You are on page 1of 19

Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thin-Walled Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tws

Nonlinear behavior of FRP-reinforced concrete-lled double-skin


tubular columns using nite element analysis
Sayed Behzad Talaeitaba a, Minoo Halabian a, Mohammad Ebrahim Torki b,n
a
b

Faculty of Engineering, Azad University of Science and Research, Isfahan, Iran


Department of Aerospace Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA

art ic l e i nf o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 11 January 2015
Received in revised form
26 June 2015
Accepted 24 July 2015

The literature lacks exhaustive study on CFDST hybrid columns circumscribed by FRP layers. Extended
FEM analysis was carried out on 70 real-scale models with varying parameters including the material and
number of FRP layers, concrete strength, length-to-diameter ratio (specic length), and hollow section
ratio. Carbon bers proved stronger than glass bers, leading to higher ultimate stress associated with
lower strain. Specimens with high specic lengths suffered from steel premature buckling, thus stiffened
with steel plates. Specimens with various hollow section ratios were nally compared, showing an increase range of 70% between the maximum (0.75) and minimum (0.25) ratios.
& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Hybrid columns
CFDST columns
FRP bers
Hollow section ratio
Nonlinear behavior of reinforced concrete

1. Introduction
Thanks to the established intrinsic synergy between steel and
concrete, hybrid columns have received growing applications
through the past decades. The virtues of hybrid columns are
manifold. They include construction convenience (e.g. applicability
as a duct for plumbing) and signicant mechanical enhancement
of structural elements in comparison to ordinary reinforced or
even purely steel members. Amongst the enhanced mechanical
properties is increased connement and shear strength underlying
further efciency in the structural element. That is, the conning
effect is applied on concrete at best when the hybrid column is
circular [1]. With regards to the relative placement of steel and
concrete, hybrid columns can take the form of a concrete-lled
steel tube (CFST), a concrete-lled FRP tube (CFFT), a steel section
encased in a concrete section, a steel-reinforced concrete section
(SRC), a double steel tubular column, or a concrete-lled double
skin tubular column (CFDST) [2] .
Research work about hybrid concrete columns is plentiful in
the literature. The seminal idea of using double tubular steel columns was rstly proposed by Khalil and Illouli [3] to be consisting
of two steel layers embedding a concrete layer in between. Others
investigated various properties of similar tubular columns including Wei et al. [4], Han et al. [5], Zhao and Grzebieta [6], and
n

Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: talaeitaba@yahoo.com (S.B. Talaeitaba), mtorki@tamu.edu,
mtorki85@gmail.com (M. Ebrahim Torki).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2015.07.018
0263-8231/& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Tao et al. [7]. Along with their virtues, these columns were proven
to have certain shortcomings stemming from placing steel at the
outer layer, which would entail protection against re and corrosion. Thus, researchers were lead through further strengthening
tubular columns with FRP strips, which was rstly brought up by
Fam and Rizkalla [8]. They set forth both the inner and outer layers
to be made of FRP layers, as shown in Fig. 1. This would trigger
certain issues concerning the connectivity problem between the
column and a beam in absence of steel and the inability of FRP
layers to bear structural loads. Later on, other researchers introduced the idea of hybrid columns into CFDST and investigated
the load bearing properties of this type of column. Later on, Yu
et al. [9] carried out FEM calculations, in agreement to the corresponding experimental outcomes, on the exural behavior of
columns with a steel inner layer and an FRP outer layer embracing
concrete in between. Owing to the conning effect of concrete,
buckling of the steel tube will be remarkably delayed or even totally dispensed with. However, tearing in the FRP layer will give
rise to premature fracture, and that is where the thickness of the
steel inner layer will take effect [10].
Hu et al. [1] proposed and veried proper material constitutive
models for concrete-lled tubes (CFT) using ABAQUS in agreement
to experimental data. Circular tubes proved to provide the best
conning effect when the width-to-thickness ratio was small.
Square CFT columns, however, did not provide a large conning
effect, esp. when the width-to-thickness ratio was large. Later on,
Hu and Su [11] established empirical equations to predict the
lateral conning pressure exerted on the concrete core.

390

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

Fig. 1. Schematic outline of a circular or square prismatic CFDST column consisting of steel and FRP layers.
Table 1
Geometric properties of validating specimens [19].
Type

Dim. (mm) No. of


FRP
layers

C37-A2 152  305


C47-B2 152  305
C37-C2 152  305

2
2
2

Di (mm) Hollow
section
ratio ()

ti (mm) Concrete compressive


strength ( f c )

42
76
88

2.3
3.5
2.1

0.28(A)
0.5(B)
0.58(C)

36.7
46.7
36.9

Table 2
Mechanical properties of FRP layers [19].
Efrp (MPa)

to (mm)

fu

h,rup

80100

0.17

0.031

0.018

Table 3
Mechanical properties of steel tie plates.
Steel tube diameter (mm)

Steel tube thickness (mm)

Esteel (MPa) Fysteel


(MPa)

Fusteel
(MPa)

steel

76

3.3

198700

475.5

0.3

406.2

Tao et al. [7] investigated the behavior of concrete-lled stub


columns and beam-columns by centering in the diameter-tothickness and hollow section ratios for stub columns as well as
slenderness ratio and load eccentricity for beam-columns. They
developed a theoretical model using a unied theory by introducing a connement factor to describe the composite action between the outer steel tube and the inner concrete layer. Tao and

Han [12] expanded their studies by evaluating the failure modes


and load vs deformation behavior of test specimens in comparison
with those of ordinarily concrete-lled steel tubular columns and
empty double skin tubes.
More recently, Huang et al. [13] executed nite element analysis for the compressive behavior of concrete-lled stub columns
with square and circular cross sections. They presented their results in terms of average stress vs longitudinal strain, stress distributions in the concrete layer, interaction between concrete and
steel tubes, and the effect of hollow section ratio. Han et al. [14]
modeled the behavior of CFDST columns under long-term sustained loading conditions. They generated a simplied formula for
calculating the ultimate strength of these columns subjected to
long-term sustained loading in accordance to performed longterm service and ultimate strength tests. Li et al. [15] discussed the
behavior of CFDST columns subjected to axial preloads either on
the outer tube alone or on both tubes using FE analysis. They
predicted the inuences of the preload ratio, slenderness ratio,
hollow section ratio and concrete strength on the axial strength.
The compressive strength of CFDST stub columns with external
carbon or stainless steel tubes was calculated by Hassanein and
Kharoob [16, 17] over a complete range of the diameter-to-thickness ratio. Wang and Li [18] used ANSYS to analyze the mechanical
behavior of CFDST columns from loading to failure, with the hollow section ratio being the main varying parameter.
Investigation through the literature reects the need in a more
exhaustive insight through the effects due to geometric properties
of the constituting elements of CFDST columns on the strength and
stability of these columns. More consequentially, similar effects in
presence of FRP strips as a third constituent are still far from established. The present research investigates the nonlinear

Fig. 2. Experimental set-up of the hybrid column: (a) prior to and (b) after compressive loading [9].

