pressive strength (Table 1).
Steam curing
200 N/mm 2 strength
2.2 Test results and discussion
Fig. 1 Composition of UFC. Figure 2 shows the test cylinder failure pattern. All the
NF (non-fiber) cylinders showed explosive fracture as
(1) Compressive characteristics of UFC as a struc- shown in Fig. 2(c). The fiber-including cylinders showed
tural concrete mostly diagonal sliding failure (Fig. 2(b)) or vertical
(2) Tensile characteristics of UFC as a structural splitting failure (Fig. 2(a)). Obviously, the contained
concrete fibers prevented explosive fracture or delayed crushing
(3) Compressive characteristics of UFC columns or splitting of the concrete.
reinforced with steel bars and confined with Table 2 shows the test results. Each test result value
lateral reinforcements in this table is the average value of the specimens with
(4) Restoring force characteristics of UFC columns the same test variables. The stress-strain relationships of
subjected to seismic forces steel fiber-reinforced cylinders are shown in Fig. 3. It can
(5) Restoring force characteristics of UFC frames be seen that 1) the loading curves became closer to
subjected to seismic forces straight lines with increases in compressive strength, 2)
Further, methods to evaluate the mechanical properties the strength significantly dropped immediately after the
of UFC and restoring force characteristics of columns peak and 3) test cylinders still could carry axial stress
and frames of UFC are proposed as guides for the design
of UFC buildings.

2. Compressive characteristic of UFC

2.1 Test outline
A uniaxial compression test of UFC cylinders was con-
ducted to investigate the stress-strain relationship of
UFC, which is basically a very brittle material like rock.
The test cylinders were subjected to monotonically in-
creasing axial forces up to failure. The post-peak loading (a) (b) (c)
was controlled to be very slow by a very small increment Fig. 2 Failure patterns of test cylinders.

Table 1 Test specimens (Uniaxial compression test of UFC cylinders).

Design Contained Curing Curing
No. of
Specimen Strength Fibers Temperature Time
Specimens 2
(N/mm ) (vol. %) (℃) (h)
200FM2 12 200 90 48
Steel Fiber
160FM2 3 160 60 24
(2.0 %)
120FM2 3 120 60 6
160FO3 4 160 PVA Fiber 90 48
120FO3 3 120 (3.0 %) 60 24
200NF 8 200 90 48
Non-fiber
160NF 3 200 60 24
 S. Sugano, H. Kimura and K. Shirai / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 2, 133-147, 2007 135

Table 2 Test results.

Compressive Elastic Strain
Number of Poisson’s
Specimen Strength σB Modulus Ec at σB
Specimens 2 2 Ratio
(N/mm ) (kN/mm ) (µ)
200FM2 12 190 50.5 0.203 4010
160FM2 3 168 48.9 0.193 4220
120FM2 3 139 46.6 0.187 3850
160FO3 4 159 43.3 0.182 3900
120FO3 3 141 43.6 0.200 3930
200NF 8 184 50.7 0.203 4100
160NF 3 171 47.3 0.194 4160

after the sudden drop in strength. The observed elastic 220

modulus is shown in Fig. 4, where it is compared with FM series
200
the existing design equations. The observed elastic 180 200-06
160-03 Legend
160-03 160FM2-03
moduli of steel fiber-reinforced cylinders are larger than 160 160-02 160-01
120-01 120FM2-01
those of non-fiber and organic fiber-reinforced cylinders. Stress σ (N/mm2) 140
160-01
The average observed elastic modulus is very close to the 120
values calculated by the AIJ equation (AIJ 1999). 100 160-02
160-03
The relationship between the compressive strength of 80
cylinder σΒ and strain εm at σB is shown in Fig. 5. Al- 60 200-06 120-03
120-02
though the scatter is not small, the strain obviously in- 40 120-01
creases with increases in σB. The equations by Fafitis and 20
Shah and by Popovics, shown below, express the upper 0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
and lower boundaries, respectively, of the test results. Strain ε (µ)
Fafitis and Shah’s equation Fig. 3 Stress-strain curves (observed).

ε m = 1950 + 14.6σ B (1)

80
200FM2 160F03
Popovics’ equation 160FM2 120FO3
70
120FM2 200NF
Elastic modulus Ec (kN/mm2)

ACI-363
ε m = 7634 σ B (2) 60 160NF

50
2.3 Evaluation of stress-strain relationship 40
A comparison of observed stress-strain relationships with
existing equations (Obata 2002) indicated that 1) 30 AIJ 1999
Muguruma’s equation, shown below as Equation 3, best E=33.5k1k2(γ/2.4)2(σB/60)1/3
20 (k1=k2=1, γ=2.4)
fit the observed loading curves regardless of whether AIJ 1971
fiber was included and 2) no equations could evaluate the 10 Ec=21（γ/2.3）1.5 （σB/20）1/2
observed two-step post-peak curves, and therefore, it was 0
considered necessary to propose equations to match the 0 40 80 120 160 200 240
observed post-peak curves. Compressive strength σB (N/mm2)
The following equations are proposed to match the
observed stress-strain curves (Obata 2002). Fig. 4 Elastic modulus.