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

391

Fig. 3. FEM model of the hybrid column: (a) prior to and (b) after compressive loading.

60

60
Specimen C47-B2

Specimen C37-A2

50
Experimental
FEM (Yu et al)
FEM (present)

40

Axial stress (MPa)

Axial stress (MPa)

50

30

20

30

20

10

10

Experimental
FEM (Yu et al)
FEM (present)

40

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

Axial strain

Axial strain

60
Specimen C37-C2

Axial stress (MPa)

50
Experimental
FEM (Yu et al)
FEM (present)

40

30

20

10

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

Axial strain
Fig. 4. Plots showing compressive stress vs axial strain, as compared with experimental data and FEM calculations in Ref. [19], for (a) the C37-A2 specimen, (b) the C47-B2
specimen, and (c) the C37-C2 specimen. A very nice agreement between all data sets could be observed in all curves.

compressive behavior of CFDST columns determined from nonlinear FEM calculations executed on 70 models made in ABAQUS.
The FEM models as such are made on the basis of the idea primarily put forward by Teng [19]. The stressstrain curves plotted
compare favorably with the experimental results produced by

Teng [19]. Then, the models are extended as to measure the effects
of geometric parameters in presence of an FRP layer generating the
outer layer on the load bearing capacity, strain to failure, and
buckling load. The so-called geometric parameters include the
column height, diameter, and hollow section ratio, dened as the

392

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

2. FEM modeling

external-to-internal diameter ratio. Aside from geometry, the effects due to material were assessed. In this regard, concrete compressive strength as well as FRP material (either carbon or glass)
and number of FRP layers will be noticed in the passing.

In order to ensure maximal accordance with reality, SOLID


(brick) elements were used representing concrete, and steel as
well as FRP layers were modeled using SHELL elements.
To be more specic, due to the essence of 3D modeling, C3D8R
(8-node solid elements) elements were utilized to represent concrete. The mechanical properties of concrete should be dened
over a complete elasticplastic range. In the elastic range, known
to be up to a compressive stress equal to 0.5f c , the elasticity
modulus and the Poisson's ratio are specied. The nonlinear behavior of concrete used in the present work stems from the
Hognestad stressstrain model [2]. The elasticity modulus can be
obtained from Eq. (1) [20].

Table 4
Mechanical properties of GFRP strips.
Type

Efrp (MPa)

to (mm)

fu

h,rup

GFRP
CFRP

80,100
230,000

0.17
0.17

0.031
0.017

0.018
0.0102

Ec = 4700 f c

where f c is the specic strength of concrete in MPa. The concrete


damaged plasticity model has been applied to dene the plasticity
parameters of concrete. In the meantime, on account of better
agreement between numerical outcomes and experimental data,
sensitivity analysis was performed on the dilation angle and
viscosity to reach maximum concordance with experiment in the
allowable ranges recommended by the software. The dilation

Table 5
Mechanical properties of inner-layer steel tubes.
Esteel (MPa)

Fysteel (MPa)

Fusteel (MPa)

steel

198,700

240

60

0.3

(1)

Table 6
Geometric properties of main specimens for the effects of the material and the number of FRP layers.
No. of specimen

Type

Do (mm)

H (mm)

No. of FRP layers

Di (mm)

Hollow section ratio ()

ti (mm)

Concrete compressive strength ( f c )

1
2
3
4
5
6

C47-15-30-B2-G
C47-15-30-B4-G
C47-15-30-B6-G
C47-15-30-B2-C
C47-15-30-B4-C
C47-15-30-B6-C

152
152
152
152
152
152

305
305
305
305
305
305

2
4
6
2
4
6

76
76
76
76
76
76

0.5(B)
0.5(B)
0.5(B)
0.5(B)
0.5(B)
0.5(B)

3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5

46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7

Table 7
Geometric properties of main specimens for the effect of concrete compressive strength.
No. of specimen

Type

Do (mm)

H (mm)

No. of FRP layers

Di (mm)

Hollow section ratio ()

ti (mm)

Concrete compressive strength ( f c )

7
8
9
10

C30-15-30-B2-G
C40-15-30-B2-G
C50-15-30-B2-G
C60-15-30-B2-G

152
152
152
152

305
305
305
305

2
2
2
2

76
76
76
76

0.5(B)
0.5(B)
0.5(B)
0.5(B)

3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5

30
40
50
60

160
C47-15-30-B2-G
C47-15-30-B4-G
C47-15-30-B6-G

140

Axial stress (MPa)

120

100
80
60

100
80
60

40

40

20

20

C47-15-30-B2-C
C47-15-30-B4-C
C47-15-30-B6-C

140

120

Axial stress (MPa)

160

0.005

0.01

Axial strain

0.015

0.02

0.005

0.01

Axial strain

Fig. 5. Stressstrain behavior of specimens with differing FRP layers.

0.015

0.02

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

393

160
C47-15-30-B2-G
C47-15-30-B2-C
Hognestad

140

Axial stress (MPa)

120
100
80
60
40
20
0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

Axial strain
Fig. 6. Stressstrain behavior of specimens with differing FRP material.

160
/

160
/

fc = 30 MPa

140

fc = 40 MPa

140

C30-15-30-B2-G
Hognestad

120

Axial stress (MPa)

Axial stress (MPa)

120
100
80
60

100
80
60

40

40

20

20

C40-15-30-B2-G
Hognestad

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.005

Axial strain

0.01

160
/

fc = 60 MPa

140

C50-15-30-B2-G
Hognestad

C60-15-30-B2-G
Hognestad

120

Axial stress (MPa)

Axial stress (MPa)

120
100
80
60

100
80
60

40

40

20

20

0.02

160

fc = 50 MPa

140

0.015

Axial strain

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

Axial strain

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

Axial strain

Fig. 7. Concrete stressstrain curves in C30-15-30-B2-G for: (a) f c = 30 MPa , (b) f c = 40 MPa , (c) f c = 50 MPa , and (d) f c = 60 MPa .

angle and viscosity turn out to be 30 and 5  10 4 at best,


respectively.
On the other hand, steel and FRP have been represented with
S4R shell elements. The elasticity modulus and Poisson's ratio of

steel are considered to be 2  105 MPa and 0.3, respectively. FRP is


dened as a laminated composite by determining the elasticity
and shear moduli as well as Poissons ratios along and perpendicular to the bers' direction. Bearing in mind that rening the FRP

394

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

Fig. 8. Representative cross sections with each hollow section ratio: (a) = 0.25, (b) = 0.5, and (c) = 0.75.

mesh size better enhances the results' precision, the optimum


mesh size in this zone has been obtained to be 10 mm to compromise between the highest accuracy and the lowest time of
analysis. Furthermore, steel stiffening plates have been utilized in
the supporting and loading zones, and they have been represented
with R3D4 four-node solid elements. It is inevitable that the plate
height be taken as such to induce minimum stress concentration
and to be ineffective on the overall specimen's stiffness. To this
end, two plates with 20 mm thickness and with a high elasticity
modulus have been placed at the two column ends. In order to
dene the support constraints, the lower plate center is restrained
against all directions while the upper plate, bearing the compressive load, is allowed to move only along the loading direction
(y) [19].
Finally, a surface-to-surface type contact has been assigned to
the connection between steel and concrete in the interest of a
unitary behavior in steel and concrete. In this respect, the concrete
surface around steel is considered as the master surface and steel
itself is the slave surface. Along with this assumption, the

deformation in steel will be attributed mainly to the deformation


of the concrete layer around it. To be more specic, the radial
contact type has been chosen as hard contact whereas a friction
factor has been dened in the tangential direction. Of course, this
friction factor would never impact the peripheral sliding between
steel and concrete, and, more generally, would not majorly affect
the overall behavior of the column [19]. Analysis attests that a
value of 0.1 for friction factor would make the deformation of the
slave layer totally dependent upon the master surface. Moreover,
to model the true interaction between them, a mesh-tie constraint
has been imposed between concrete and the surrounding FRP
layer by tying between one node from FRP and one from the outer
surface of concrete [19].

3. Validation of FEM models


To issue further credit to the outcomes from analyses, the results ought to be specied for comparison in accordance with

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

160

160

C47-40-100-A2-C
C47-40-200-A2-C
C47-40-300-A2-C

140

120

Axial stress (MPa)

Axial stress (MPa)

C47-50-100-A2-C
C47-50-200-A2-C
C47-50-300-A2-C

140

120
100
80
60

100
80
60

40

40

20

20

395

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

Axial strain

Axial strain

160
C47-60-100-A2-C
C47-60-200-A2-C
C47-60-300-A2-C

140

Axial stress (MPa)

120
100
80
60
40
20
0

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

Axial strain
Fig. 9. Stressstrain curves for specimens: (a) C47-40-100-A2-C, C47-40-200-A2-C, and C47-40-300-A2-C; (b) C47-50-100-A2-C, C47-50-200-A2-C, and C47-50-300-A2-C;
(c) C47-60-100-A2-C, C47-60-200-A2-C, and C47-60-300-A2-C. The given specic lengths have been dened, in fact, to have a proper comparator intrinsic to the column.

existing experimental and FEM data. To this end, the experimental


results obtained by Teng et al. [19] and their FEM counterparts
calculated by Yu et al. [9] (made with a similar procedure as discussed herein) are considered for validation. Table 1 includes the
geometric properties of the specimens at hand. Each specimen is
named after its cross section type (C standing for Circular), cylindrical compressive strength (e.g. 37 for 37 MPa), hollow section
ratio, dened as the ratio between the internal and external diameters (A, B, and C showing 0.28, 0.5, and 0.58, respectively), and
the number of FRP layers (2 showing two layers). The void size
represents the internal tube diameter, which can be determined
from the hollow section ratio multiplied by the overall diameter.
FRP strips are of a laminated type and have been modeled as annular ties (hoops), all the same as in Teng's experiments. Hence,
the FRP ties will mainly evince as conning agents operating
against the so-called hoop stresses in columns under pure
compression.
The mechanical properties of FRP layers have been collected in
Table 2, where Efrp is the elasticity modulus, to is the layer thickness, h,rup is the rupture hoop strain (known to be always smaller
than the direct ultimate strain of bers, fu). Finally, the mechanical properties of steel tie plates (placed at the column ends to
provide support constraints) are dened in Table 3.
The experimental and FEM specimens, prior to and after
loading, are shown in Figs. 2 and 3.
Plots representing the evolution of the ultimate concrete stress

vs axial strain are depicted in Fig. 4. It might be appealing to the


reader that the compressive axial stress is read as a reaction force
at the node at which an axial displacement restraint is imposed
placed at the center of the top tie plate along the loading direction divided by the net cross section area of the specimen,
dened as the area undergoing the compressive load. Moreover,
the total axial strain is determined from the total displacement at
the opposite steel plate divided by the overall specimen length.
This strain would equal that for the middle of the height. The
curves, as shown if Fig. 4, are in appropriate agreement with experimental data and the FEM counterparts from Ref. [19].
Experimental observations in this test attest that failure of the
specimens takes place in the form of tearing in FRP strips due to
increasing hoop stress. Afterwards, concrete will crush, and ultimately the column will lose overall stability due to buckling in the
steel tube [19]. Tearing FRP strips would invariably occur at the
middle of the column height. The TsaiWu yield criterion with the
maximum-strain phenomenon has been taken into account in the
tearing of FRP strips in contact with concrete [21]. Throughout the
present study, all curves corresponding to FRP-reinforced specimens are prescribed to end at the FRP tearing instant.
4. Parametric study
In the foregoing section, the effects of material and the number
of FRP layers as well as the inuence of compressive strength were

396

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

C47-40-100-A2-C
Right (-)
Left (+)

Axial stress (MPa)

-50

-100

-150

-200

-250

-300

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

Time (analysis stage)

C47-40-100-A2-C
Right (-)
Left (+)

Axial stress (MPa)

-50

-100

-150

-200

-250

-300

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

Time (analysis stage)

C47-40-300-A2-C
Right (-)
Left (+)

Axial stress (MPa)

-50

-100

-150

-200

-250

-300

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

Time (analysis stage)


Fig. 10. Stress vs time curves and their corresponding deformed states belonging to specimens: (a,b) C47-40-100-A2-C, (c,d) C47-40-200-A2-C, and (e,f) C47-40-300-A2-C
specimens. One could easily observe the bifurcation phenomenon in (e) after 0.1 s from the loading outset.