Loading zone

σ = Ecε + ( Ec − ε m )(ε / ε m ) 2 (3) Post-peak zone (2): Second curve

E=33.5 (γ/2.4)2(σB/60)1/3 (4) σ = f c '−0.0103(ε − ε m ' ) (7)

Post-peak zone (1): First curve where f c ' = 0.65 σ B and ε m ' = strain at the stress f c ' .
Figure 6 shows the calculated and observed
σ = σ B − 0.155(ε − ε m ) (5) stress-strain relationships. Equation 3 was found to well
predict the stress-strain relation in the loading zone.
ε m = 4270 (µ) (6) Equations 5 to 7 also well predicted post-peak behavior.
 136 S. Sugano, H. Kimura and K. Shirai / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 2, 133-147, 2007

6000
P/2 P/2

5000 Front ε1
Fafitis･Shah式 70
εm(µ)

4000 ε2
3000 P/2 P/2
Strain at σB

2000 Popovics式
Rear
200FM2
1000 160F03　
200NF 160FM2
160NF 120FO3　 120FM2
0
0 80 160 240 δA δB δC
2
Compressive strength sB (N/mm ) 2 100 100 100
Compressive strength σB (N/mm )
Fig. 5 Strain at compressive strength.
Fig. 7 Bending test and measurement of UFC prism.
240
for σB=180 N/mm2
for σB=160 N/mm2
200 200-06 test (160FM2, 200FM2) Table 3 Test specimens (Bending test of UFC prisms).
σB: 174 2
160-03 Contained Design Specified Strength (N/mm )
σB: 171
160 σB: 180 160-01 Steel 120 160 200
Stress σ (N/mm2)

σB: 170
Fibers *1 *2
160-02 Vertical Vertical Vertical Horizontal
120 σB: 160
(vol.%)
σB: 160 0 － － 6 －
80 σB: 160 1.0 － － 6 6
2.0 6 6 6 6
200-06
40 σB: 174 3.0 － － 6 6
σB: 180
160-02 160FM2-02 *1 Direction of casting UFC: Vertical
σB: 160 σB =160 N/mm2 *2 Direction of casting UFC: Horizontal
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Strain ε (µ) Table 4 Compressive strength of UFC.
Fig. 6 Evaluation of σ-ε relationship. Design
Specified
120 160 200
Strength
2
(N/mm )
Contained
3. Tensile characteristics of UFC Steel Fibers 2.0 2.0 0 1.0 2.0 3.0
(vol. %)
3.1 Test outline Compressive
A bending test of UFC prisms was conducted to inves- Strength 108 149 197 204 192 197
2
tigate the flexural tensile characteristics of UFC. The test σB (N/mm )
prism was subjected to uniform bending moment at its
mid-span (Fig. 7). The tensile strength and the ultimate
3.2 Test results and discussion
tensile strain of UFC were examined based on the ob-
The failure pattern of the test specimens and the observed
served moment-curvature relationships. The influences
moment vs. curvature relationships are shown in Fig. 8.
of the amount of steel fiber, the compressive strength of
The non-fiber specimens and 1.0 % steel fiber specimens
UFC and the direction of casting fiber containing con-
failed immediately after crack initiation, while the
crete on the tensile strength and the ultimate strain were
specimens with 2.0% and 3.0 % steel fiber increased in
examined.
strength even after crack initiation and gradually lost
The test specimens listed in Table 3 measured 100 mm
strength in the post-peak zone. Thus steel fiber was found
by 100 mm in cross-section and 400 mm in length. The
to have a remarkable boosting effect on strength and
test variables were 1) specified design strength of UFC
ductility in the test specimens. The test results are listed
(120, 160, 200 N/mm2), 2) amount of steel fibers
in Table 5 in terms of tensile strength and ultimate tensile
(non-fiber, 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 vol.%) and 3) the direction of
strain, which were evaluated referring to Shimizu’s
casting concrete (vertical casting and horizontal casting).
method (Shimizu 2006). The tensile strength and ulti-
The total number of test specimens was fifty four. The
mate strain values listed in this table were the character-
compressive strengths of the test cylinders are listed in
istic values in the idealized rigid-plastic relation of ten-
Table 4.
sile stress and tensile strain obtained from the observed
 S. Sugano, H. Kimura and K. Shirai / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 2, 133-147, 2007 137

moment-curvature relationship. Each test result value in
the table is the average value of six specimens. As indi-
cated in the table, the tensile strength increased with
increases in the amount of steel fibers and the compres-
sive strength. Horizontally cast specimens showed 5%
higher tensile strength compared to vertically cast
specimens.
120FM2-V
(a) Failure patterns.
3.3 Evaluation of tensile characteristics of UFC
The tensile characteristic of UFC was evaluated using the
compressive strength of standard cylinder σB. It is as-
sumed that the 2.0% inclusion of steel fiber is the stan-
dard in practice. The relationship between the tensile
strength of UFC and the amount of steel fiber is shown in
Fig. 9. In this figure, the tensile strength is normalized by
the strength for 2% inclusion. The tensile strength is
proportional to the amount of steel fiber (Fig. 9(a)) and
the relation is expressed with Equation 8. The increase in
tensile strength with increases in the compressive
strength of standard cylinder is shown in Fig. 9(b), and
200FM3-V the relation is expressed with Equation 9. The tensile
ultimate strain is proportional to the amount of steel fiber
(Fig. 10(a)), a relation that is expressed with Equation 10.
However, the strain is virtually constant against the
compressive strength, σB, as shown in Fig. 10(b).

f (V f ) = 0.25V f + 0.54 (8)

5 5
4 4 σ T = ασ B 0.44 f (V f ) (9)
Moment (kN･m)
Moment (kN･m)

3 3
2 2 ε u = 0.15V f + 0.185 (10)
1 1
200FM2-H
0
200FM2-V
where f (V f ) is the steel fiber effect coefficient, V f is
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 the amount of steel fiber (vol. %), σT is the tensile
Curvature （μ/mm） Curvature （μ/mm）
strength, εu is the ultimate strain and α is the coefficient
(b) Moment-curvature relationships. relating to the direction of casting UFC (1.00 for vertical
casting and 1.05 for horizontal casting).
Fig. 8 Failure patterns and moment-curvature relation-
ships.