evaluated on 6 and 4 specimens, respectively. In what follows, the


specimens have the same dimensions as those in Ref. [19]. Unlike
validation specimens, however, each specimen is named with
7 parameters here. For instance, C47-15-30-B2-G has a Circular
cross section, a 47 MPa compressive strength, a 15 cm diameter, a
30 cm height, a B hollow section ratio (as dened in Section 3),

and 2 FRP layers made of Glass bers. All FRP materials used
constitute either glass (G) or carbon (C) bers. Table 4 shows the
mechanical properties of FRP strips, all of which have been dened
in Section 3. The steel tubes placed at the inner layer have the
properties as shown in Table 5.
The complete collection of specimens' properties for the

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

397

100

C47-40-300-A2-C

Axial stress (MPa)

80
(0.003 , 45.328)

60

40

20

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

Axial strain
Fig. 11. Stressstrain curve for the C47-40-300-A2-C specimen, showing an abrupt drop at the circled zone due to damage initiation. Further discussion will be given in the
following for this damage. It can be observed that the curve would continue, more or less, smoothly after this point.

Axial stress (MPa)

-50

(2734.49 , -69.60)

-100

-150
C47-40-300-A2-C
Tsai-Wu
-200

-250

-300

1000

2000

3000

4000

Hoop stress (MPa)


Fig. 12. Compressive axial stress vs tensile hoop stress for a composite element having an intersection with the TsaiWu failure curve representative of tearing in FRP for
the D47-40-300-A2-C specimen.

investigation of the effects of FRP layers and compressive strength


are included in Tables 6 and 7, respectively. The parameters have
been dened in advance. The name of each specimen is expressed
in the second column.
4.1. Investigating the effects due to the material and number of FRP
layers
Specimens respective of the FRP material are sufxed by G and
C, signifying GFRP and CFRP, respectively. FRP layers have been
provided in 2, 4, and 6 layers. Figs. 5 and 6 demonstrate the effects
of FRP layers and material on the stressstrain behavior of specimens. It can be observed in Fig. 5 that the ultimate compressive
stress in concrete increases by 45% when the number of FRP layers
changes from 2 to 6. Moreover, the stressstrain curve of CFDST

columns consists of two zones. The rst zone takes after that of
plain concrete, where steel and FRP are not yet signicantly involved in resisting the load. The secondary zone, however, is when
the stiffness of the material is, for the most part, dictated by the
reinforcing elements, including steel and FRP layers. Thus, the
number of FRP layers should have a remarkable inuence in the
slope of the secondary zone. Furthermore, Fig. 6, pertaining to two
specimens with dissimilar FRP layers, reveals that carbon bers
would have a greater effect on the ultimate compressive stress in
concrete, i.e. by 13%. By way of contrast, glass bers, due to their
lower rigidity, endure larger strains in comparison to carbon bers. Thus, using carbon bers would decrease the strain to failure,
and the material toughness would decline accordingly. The dashed
curves represent the Hognestad unconned specimens. The conned specimen, as demonstrated in Fig. 6, exhibits a 460 percent

398

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

Fig. 13. Contours showing: (a) hoop strain (mm/mm) and (b) hoop stress ( N/mm2 MPa ) for the C47-40-300-A2-C specimen. The color legend beside (a) shows the region
where the hoop strain has exceeded or is still below the FRP tearing limit.

400

100

C47-40-300-A2-C
Steel

C47-40-300-A2-C
Concrete

75

Axial stress (MPa)

Axial stress (MPa)

300

200

100

50

25

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.005

Axial strain

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

Axial strain

5000

C47-40-300-A2-C
FRP

Axial stress (MPa)

4000

3000

2000

1000

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

Axial strain
Fig. 14. Stressstrain curve in the C47-40-300-A2-C specimen belonging to: (a) steel, (b) concrete, and (c) FRP, demonstrating the differences existing in mechanical
behaviors as well as stress and strain ranges. The plots have been generated only for the ascending region.

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

80

399

80

C47-40-300-A2-C
C47-50-300-A2-C
C47-60-300-A2-C

C47-40-300-B2-C
C47-50-300-B2-C
C47-60-300-B2-C
60

Axial stress (MPa)

Axial stress (MPa)

60

40

20

40

20

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.005

Axial strain

0.01

0.015

0.02

Axial strain
80
C47-40-300-C2-C
C47-50-300-C2-C
C47-60-300-C2-C

Axial stress (MPa)

60

40

20

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

Axial strain
Fig. 15. Axial load vs strain plots for specimens, with constant ratio, made with 300 mm diameters: (a) C47-40-300-A2-C, C47-50-300-A2-C, and C47-60-300-C; (b) C4740-300-B2-C, C47-50-300-B2-C, and C47-60-300-B2-C; (c) C47-40-300-C2-C, C47-50-300-C2-C, and C47-60-300-C2-C. The abrupt drops occurring shortly after the yield
point indicate premature buckling in the specimen.

increase in the strain to failure in comparison with that in its


unconned counterpart.
4.2. Investigating the effect of concrete compressive strength
The effect of concrete compressive strength was measured by
changing from 30 to 60 MPa in specimens with constantly 2 FRP
layers, as depicted in Fig. 7. A deeper insight into this effect entails
that each stressstrain curve be compared with its counterpart for
plain concrete (without any steel reinforcing bars), basically
known as the Hognestad curve [2]. Then, Fig. 7 shows the increase
extent in concrete axial (compressive) stress and strain as normalized with respect to the Hognestad ultimate stress and strain,
i.e. f c and hog , respectively. It can be deduced that increasing
f c limits the increase level in ultimate compressive stress whereas
the ultimate strain increases by the same percentage since, by all
means, it is majorly affected by the FRP material rather than the
concrete compressive strength. Stated another way, increasing the
concrete compressive strength would downgrade the effect of
applying the CFDST technique on the overall strength and stability.

5. New models
In order to have more condence in the application of CFDST in

structures, the specimens had better be made in dimensions close


to reality. This is suggestive of more profound study into the effect
of column geometry within a wider range of parameters. To this
challenge, 54 specimens were made with various heights, diameters, and 3 different hollow section ratios. The cross section of a
representative column with each hollow section ratio is shown in
Fig. 8, and the geometric properties of all specimens are completely enlisted in Appendix A.
5.1. Investigating the effect of column height
The effect of height is being evaluated according to 18 classes of
specimens, each class entitled to identical geometric properties
but 3 different heights. To this effect, the stressstrain curves have
been plotted up to the last load step. In accordance with Shanley's
buckling theory, the convex lines in a column deformed from its
straight state will undergo compressive exural stress while the
concave ones feel tensile exural stress. Thus, bending in the
column is triggered by the so-called buckling effect (Fig. 9). In this
respect, for each specimen, the stress vs time curve was inspected
for two points on the same altitude but one belonging to the
convex zone and the other to the concave zone. As long as the two
curves are concurrent, the column remains stable. All the same,
buckling occurs at the onset of separation between the two curves,
a phenomenon known as bifurcation. A representative bifurcation

400

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

-50

Axial stress (MPa)

Axial stress (MPa)

-50

-100

-100

-150

-150
C47-30-300-A2-G
Tsai-Wu

-200

-200

-250

-250

-300

C47-30-300-B2-G
Tsai-Wu

1000

2000

3000

-300

4000

1000

2000

3000

4000

Hoop stress (MPa)

Hoop stress (MPa)


0

Axial stress (MPa)

-50

-100

-150
C47-30-300-C2-G
Tsai-Wu

-200

-250

-300

1000

2000

3000

4000

Hoop stress (MPa)


Fig. 16. Axial vs hoop stress for composite elements in the unstiffened specimens with 300 mm diameters (made with GFR), in conjunction with the TsaiWu failure curve
for: (a) D47-30-300-A2-G, (b) D47-30-300-B2-G, and (c) D47-30-300-C2-G specimens.

Fig. 17. Cross section of specimens strengthened with steel plates, all with a 300 mm outer diameter but different inner diameters.
Table 8
Properties of specimens strengthened with steel plates as compared with their counterparts without stiffeners.
No. of specimen

Type

Do (mm)

H (mm)

No. of FRP layers

Di (mm)

Hollow section ratio ()

ti (mm)

Concrete compressive strength ( f c )

65
66
67
68
69
70

C47-30-300-A2-G
C47-30-300-A2-G-S
C47-30-300-B2-G
C47-30-300-B2-G-S
C47-30-300-C2-G
C47-30-300-C2-G-S

300
300
300
300
300
300

3000
3000
3000
3000
3000
3000

2
2
2
2
2
2

75
75
150
150
225
225

0.25
0.25
0.5
0.5
0.75
0.75

4
4
5.6
5.6
6.3
6.3

46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

5000

401

5000

C47-30-300-A2-G
C47-30-300-A2-G-S

C47-30-300-B2-G
C47-30-300-B2-G-S
4000

Axial load (kN)

Axial load (kN)

4000

3000

2000

1000

3000

2000

1000

10

15

20

25

30

10

Displacement (mm)

15

20

25

30

Displacement (mm)

5000
C47-30-300-C2-G
C47-30-300-C2-G-S

Axial load (kN)

4000

3000

2000

1000

10

15

20

25

30

Displacement (mm)
Fig. 18. Plots of axial load vs axial displacement for: (a) C47-30-300-A2-G and C47-30-300-A2-G-S, (b) C47-30-300-B2-G and C47-30-300-B2-G-S, (c) C47-30-300-C2-G and
C47-30-300-C2-G-S specimens.

Fig. 19. FEM displacement-to-buckling (vertical displacement in mm) contours for C47-30-300-A2-G: (a) unstiffened and (b) stiffened specimens.

402

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

curve for a buckled specimen is shown in Fig. 10. In order to have a


proper comparator intrinsic to the column, it is favorable to
identify a specic length, dened as the ratio between the length
and the cross section diameter, i.e. = L/D . Otherwise, the outcomes cannot be generalized for every similar column because a
long column with a large diameter would behave like a short
column as far as stability is concerned. A clever probe into stress
10
time plots reveals that specimens with 3 5, which correspond to all specimens with lengths below 3 m, will never suffer
from bifurcation buckling or they would, in the worst case scenario, face local buckling. However, specimens with higher specic
lengths those pertaining to a 3 m length will encounter an
abrupt stress failure signifying an overall buckled state. Since this
is more practically representative of full-sized columns in real
structures, further specimens have all been regarded to have > 5.
For instance, the stressstrain curve for the C47-40-300-A2-C
specimen is shown in Fig. 11. The curve declares that, at point A,

with the stress and stress given in the gure, there exists slight
decrease in stress whereas the stress will continue to rise afterwards. In fact, as for the Riks arc-length method in the FEM analyses [22], the curves will extend up to the last load step. However,
full agreement between experimental and FEM data would be
acquired if the instant when tearing in FRP strips occurs is elucidated and the stressstrain curve is plotted up to that point. To this
aim, two alternative methods have been applied comparatively:
using the TsaiWu [21] and the maximum strain criteria [23]. In
the former method, the compressive stress vs hoop tensile stress
was plotted for a FRP element, and the point of intersection with
the TsaiWu failure curve, as shown in Fig. 12, was believed as the
tearing point for the FRP strip. In the latter, however, the FRP hoop
stress exceeding h,rup would mark rupture in the FRP strip. Fig. 13
shows the hoop stress and strain for the structure at the FRP
tearing instant on the basis of the TsaiWu criterion. The contour
legend for the given example shows that the hoop stress has

Table 9
Ratio between the ultimate axial displacements of stiffened and ordinary specimens (RF standing for the reaction force).

Specimen

DCS /DC (%)

RFCS /RFC (%)

C47-30-300-A2-G
C47-30-300-B2-G
C47-30-300-C2-G

182
127
126

119
102
107

80
C47-40-300-A2-C
C47-40-300-B2-C
C47-40-300-C2-C
Hognestad

40

20

C47-40-300-A2-C
C47-40-300-B2-C
C47-40-300-C2-C
Hognestad
60

Axial stress (MPa)

Axial stress (MPa)

60

80

40

20

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.005

Axial strain

0.01

0.015

0.02

Axial strain

80
C47-40-300-A2-C
C47-40-300-B2-C
C47-40-300-C2-C
Hognestad

Axial stress (MPa)

60

40

20

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

Axial strain
Fig. 20. Axial load vs strain for specimens with varying hollow section ratios: (a) C47-40-300-A2-C, C47-40-300-B2-C, and C47-40-300-C2-C, (b) C47-50-300-A2-C, C47-50300-B2-C, and C47-50-300-C2-C, (c) C47-60-300-A2-C, C47-60-300-B2-C, and C47-60-300-C2-C.