Table 5 Test results.

Maximum Curvature Tensile Ultimate
Specimen Moment at Mmax Strength Tensile Strain
2
Mmax (kNm) (µ/mm) σT (N/mm ) εu (%)
120FM2-V 3.43 54.3 8.13 4.20
160FM2-V 3.90 67.7 9.15 5.40
200FM0-V 3.41 － － －
200FM1-H 3.96 85.2 9.12 7.38
200FM2-H 4.53 74.4 10.87 5.63
200FM3-H 5.29 87.1 13.47 5.50
200FM1-V 3.43 45.2 8.25 3.57
200FM2-V 4.22 61.4 10.06 4.65
200FM3-V 5.69 86.7 13.34 6.60

2 12 0.8 0.8
Ultim ate tens . strain (%)

Ultim ate tens . strain (%)

N orm alized strength f(V f)

Tens. strength σ t/f(V f)

10
1.5 0.6 0.6
8
1 6 0.4 0.4
4
0.5 0.2 0.2
f(Vf) = 0.25Vf + 0.54 2 σT / f(Vf) = 0.99σB0.44 εu = 0.15Vf + 0.185
0
0 1 2 3 4 0 50 100 150 200 0 1 2 3 4 100 150 200
Contained fiber (Vol.%) Com. strength σB(N/mm2) Contained fiber (Vol.%) Com. strength (N/mm2)

(a) (b) (a) (b)

Fig. 9 Tensile strength. Fig. 10 Ultimate tensile strain.
138 S. Sugano, H. Kimura and K. Shirai / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 2, 133-147, 2007

4. Behavior of UFC columns under uniaxial
compression
4.1 Test outline
A uniaxial compression test of UFC columns was con-
ducted to find adequate methods to confine
200MPa-UFC, which is basically a very brittle material
like rock. The columns were subjected to monotonically
increasing axial forces up to failure. Nine rectangular
section columns were constructed for the test (Fig. 11
and Table 6). The section of the columns was 200 mm by
200 mm and longitudinal reinforcements were 12-D10
with the specified yield strength of 685 N/mm2. The test
135
variables were 1) compressive strength of UFC (120, 160,
200 N/mm2), 2) amount of steel fibers (0, 2.0 vol.%), 3)
diameter of lateral reinforcement (6.0, 7.1 mm) and 4)
spacing of lateral reinforcement (35, 45, 55 mm). The
specified yield strengths of high- and ultra-high- strength
lateral reinforcements were 700 and 1400 N/mm2, re-
spectively. The amount of lateral reinforcement in terms
of the ratio of pwwσy to the compressive strength σΒ of
UFC ranged from 0.0055 to 0.023 (Table 6) (pw is the
lateral reinforcement ratio and wσy is the yield strength of
lateral reinforcement).
4.2 Test results and discussion
The stress-strain relationships of core concrete of the test
columns are shown in Fig. 12, which also shows the
stress-strain relationships of standard cylinders. As in-
dicated in this figure, the compressive strength of core

concrete was significantly higher than the standard cyl-

inder strength except in the case of columns without steel
fibers (NF columns). In the NF columns, the enhanced
strength was very small. The compressive strength of
Test section

core concrete fcc was enhanced with increases in the

590
320

amount of lateral reinforcement pwwσy / σB (Fig. 13). The

ratio of the enhanced strength fcc to the standard cylinder
strength σB was expressed with the following empirical
equation.
135

f cc σ B = 0.92( p w w σ y σ B )
0.5
+ 1. 0
(11)
200 in mm The compression ductility, which is expressed in terms
of the ratio of the strain of column at the maximum
strength εcm to the strain of the standard cylinder at its
compressive strength εm, was enhanced with increases in
the amount of lateral reinforcement, as shown in Fig. 14.
The compression ductility εcm/εm is expressed with the
180

200
90

following empirical equation.

90 ε cm ε m = 99.6( pw w σ y σ B ) 2 + 1.0 (12)

200

Fig. 11 Test specimen (Uniaxial compression test of UFC

columns).
Steel fiber 2% Steel fiber 2%
300
Table 6 Test specimen. × : Crushing of test cylinder × : Crushing of test cylinder
250
(Uniaxial compression test of UFC columns) 200
Lateral reinforcement 160FM2-35
150
Stress σ (N/mm2)

Contained 120FM2-45
σB
Specimen fibers Space wσy pwwσy 100
(N/mm2) pw σB 160FM2(TP)
(vol. %) (mm) (N/mm
2
) 50 120FM2(TP)
120FM2-35 160FM2-45
200FM2-35 35 2.3 0.145 0
200FM2-45 222 Steel 45 1.8 1400 0.113 300 Non-fiber Steel fiber 2%
200FM2-55 55 1.5 0.092 200FM2-45
fiber 250
160FM2-35 35 1.8 0.071 200NF-45
181 (2.0 200
160FM2-45 45 1.4 0.055
700
120FM2-35 vol. %) 35 1.8 0.081 150 200FM2-55
159 200NF-35 200FM2(TP)
120FM2-45 45 1.4 0.063 100
200NF-35 Non- 35 2.3 0.152 200NF(TP)
213 1400 50
200NF-45 fiber 45 1.8 0.118 200FM2-35
0
2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
σB : Compressive strength of UFC (N/mm )
2 Strain ε(%)
wσy : Yield strength of lateral reinforcement (N/mm )
pw : Lateral reinforcement ratio (%) Fig. 12 Stress-strain relationship of core concrete.
 S. Sugano, H. Kimura and K. Shirai / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 2, 133-147, 2007 139