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

16000
C47-50-300-A2-C
Steel alone
Concrete alone
Sum (steel+conc)
C47-50-300-A2-G

14000

10000
8000
6000

16000

12000
10000
8000
6000

4000

4000

2000

2000

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

Axial strain

16000

14000

12000

12000

10000
8000
C47-60-300-A2-C
Steel alone
Concrete alone
Sum (steel+conc)
C47-60-300-A2-G

4000
2000
0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

16000

14000

6000

Axial strain

Axial load (kN)

Axial load (kN)

C47-50-300-A2-C
Steel alone
Concrete alone
Sum (steel+conc)
C47-50-300-A2-G

14000

Axial load (kN)

Axial load (kN)

12000

403

C47-60-300-A2-C
Steel alone
Concrete alone
Sum (steel+conc)
C47-60-300-A2-G

10000
8000
6000
4000
2000

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

Axial strain

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

Axial strain

Fig. 21. Axial load vs strain for equivalent steel and concrete cross sections as
compared with their summation and the hybrid counterparts in: (a) C47-50-300A2-G and C47-50-300-A2-C, (b) C47-60-300-A2-G and C47-60-300-A2-C.

Fig. 22. Axial load vs strain for equivalent steel and concrete cross sections as
compared with their summation and the hybrid counterparts in: (a) C47-50-300B2-G and C47-50-300-B2-C, (b) C47-60-300-B2-G and C47-60-300-B2-C.

exceeded 0.102, and thus both criteria imply tearing in FRP strips.
However, for the sake of further condence, the smaller strain to
tearing has been chosen as the determinant of tearing in FRP, and
the stressstrain curves have been extended up to the FRP tearing
point. It might be appealing to the reader that the FRP tearing
stress lies between 852 to 2678 MPa. Further clarication need be
made regarding the abrupt drop at point A (as shown in Fig. 11). In
actual fact, nonlinear analysis in ABAQUS is identied by means of
time steps. Hence, the total time for every evidence can be tracked.
The time when the stress and strain reach those at point A is 0.018
for the given specimen at Fig. 11. With that said, the stressstrain
curve for an element belonging to the middle of the height and
thickness of the column has been scrutinized at the 0.018 instant,
as shown in Fig. 14. At this point, the FRP stressstrain curve shows
that FRP has not torn yet. Moreover, the concrete stressstrain
curve demonstrates that the concrete compressive stress has exceeded 0.5f c , and hence concrete is in the post-cracking nonlinear
zone. Finally, the steel stressstrain curve shows that steel has
yielded. Therefore, damage has initiated at this point, inducing a
sharp drop in the curve (Fig. 15).

5.2. Investigating the effect of column diameter


The effect of diameter was evaluated in 24 specimens, 12 of
them with CFRP and 12 with GFRP bers. All properties were kept
constant except diameter, which varied with 400, 500, and
600 mm values. A general comparison between the mechanical
behaviors of two columns demands, however, that the value of the
diameter be used with a specic length ratio . Fig. 15, exhibiting
the axial load vs strain plots for various specimens made with a
300 mm diameter, indicates that, with a constant ratio, all such
specimens would undergo buckling prior to FRP tearing. Moreover,
the ultimate axial stress experiences small difference with increasing cross section diameter. To obviate this challenge, stiffening plates were used to delay buckling to occur after FRP strips
would tear. With the same column height, specimens made with
400, 500, and 600 mm, however, would buckle as soon as or
slightly after the FRP strips have torn, i.e. buckling occurs in the
hybrid column. Hence, these specimens would not demand being
stiffened. Fig. 16 depicts the axial vs hoop stress for composite
elements in the unstiffened specimens with 300 mm diameters

404

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

16000
C47-50-300-C2-C
Steel alone
Concrete alone
Sum (steel+conc)
C47-50-300-C2-G

14000

Axial load (kN)

12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

Axial strain

16000
C47-60-300-C2-C
Steel alone
Concrete alone
Sum (steel+conc)
C47-60-300-C2-G

14000

Axial load (kN)

12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

Axial strain
Fig. 23. Axial load vs strain for equivalent steel and concrete cross sections as compared with their summation and the hybrid counterparts in: (a) C47-50-300-C2-G and
C47-50-300-C2-C, (b) C47-60-300-C2-G and C47-60-300-C2-C.

Table 10
Load bearing capacity in equivalent steel cross sections, showing the signicant reduction in the cross sectional area and thickness when a hybrid design is used.
Model

PCFDST

DSD

tSD

ASD

DSeq

tSeq

ASeq

ASeq /ASD

C47-50-300-A2-G-C
C47-60-300-A2-G-C
C47-50-300-B2-G-C
C47-60-300-B2-G-C
C47-50-300-C2-G-C
C47-60-300-C2-G-C

10447.1
14494.2
9361.36
13065.5
8183.08
11104.4

125
150
250
300
375
450

6.3
8
8
8.8
10
12

2349.31
3568.84
6082.12
8050.51
11467
16512

800
1100
750
1000
650
900

30
30
30
30
30
30

72570.9
100845
67858
91420
58433.6
81995.5

30
28
11
11
5
5

(made with GFR), in conjunction with the TsaiWu failure curve.


According to this criterion, a closed curve is identied as the
yield locus on the basis of the mechanical properties of the two
principal directions of the composite element. The point of intersection between this locus and the axial vs hoop stress curve denotes the pair of stresses at the yield onset. As clearly observed in
Fig. 16, the curves belonging to unstiffened specimens would digress towards the hoop stress axis prior to intersecting with the
TsaiWu yield locus. To overcome this issue, steel stiffening plates

with a 6 mm thickness were connected to the steel tube. The


width of the stiffening plate was dictated such that there be always a 15 mm distance between the outer edge of the plate and
the inner surface of the FRP layer.
The properties of the stiffened specimens are tabulated in
Table 8 as compared to their unstiffened counterparts. Obviously,
the naming follows a similar convention as in previous specimens,
with the only difference of adding an S sufx to the end, symbolizing the use of a stiffening plate. Fig. 17 shows the schematic

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

405

cross section of stiffened specimens.


Stiffened specimens would experience larger displacements
owing to their increased lateral stiffness. This can be easily explored from Fig. 18 and Table 9. The axial displacement in all cases
has been measured at the column midpoint.
Table 9 reveals that the ultimate displacement ratio is clearly
larger in stiffened columns than that in unstiffened specimens. It
might be tempting to see the displacement contours of C47-30300-A2-G and C47-30-300-A2-G-S at the buckling moment. This
can be seen in Fig. 19. It could be observed that the buckling time
step and the displacement to buckling are clearly larger in stiffened specimens. For the given specimen, for instance, the ultimate displacement in the stiffened and unstiffened counterparts
were 14 and 8 mm, respectively.
The combined effects due to diameter and thickness can be
sought through the Do/to parameter, as the ratio between column
external diameter and outside FRP thickness. In fact, a decreasing
Do/to parameter will result in increasing the FRP thickness, which
increases the maximum hoop stress and would accordingly
heighten the concrete ultimate compressive stress. By way of
contrast, Di /ti , as ratio between the internal counterparts, does not
tend to have a remarkable effect on the column compressive behavior (this could be observed in Fig. 19).

column steel tube diameter and thickness, respectively. Correspondingly, DSeq and tSeq are the same parameters for the equivalent steel cross section. Hence, ASD and ASeq will be the steel cross
sectional area in the hybrid and the equivalent steel column, respectively. The hybrid curves have continued up to the point
where FRP is torn, the steel curves have ended at the buckling
load, and the concrete curves have been plotted up to or slightly
past the concrete ultimate strain 0.004.

5.3. Investigating the effect of hollow section ratio

1. Designing a column in the form of CFDST would intensely increase the load bearing capacity in comparison to equivalent
designs (under the same loading scheme) with the presence of
steel and concrete alone. The design proves even better than
the sum of steel and concrete designs, each designed against
the whole loading.
2. Increasing the number of FRP layers only from 2 to 6 would
induce a 45 percent increase in the concrete ultimate compressive stress. This accounts for a great inuence within a
small range of improvement.
3. Changing bers from glass to carbon would increase the ultimate compressive stress of concrete by 13 percent. In the
meantime, it would lower the strain to failure as for the more
brittle nature of carbon.
4. Increasing the concrete compressive strength would create a
more remarkable effect on the load bearing capacity in a hybrid
column than in an ordinarily reinforced column. That is, the
load bearing capacity and strain to failure were increased between 3090 percent and 460 percent, respectively in comparison to those in an ordinary reinforced concrete column.
5. With a specied length, increasing the overall diameter of the
column would signicantly increase the load bearing capacity,
irrespective of the hollow section ratio value. Quantitatively,
increasing the diameter by 100 and 200 mm would lead to a 45
and 200 percent increase in the ultimate load, respectively.
6. Employing steel stiffening plates in columns with high specic
lengths (e.g. = 10) would not only increase the ultimate displacement by 2682 percent, but also delay the steel tube
buckling incidence up to the point of FRP tearing. This helps
maximizing the performance of the column under a combined
state of compressive and lateral loads (e.g. against earthquake).
7. An increase of 0.25 and 0.5 applied to the initial hollow section
ratio of 0.25 would lead to a 2070% increase in the ultimate
axial load, respectively.

Specimens corresponding to evaluating the effect of hollow


section ratio were subjected to have the specic length ratio of
3000/400 = 7.5, 3000/500 = 6.0000, and 3000/600 = 5.0 and hollow section ratios of 0.25 (A), 0.5 (B), and 0.75 (C). The hollow
section ratios were selected far apart to ensure that the corresponding effect is sufciently obvious (Fig. 20). Fig. 21 portrays the
effect of hollow section ratio on the stressstrain behavior while
all other parameters have been kept invariant. It can be deduced
that the hollow section ratio does not remarkably affect the stress
strain behavior of the hybrid column in case that all other geometric properties are kept constant.

6. Load bearing capacity of specimens compared at varying


constituents
This section is aimed at showing how the existence and connectivity of different constituents of a hybrid column, including
steel, concrete, and GFRP or CFRP strips, would inuence the
stressstrain behavior. In this sense, the axial load vs strain curve
has been plotted for various specimens, each plot comprising the
equivalent steel and concrete constituents alone, the sum of axial
loads induced by equivalent steel and concrete, and the one with
steel, concrete, concrete, and FRP strips (either in glass or carbon
bers) all existing in the hybrid column in Figs. 2123.
The equivalent steel cross section is obtained by picking a trial
cross section under identical axial loading and calculating the
slenderness ratio = kL/r , then checking the existing stress with
the allowable compressive stress Fa according to Ref. [24]. By denition, k is the effective length factor, L is the unsupported length
(equal to the height of the column), and r is the minimum gyration
radius of the cross section. On the other hand, a concrete equivalent cross section can be designed to bear the existing load in
absence of other constituents, in accordance with building code
requirements [25].
Table 10 reveals that an equivalent steel cross section should
have an area between 5 and 30 times that of the steel tube used in
the hybrid column. DSD and tSD could be dened as the hybrid

7. Concluding remarks
Specic focus has been placed over hybrid columns known as
CFDST in the literature over the past few decades. Of particular
importance is the effects of geometric properties on the mechanical behavior of these columns under compression. The present work investigates the nonlinear behavior of CFDST using extended FEM analysis. The effect of various parameters including
the material and number of FRP layers and concrete compressive
strength as well as height, diameter, and hollow section ratio were
explored. Results are conducive to the following outcomes:

Appendix A
See Table A1.

406

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

Table A1
Geometric properties of specimens as for the study of height, diameter, and hollow section ratio.
No. of specimen

Type

Do (mm)

H (mm)

No. of FRP layers

Di (mm)

Hollow section ratio ()

ti (mm)

Concrete compressive strength ( f c )

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64

C47-40-100-A2-G
C47-40-100-B2-G
C47-40-100-C2-G
C47-40-100-A2-C
C47-40-100-B2-C
C47-40-100-C2-C
C47-40-200-A2-G
C47-40-200-B2-G
C47-40-200-C2-G
C47-40-200-A2-C
C47-40-200-B2-C
C47-40-200-C2-C
C47-40-300-A2-G
C47-40-300-B2-G
C47-40-300-C2-G
C47-40-300-A2-C
C47-40-300-B2-C
C47-40-300-C2-C
C47-50-100-A2-G
C47-50-100-B2-G
C47-50-100-C2-G
C47-50-100-A2-C
C47-50-100-B2-C
C47-50-100-C2-C
C47-50-200-A2-G
C47-50-200-B2-G
C47-50-200-C2-G
C47-50-200-A2-C
C47-50-200-B2-C
C47-50-200-C2-C
C47-50-300-A2-G
C47-50-300-B2-G
C47-50-300-C2-G
C47-50-300-A2-C
C47-50-300-B2-C
C47-50-300-C2-C
C47-60-100-A2-G
C47-60-100-B2-G
C47-60-100-C2-G
C47-60-100-A2-C
C47-60-100-B2-C
C47-60-100-C2-C
C47-60-200-A2-G
C47-60-200-B2-G
C47-60-200-C2-G
C47-60-200-A2-C
C47-60-200-B2-C
C47-60-200-C2-C
C47-60-300-A2-G
C47-60-300-B2-G
C47-60-300-C2-G
C47-60-300-A2-C
C47-60-300-B2-C
C47-60-300-C2-C