1.50 5. Behavior of UFC columns under cyclic

lateral loading
Strength ratio fcc / σB

5.1 Test outline

A cyclic lateral loading test of columns of 200MPa-UFC
1.25
was conducted to obtain basic data on their seismic be-
haviors because such data has not yet been reported. The
columns were subjected to cyclic increasing lateral
forces up to failure. Six rectangular section columns
were constructed for the test. The cross section of the
fcc/ σB = 0.92（pwwσy/ σB ）1/2 +1
columns was identical to that of the columns for the
1.00
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
uniaxial compression test described above (Table 7 and
pwwσy /σB Fig. 15). The section of the test columns was 200 mm by
200 mm and the shear span ratio was 2.5 (Fig. 15).
Fig. 13 Enhanced strength of core concrete.

5 Table 7 Test specimens.

(Cyclic lateral loading test of UFC columns)
4
Strain ratio εcm / εm

Lateral reinforcement
Axial
3 stress UFC cσB Failure
Specimem
ratio (N/mm2) Space pw pwwσy/Fc mode
η0=σ0/cσB (mm) (%)
2
06FM23 218 35 2.29 0.160 F-C-Bu
1 06FM16 0.6 230 50 1.60 0.112 F-C-Bu
εcm/εm= 99.6（pwwσy/ σB ）2 +1 06FM05 214 75 0.53 0.037 F-C-Bu
0 03NF16 199 50 1.60 0.112 F-C-Bu
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
pwwσy /σB 03FM16 0.3 207 50 1.60 0.112 F-C-Bu
03FM05 202 75 0.53 0.037 F-C-S-W
Fig. 14 Enhanced ultimate strain of core concrete.
σ0: axial stress , cσB: compressive strength
pw: reinforcement ratio, F : main bar yielding, C : crush of concrete
Bu: main bar buckling, S : shear failure, W : rupture of hoop

06FM23 06FM16， 03FM16， 03NF16 06FM05， 03FM05

400

200 200 200

1000
1800
35

50

75
180
180

180

90 90
Section Section Section
400

800 800 800

Hoop space 35mm Hoop space 50mm Hoop space75mm

pwwσｙ/σB ＝ 0.150 pwwσｙ/σB ＝ 0.105 pwwσｙ/σB ＝ 0.035

Fig. 15 Test columns (Cyclic lateral loading test of UFC columns).

140 S. Sugano, H. Kimura and K. Shirai / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 2, 133-147, 2007

Longitudinal reinforcements were 12-D10 with the
specified yield strength of 685 N/mm2. The test variables
were 1) axial stress ratio (0.3 and 0.6), 2) amount of steel
fibers (0 and 2.0 vol.%) and 3) amount of lateral rein-
forcement (pwwσy/σB = 0.037-0.160). The test specimens
are listed in Table 7.
5.2 Test results and discussion
The lateral force vs. displacement relationship of each
column is shown in Fig. 16 and the failure patterns of all
the specimens are shown in Fig. 17. There were two
types of failure mode. One is the type in which longitu-
dinal reinforcements yielded in compression, concrete
crushed and longitudinal reinforcements buckled
(F-C-Bu: all the columns except 03FM05). The other
was the type in which the shear failure followed by the
rupture of lateral reinforcement took place after the
crushing of concrete (F-C-S-W: 03FM05).
The moment vs. axial force relationship is shown in
Fig. 18. The observed maximum strengths of all the
columns except 03NF16 were much larger than the cal-
culated flexural strength. The enhancement of the

500
400 03FM05
03FM05 03FM16
03FM16 03NF16
03NF16
(kN)

300
P(kN）

200
force

100
0
水平力
Lateral

-100
P－⊿Effect P－⊿Effect P－⊿Effect
-200
-300
-400
Pmax =366kN Pmax=387kN Pmax=306kN
-500
500
06FM05
400 06FM05 06FM16
06FM16 06FM23
06FM23
300
force P(kN）
(kN)

200
100
0
Lateral水平力

-100
-200
P－⊿Effect P－⊿Effect
-300 P－⊿Effect

-400
Pmax=269kN Pmax=384kN Pmax=431kN
-500
-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6
Displacement R(%) -2rad)
変形角 R(10 変形角R(10
Displacement R(%) -2rad) 変形角R(10
Displacement R(%) -2rad)

Fig. 16 Lateral force vs. displacement relationship.