400
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
400
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600
600

1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
3000
3000
3000
3000
3000
3000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
3000
3000
3000
3000
3000
3000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
2000
3000
3000
3000
3000
3000
3000

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

100
200
300
100
200
300
100
200
300
100
200
300
100
200
300
100
200
300
125
250
375
125
250
375
125
250
375
125
250
375
125
250
375
125
250
375
150
300
450
150
300
450
150
300
450
150
300
450
150
300
450
150
300
450

0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75
0.25
0.50
0.75

5.6
6.3
8.0
5.6
6.3
8.0
5.6
6.3
8.0
5.6
6.3
8.0
5.6
6.3
8.0
5.6
6.3
8.0
6.3
8.0
10.0
6.3
8.0
10.0
6.3
8.0
10.0
6.3
8.0
10
6.3
8.0
10.0
6.3
8.0
10.0
8.0
8.8
12.0
8.0
8.8
12.0
8.0
8.8
12.0
8.0
8.8
12.0.
8.0
8.8
12.0
8.0
8.8
12.0

46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7
46.7

References
[1] H.T. Hu, C.S. Huang, M.H. Wu, Y.M. Wu, Nonlinear analysis of axially loaded
concrete-lled tube columns with connement effect, J. Struct. Eng. 129 (10)
(2003) 13221329.
[2] E. Hognestad, Study of combined bending and axial load in reinforced concrete
members, University of Illinois. Engineering Experiment Station. Bulletin; no. 399,
1951.
[3] H. Shakir-Khalil, S. Illouli, Composite columns of concentric steel tubes, 1989.
[4] S. Wei, S.T. Mau, C. Vipulanandan, S.K. Mantrala, Performance of new sandwich
tube under axial loading: experiment, J. Struct. Eng. 121 (12) (1995)
18061814.
[5] T.H. Han, K.H. Han, S.Y. Han, S.N. Kim, J.O. Kang, Y.J. Kang, The behavior of an
internally conned hollow concrete lled steel tube column, in: Proceedings of
the 8th KoreaJapan joint seminar, vol. 3, 2005.
[6] X.L. Zhao, R. Grzebieta, Strength and ductility of concrete lled double skin
(SHS inner and SHS outer) tubes, Thin-Walled Struct. 40 (2) (2002) 199213.
[7] Z. Tao, L.H. Han, X.L. Zhao, Behavior of concrete-lled double skin (CHS inner
and CHS outer) steel tubular stub columns and beam-columns, J. Constr. Steel

Res. 60 (8) (2004) 11291158.


[8] A.Z. Fam, S.H. Rizkalla, Flexural behavior of concrete-lled ber-reinforced
polymer circular tubes, J. Compos. Constr. 6 (2) (2002) 123132.
[9] T.T.J.G. Yu, J.G. Teng, Y.L. Wong, Stress-strain behavior of concrete in hybrid
FRP-concrete-steel double-skin tubular columns, J. Struct. Eng. 136 (4) (2009)
379389.
[10] S. Tokgoz, C. Dundar, Tests of eccentrically loaded L-shaped section steel bre
high strength reinforced concrete and composite columns, Eng. Struct. 38
(2012) 134141.
[11] H.T. Hu, F.C. Su, Nonlinear analysis of short concrete-lled double skin tube
columns subjected to axial compressive forces, Mar. Struct. 24 (4) (2011)
319337.
[12] Z. Tao, L.H. Han, Behaviour of concrete-lled double skin rectangular steel
tubular beamcolumns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 62 (7) (2006) 631646.
[13] H. Huang, L.H. Han, Z. Tao, X.L. Zhao, Analytical behaviour of concrete-lled
double skin steel tubular (CFDST) stub columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 66 (4)
(2010) 542555.
[14] L.H. Han, Y.J. Li, F.Y. Liao, Concrete-lled double skin steel tubular (CFDST)
columns subjected to long-term sustained loading, Thin-Walled Struct. 49 (12)
(2011) 15341543.

S.B. Talaeitaba et al. / Thin-Walled Structures 95 (2015) 389407

[15] W. Li, L.H. Han, X.L. Zhao, Axial strength of concrete-lled double skin steel
tubular (CFDST) columns with preload on steel tubes, Thin-Walled Struct. 56
(2012) 920.
[16] M.F. Hassanein, O.F. Kharoob, Compressive strength of circular concrete-lled
double skin tubular short columns, Thin-Walled Struct. 77 (2014) 165173.
[17] M.F. Hassanein, O.F. Kharoob, Analysis of circular concrete-lled double skin
tubular slender columns with external stainless steel tubes, Thin-Walled
Struct. 79 (2014) 2337.
[18] Y.Z. Wang, B.S. Li, Finite Element Analysis for Concrete Filled Double-Skin Steel
Tubular Stub Columns, Adv. Mater. Res. 690 (2013) 696699.
[19] J.G. Teng, T. Yu, Y.L. Wong, S.L. Dong, Hybrid FRPconcretesteel tubular columns: concept and behavior, Constr. Build. Mater. 21 (4) (2007) 846854.

407

[20] J.G. MacGregor, J.K. Wight, S. Teng, P. Irawan, Reinforced Concrete: Mechanics
and Design, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1997.
[21] S.W. Tsai, E.M. Wu, A general theory of strength for anisotropic materials, J.
Compos. Mater. 5 (1) (1971) 5880.
[22] Manual, ABAQUS UserS, Version 6.5, Hibbitt, Karlsson and Sorensen. Inc.,
Pawtucket, RI, 2004.
[23] W.F. Chen, Plasticity in Reinforced Concrete, J. Ross Publishing, 2007.
[24] C.G. Salmon, J.E. Johnson, F.A. Malhas, Steel Structures: Design and Behavior,
Harper and Row, New York, 1980.
[25] ACI Committee, American Concrete Institute, and International Organization
for Standardization, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI
31808) and Commentary, American Concrete Institute, USA, 2008.

You might also like