06FM05 06FM16 06FM23 03FM05 03FM16 06NF16

pw = 0.53% pw = 1.60 % pw = 2.29 % pw = 0.53% pw = 1.60 % pw = 2.29 %
without sub-tie without sub-tie non-fiber
(b) Axial force ratio η0 = 0.3
(a) Axial force ratio η0 = 0.6 (b) Axial force ratio η0 = 0.3
Fig. 17 Failure pattern.
 S. Sugano, H. Kimura and K. Shirai / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 2, 133-147, 2007 141

strength is considered to be caused by confinement with ultimate strength of the column without steel fibers could
lateral reinforcements. The ratio of the observed strength be evaluated based on the flexural strength of the core
to the calculated flexural strength of the columns with the section.
axial stress ratio of 0.6 became closer to 1.0 as shown in The effects of the amount of both lateral reinforcement
Fig. 19 when the effect of confinement with lateral re- and steel fibers on the ductility of columns are shown in
inforcement was evaluated based on Equation 11. The Figs. 20 and 21, respectively. The ultimate displacement,
defined as the displacement at 80% the maximum
strength after experiencing the maximum strength, sig-
nificantly increased with increases in the amount of lat-
eral reinforcement pwwσy / σB for the case where η0 = 0.6,
as shown in Fig. 20. In the case of low axial force level
(η0 = 0.3), both the strength and the ductility were en-
Axial force N (kN)

hanced by the inclusion of steel fibers, as shown in Fig.

21.

5.3 Evaluation of flexural behavior of UFC

columns
Core section
The relationship between lateral force and story drift of
each UFC column was investigated using fiber-model
analysis of the column section (Murakami 2007). In the
Non-fiber
analysis, the previously discussed tensile characteristic
of UFC and the confinement to UFC by lateral rein-
Moment M (kNm) forcements were considered. The analytical model of
Fig. 18 Moment – axial force diagram. confined UFC is shown in Fig. 22 and the constitutive
equations are shown below.

η0 = 0.6 Compression Side

Strength ratio (test / calculated)

σ = EUFC ε (0 ≤ ε ≤ ε c ' ) (13)

Confinement
neglected fc − fc '
σ= UFC
(ε − ε c ) + f c '
UFC ε c − ε c '

(ε c ' ≤ ε ≤UFC ε c ) (14)

Confinement fc
σ= UFC
(ε − 6) (UFC ε c ≤ ε ≤ 6) (15)
considered 6−UFC ε c

UFC f c = (1.8( p w w σ y / f c ) + 1) f c (16)

UFC ε c = (5( pw w σ y / f c ) + 1)ε c (17)

pwwσy /σB
Fig. 19 Enhanced flexural strength.
450
pwwσy /σB = 0.112 03FM16
400 Pmax = 387kN
1.2
η0 = 0.6 06FM05 (pw = 0.53%)
350
Ru = 4.38%
06FM16 (pw = 1.60%)
1.0 06FM05
Lateral force P (kN)

06FM23 (pw = 2.29%)

300 Steel fiber
2.0 vol.%
Lateral force P/Pmax

0.8 250
06FM16
0.6
200
06FM23 03NF16
Ru = 2.57 150 Pmax = 306kN Non-fiber
0.4 Ru = 3.00%
100
Ru = 0.68 Ru = 3.69
0.2 50
0
0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Displacement R (%) Displacement R (%)
Fig. 20 Effect of amount of lateral reinforcement. Fig. 21 Effect of steel fiber.
 142 S. Sugano, H. Kimura and K. Shirai / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 2, 133-147, 2007

f c' = 2UFC f c / 3 ε c'= f c ' / Ec f c = 0.85UFC σ B t ε u = 0.15V f + 0.185 (21)

Tension Side
f (V f ) = 0.25V f + 0.54 (22)
σ = EUFC ε (0 ≤ ε ≤ ε t ) (18)
where UFC σ B is the compressive strength of UFC stan-
σ = σ T =UFC σ B 0.44 f (V f ) (ε t ≤ ε ≤ t ε u ) (19) dard cylinder and V f is the amount of steel fiber (vol.%).
The calculated lateral force vs. story drift relationships
σ =0 (t ε u ≤ ε ) (20) are shown in Fig. 24 for the cases with a low axial force
column (03FM16) and a high axial force column
(06FM16). The curvature distribution along the column
height was assumed as shown in Fig. 23. Shear stiffness
was assumed to be elastic. As shown in Fig. 24, generally
σ the calculation result agreed well with the test result in
UFCfC the case of the low axial force column, though the flex-
ural strength was slightly underestimated. Consideration
of the tensile resistance of UFC slightly pushed up the
fC’ flexural strength. In the case of the high axial force
column, the flexural strength was more underestimated
while the tensile resistance of UFC did not contribute to
the flexural strength. The shape factor, the ratio of the
EUFC
tεu
strength of concrete in the column to the standard cyl-
inder strength, of 0.85 for the compressive strength of
εc 6% ε
σT UFC UFC might have resulted in further underestimation of
flexural strength.

Fig. 22 Analytical model of confined UFC. 6. Behavior of interior beam-column

subassemblages under cyclic lateral
Φ Φ loading
1D A
6.1 Test outline
In order to obtain fundamental data on the seismic be-
内法スパンLheight L

havior of beam-column subassemblages (partial frame)

using 200MPa-UFC, a cyclic lateral loading test of inte-
Clear

Φ・D rior beam-column subassemblages was conducted. Four

interior beam-column subassemblages half the real scale
Hinge
ヒンジ領域
length
were constructed for the test. The dimensions and ar-
（1Dと仮定） 1D
1D rangement of the reinforcing bars of the specimens are
Φ Φ shown in Fig. 25 and Tables 8. The mechanical proper-
断面せいD
Depth D ties of the reinforcing bars and concrete are listed in
Curvature distribution
Fig. 23 Assumed curvature distribution.
Tables 9 and 10. The test variables were 1) volume of
steel fibers (0 and 2.0 vol.%) and 2) development length

500
450【03FM16】 【06FM16】 Test
400
Shear force（kN）

Analysis
350
300 Analysis
250 σT neglected
200 Pmax: Test/Cal.=1.11 Pmax: Test/Cal.=1.18
150 Failure progress □ Crush of concrete
Failure progress ○ Max. load - Pmax
100 Test: Yc Pmax Yt Test: Yc Pmax ◇ C-Yielding - Yc
50 Cal.:
Cal.: Yc Yt Pmax Cal.:
Cal.: Yc Pmax △ T-Yielding - Yt
0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.00.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0

Story drift（%） Story drift（%）

Fig. 24 Flexural displacement (comparison with test results).

 S. Sugano, H. Kimura and K. Shirai / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 2, 133-147, 2007 143

3024
420
2524 Column
378 Main bar

300
16-D29
Hoop

21
4-D8
550

420
80
80
Beam
Main bar

1600
500

16-D29
Stirrup

25
4-D8
1302

500
448
J17FM
B-C Joint
J17NF Hoop

250
4-D8@60
340
420

(a) J17 series

3024
2524 350 Column
Main bar
310
300

12-D29
Hoop
4-D8

20
635

80

350

80 Beam
Main bar
1600
330

10-D25
Stirrup
4-D8
J14NF 20
290
330

1336
J14FM B-C Joint
Hoop
250

280 4-D8@70

350
(b) J14 series

Fig. 25 Test specimen (Cyclic lateral loading test of UFC beam-column subassemblages).

of longitudinal reinforcement of the beam in the joint Table 8 Test specimens.

panel (14d and 17d; d: bar diameter). Every test speci- (Lateral loading test of beam-column joints)
men was designed so that both the shear failure of the Column Beam
joint panel and the flexural failure of the beam might take Steel
Test Main Main
place. The shear strength of the joint panel was estimated Fiber Hoop Stirrup
specimen bar bar Ld / Lb
by extending the following equation proposed by the (vol.%) cpw(%) bpw(%)
cpt(%) bpt(%)
Architectural Institute of Japan for ordinary reinforced
J14FM 2
concrete buildings (AIJ 1999). 3.34 1.10 2.74 0.57 14.0
J14NF 0
V ju = 0.8σ B b j D j
0.7 J17FM 2
(23) 1.82 1.02 2.39 0.47 16.8
J17NF 0
where, σB is the compressive strength of concrete
(N/mm2), bj is the effective width of joint panel (average 6.2 Test results and discussion
of the widths of beam and column) and Dj is the depth of The relationship between story shear force and story drift
the column. index of the specimens is shown in Fig. 26. Cracks and
failure patterns are shown in Fig. 27. The failure process
144 S. Sugano, H. Kimura and K. Shirai / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 2, 133-147, 2007

was identical in all the specimens, e.g., 1) longitudinal The envelopes of hysteresis curves of story shear
reinforcements of the beam yielded in tension, 2) lateral forces or joint panel shear stress are shown in Figs. 28
reinforcements in the joint panel yielded and 3) the joint and 29. In all the specimens, the observed maximum
panel failed in shear compression of concrete. Thus both strength was much larger than the calculated flexural
the flexural failure of the beams and the shear failure of strength or the calculated shear strength of the joint panel.
the joint panel took place as designed. The ultimate story The observed strength was 1.5 times larger in J14FM
drift index was 3% in the J17 series specimens and 8% or specimens and 1.8 times larger in J17FM specimens than
larger in the J14 series specimens. the calculated flexural strength. This indicates that both
the flexural strength of the beams and the shear strength
of the joint panel were significantly enhanced with the
Table 9 Mechanical properties of reinforcing bars.
inclusion of steel fibers.
Breaking The observed joint panel shear stresses are plotted in
Reinforcing bar Tensile Yield point
Elonga- Fig. 30 together with the results of other tests (Kimura
Strength 1989, Nakazawa 2001, Torii 2003, Iwaoka 2003 and
Strength Strain 2 tion
Standard Diameter 2 (N/mm ) Maruta 2004). AIJ Equation 23 is shown in Fig. 30.
(N/mm ) (µ) (%)
Equation 23 can be seen to overestimate the strength of
SD980 D29 1049 － 1075 12.2 other tests, although the strengths of non-fiber specimens
D25 707 4786 946 11.4 in this test can be estimated with the equation. The
SD685 strength of fiber-reinforced specimens is much larger
D6 674 3688 878 －
than the strength calculated with Equation 23. The effect
SD785 D8 1057 7039 1194 8.9 of the steel fibers on the shear strength of the joint panel
should be evaluated.
Table 10 Properties of UFC.
Compressive Elastic 6.3 Evaluation of shear strength of
strength modulus beam-column joint
(N/mm )
2
(kN/mm )
2 AIJ design Equation 23 indicates that the shear strength
of a beam-column joint panel is controlled by the com-
Column(NF) 182 50.1
pressive strength of the joint concrete. Therefore, the
Beam(NF) 190 51.4
contribution of the tensile resistance of UFC to the shear
Column(FM) 205 53.1
resistance of the joint panel may be evaluated in terms of
Beam(FM) 211 55.0

2000 2000
1500 J17FM 1500 J17NF
Story shear force (kN)

1000 1000
500 500
0 0
-500 -500
Max. story shear
× Beam yielding Max story shear
-1000 -1000 × Beam yielding
in tension
-1500 ＊ Joint hoop yielding -1500 in tension
Limit drift index Limit drift index
-2000 -2000
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100
1000 1000
800 J14FM 800 J14NF
Story shear force (kN)

600 600
400 400
200 200
0 0
-200 -200
Max. story shear
-400 × Beam yielding -400 Max. story shear
-600 in tension -600 × Beam yielding
＊ Joint hoop yielding in tension
-800 Limit drift index -800 Limit drift index
-1000 -1000
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100
Story drift index (%) Story drift index (%)

Fig. 26 Story shear vs. story drift.

 S. Sugano, H. Kimura and K. Shirai / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 2, 133-147, 2007 145

J17FM J17NF

J14FM J14NF

Fig. 27 Failure pattern.

2000 the additional shear strength of the joint panel equivalent

J14FM
1800 to the tensile strength of UFC. The additional shear
J14NF
1600 strength, then, may be added to Equation 23 as follows.
(kN)
force (kN)

J17FM
1400 J17NF
τ p = 0.8σ B 0.7 + σ T (24)
shearforce

1200
1000 Flex. Strength
Calculated flex. The tensile strength σ T of the UFC of the test speci-
Storyshear

800 Cal. (J17)

strength for J17 men is calculated as follows using Equations 8-10 and
600 the compressive strength σ B of standard cylinder as 208
400 N/mm2 (average of beams and columns).
Story

Flex. Strength
Calculated flex.
strength for J14
Cal. (J14)
200
f (V f ) = 0.25V f + 0.54 = 1.04 (25)
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Story driftindex
Story drift index(%)
(％) σ T = σ B 0.44 f (V f ) = 2080.44 x1.04 = 10.9 N / mm 2 (26)
Fig. 28 Envelopes of story shear vs. story drift index.
τ p = 0.8σ B 0.7 + σ T ＝ 0.8σ B 0.7 + 10.9 (27)

Equation 27, shown in Fig. 30, agrees well with the

(MPa) 2)

50
stress (N/mm

test results.
40
7. Concluding remarks
shearstress

30 The results of a series of tests to put 200MPa-UFC to

AIJ equation
equation (1) practical use for earthquake resistant buildings and sub-
panelshear

20 τ(σ
p =
B
0.7
0.8σMPa)
=200 B sequent analytical investigations are summarized as
J14FM follows.
1) UFC, which is basically a very brittle material like
Jointpanel

10 J14NF
J17FM rock, can be well confined with high- or ul-
J17NF tra-high-strength lateral reinforcements available in
Joint

0 the Japanese market. The compressive characteristics

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Story driftindex
index(%)
(％) of UFC are evaluated using Equations 3-7 while the
Story drift tensile characteristics are evaluated using Equations
Fig. 29 Envelopes of joint panel shear vs. story drift index.
146 S. Sugano, H. Kimura and K. Shirai / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 2, 133-147, 2007
50
Joint shear stress τ p (N/mm2)
J14FM (UFC)
45 J14NF (Non-fiber)
40 J17FM (UFC)
J17NF (Non-fiber)
35
30
25 AIJ Equation
τp = 0.8σB0.7
20
15
10
5 ▽
0 Joko, T., Sugano, S., Kimura, H. and Shirai, K. (2005).
0 40 80 120
Concrete strength σB (N/mm2)
Fig. 30 Joint panel shear vs. concrete strength.
8-10.
2) Stable seismic behavior of columns can be obtained
even under very high axial compression when they are
confined with high- or ultra-high-strength lateral re-
inforcements. The flexural behavior of UFC columns
is well evaluated when taking the tensile resistance of
UFC and confinement by lateral reinforcements into
consideration and using the analytical model shown in
Fig. 22.
3) Both shear failure of the joint panel and flexural fail-
ure of beams can concurrently take place. Steel fibers
significantly contribute to enhance the shear strength
of the joint panel. The contribution of steel fibers is
evaluated by Equation 24. The shear strength of the
joint panel without steel fibers can be evaluated by
AIJ equation 23 for ordinary concrete.
Acknowledgement
It is acknowledged that the test of interior beam-column
joints was performed under the grant of the Ministry of
Science and Education, Japanese Government, at the
grant number (B)(2) 16360278.
References
Architectural Institute of Japan (1999). “Design
guidelines for earthquake resistant reinforced
concrete buildings based on inelastic displacement
concept.” (in Japanese)
Inenaga, E., Izumu, N., Kikuta, S., Hamada, S., Ishioka,
T., Takahashi, K. and Ueda, H. (2005). “Study on
behavior of reinforced concrete frame using
ultra-high-strength fiber reinforced concrete.”
Summary of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting, Vol.
C-2, 183-184, Architectural Institute of Japan. (in
Japanese)
Iwakura, S., Hori, S., Naruse, T., Watanabe, T.,
Yamamoto, K. and Konno, O. (2003). “Experimental
study on the beam-column joints of ultra-high-strength
reinforced concrete structure.” Summary of Technical
Papers of Annual Meeting, Vol. C-2, 513-514,
Architectural Institute of Japan. (in Japanese)
Japan Concrete Institute (2005). “A technical report on
the structural performance of high-strength concrete
Contribution
of Steel fiber
structures.” (in Japanese)
Japan Society of Civil Engineers (2004).
τp = 0.8σB0.7+σT
“Recommendations for design and construction of
σT = 10.9 ultra-high-strength fiber reinforced concrete
structures -Draft.” (in Japanese)
▽
▽
Joko, T., Sugano, S., Kimura, H. and Shimoyama, Y.
▽
△ Maruta 2004 (2004). “An experimental study on restoring force
◇ Nakazawa 2001 characteristics of RPC columns.” Proceedings of the
▲ Torii 2003
◆ Iwaoka 2003 Japan Concrete Institute, 26(2), 799-804. (in
Kimura 1989 Japanese)
160 200 240 “An experimental study for hysteresis characteristics
of beam-column joints of UFC.” Proceedings of the
Japan Concrete Institute, 27(2), 691-696. (in
Japanese)
Joko, T., Sugano, S., Kimura, H. and Kawaguchi, T.
(2006). “An experimental study for restitution
characteristics of precast beam – shell column joints
using UFC.” Proceedings of the Japan Concrete
Institute, 28(2), 649-654. (in Japanese)
Kimura, H., Sugano, S., Nagashima, T. and Ichikawa, A.
(1989). “Experimental studies on beam-column joints
using high-strength concrete.” Proceedings of the
Japan Concrete Institute, 11(2), 525-530. (in
Japanese)
Kitakaze, N., Sugano, S., Kimura, H. and Katagiri, M.
(2003). “An experimental study on compressive
characteristics of columns with ultra-high-strength
concrete.” Proceedings of the Japan Concrete Institute,
25(2), 847-852. (in Japanese)
Maruta, M. and Sanada, A. (2004). “Structural capacities
of interior frame using concrete of 170N/mm2 or
higher.” Proceedings of the Japan Concrete Institute,
26(2), 469-474. (in Japanese)
Murakami, H., Sugano, S., Izumi, N. and Shirai, K.
(2005). “An experimental study of restoring force
characteristics of precast shell columns using 200
N/mm2 UFC.” Proceedings of the Japan Concrete
Institute, 28(2), 655-660. (in Japanese)
Murakami, H. (2007). “A study on evaluation of ultimate
strength of columns considering tensile behavior of
UFC.” Master Thesis, Hiroshima University. (in
Japanese)
Nakazawa, H., Kumagai, H., Tsukagoshi, H. and Kurose,
Y. (2001). “Development of ultra-high strength
reinforced concrete structures, Part 4: Loading test on
the shear behavior of beam-column joints.” Summary
of Technical Papers of Annual Meeting, Vol. C-2,
663-664, Architectural Institute of Japan. (in
Japanese)
Obata, K., Sugano, S., Araki, H., Shirai, K. Kimura, H.,
Murakami, Y. and Kitakaze, N. (2003). “An
experimental study on the compressive properties of
super-high-strength concrete.” Summary of Technical
Papers of Annual Meeting, Vol. C-2, 13-14,
Architectural Institute of Japan. (in Japanese)
 S. Sugano, H. Kimura and K. Shirai / Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology Vol. 5, No. 2, 133-147, 2007
Shimizu, K., Kanakubo, T., Kanda, T. and Nagai, S.
(2004). “Evaluation of shear strength of PVA-ECC
beams.” Proceedings of the Japan Concrete Institute,
26(2), 1537-1542. (in Japanese)
Shimizu, K., Ujiie, T., Kanakubo, T. and Kanda, T.
(2005). “Evaluation of shear characteristics of
PVA-ECC beams.” Proceedings of the Japan Concrete
Institute, 27(2), 1333-1338. (in Japanese)
Shimizu, K., Kanakubo, T., Kanda, T. and Nagai, S.
(2006). “Evaluation of tensile properties of PVA-ECC
using bending test.” Journal of Structural and
Construction Engineering, Architectural Institute of
Japan, No. 604, 31-36. (in Japanese)
Shirai, K., Tanano, H., Fukuyama, H. and Kage, T.
(2003). “Structural properties of beams using reactive
powder concrete.” Proceedings of the Japan Concrete
Institute, 25(2), 841-846. (in Japanese)
Sugano, S., Kimura, H. and Shirai, K. (2005).
“Experimental studies on seismic behavior of columns
and interior beam-column joints which used 200MPa
fiber-reinforced concrete.” Proceedings of the 8th U.S.
National Conference on Earthquake Engineering,
April 18-22, San Francisco, California, USA, Paper
No. 555.
147
Suma, S., Sugano, S., Izumi, N. and Shimoyama, Y.
(2004). “An experimental study on precast concrete
shell RPC columns.” Proceedings of the Japan
Concrete Institute, 26(2), 805-810. (in Japanese)
Takenaka Corporation (2007).
“http://www.takenaka.co.jp/”
Torii, T., Hayashi, K., Takamori, N., Teraoka, M. Uchida,
K. and Kato, Y. (2003). “Experimental study on
mechanical properties of RC beam-column
subassemblages using ultra-high-strength materials
(Part 1: Outline of Experiment).” Summary of
Technical Papers of Annual Meeting, Vol. C-2,
513-514, Architectural Institute of Japan. (in
Japanese)
Ujiie, T., Shimizu, K., Kanakubo, T. and Katagiri, M.
(2005). “Shear behavior of fiber-reinforced RPC
beams.” Proceedings of the Japan Concrete Institute,
27(2), 1339-1344. (in Japanese)
Yamana, K., Yasojima, A., Shirai, K. and Sugano, S.
(2007). “Evaluation of tensile properties of UFC using
bending test.” Summary of Technical Papers of Annual
Meeting, to be published, Architectural Institute of
Japan. (in Japanese)