Você está na página 1de 17

ACI JOURNAL TECHNICAL PAPER

Title no. 79-2

Stress-Strain Behavior of Concrete Confined by Overlapping


Hoops at Low and High Strain Rates

by B. D. Sc ott, R. Pa rk, a nd M. J. N. Prie stley

An experimental investigation into the behavior of short reinforced that provided by uniform lateral pressure. The concrete
concrete columns is described. Twenty-five concrete units, each 450 cover (outside the reinforcement) will crack longitudi -
mm (17.7 in.) square by 1200 mm (47.2 in.) high, containing either
nally and separate from the concrete core at compressive
8 or 12 longitudinal steel bars and different arrange ments of square
or octagonal steel hoops, were subjected to concentric or eccentric
strains in the order of 0.004 or higher and hence cannot
loads to failure at different strain rates. Results presented include be relied on to carry stress at high strains.
an assessment of the effect of eccentricity of load, strain rate, Early research on confined concrete, leading to em-
amount and distribution of longitudinal steel, and amount and dis- pirical stress-strain relations, was generally on small
tribution of transverse steel. A stress-strain curve for concrete confined scale concentrically loaded specimens, often without
by hoop reinforcement and loaded at a high strain rate (comparable concrete cover. The loading was generally applied con-
with seismic loading) is proposed and compared with an existing
centrically and at low strain rates. Behavior under
curve based on previous tests conducted at low strain rates. The
available ultimate compressive strain for concrete con fined by hoop
these conditions has been used to predict behavior of
reinforcement is also discussed. full-scale members under seismic conditions which are
characterized by high strain rates, repeated load ap -
Keywords: columns (supports); compressive strength; confined concrete; de- plications, and eccentricity of loading. Recent tests
formation; eccentric loads; failure; hoops; loads (forces); reinforced concrete;
reinforcing steels; strains; stresses; stress-strain relationships; tests.
conducted by Kaar, Fiorato, Carpenter, and Corley
(1978); Vellanas, Bertero, and Popov (1977); 4 and
Flexural strength calculations for reinforced concrete' Sheikh and Uzumeri (1979) 5 have involved more real-
members are generally conducted assuming an extreme istically sized specimens of confined concrete, but the
fiber concrete compressive strain of 0.003 and a con- tests have not been conducted under high strain rates
crete compressive stress block based on the concrete representative of seismic conditions.
stress-strain curve up to that strain.' However, under
seismic loading high ductilities are often demanded of
members, requiring an ultimate concrete compressive At present, the recommendations made by the seismic
strain of much greater than 0.003. This is particularly design codes of various countries show vast differences
the case for columns with high axial load levels, where in the quantity of transverse reinforcement required for
the available section ductility is very much dependent ductility in the potential plastic hinge re gions of
on the shape of the stress-strain relation of the concrete columns and piers. Park and Priestley' compared the
at high compressive strains. It is well known that the different requirements of various U.S., Japanese, and
ability of concrete to carry significant stress at high New Zealand codes in this respect and it is evident that
strains can be improved by providing arrangements of the required quantity of transverse reinforcement is still
transverse and longitudinal reinforcement which effec- a matter of some controversy. Recent tests conducted at
tively confine the core concrete,' increasing both the the University of Canterbury*' on nearly full size
compressive strength and ultimate strain. At stresses reinforced concrete columns, containing either spiral or
approaching the uniaxial compressive strength the rectangular hoop reinforcement and subjected to slow
transverse strains become very high because of the pro- cyclic loading, have shown that the
gressive internal cracking, and the concrete bears out
against the reinforcement.' The confinement of the *Park, R.; Priestley, M. J. N.; and Gill, W. D., "Ductility of Square
Confined Reinforced Concrete Columns," accepted by the Structural Divi -
concrete is provided by arching between adjacent sion, American Society of Civil Engineers, in press.
transverse bars and also to some extent by arching be - Received May 4, 1981, and reviewed under Institute publication policies.
tween adjacent vertical bars. If the bars are close Copyright © 1982, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved, including
the making of copies unless permission is obtained from the copyright pro -
enough, the confinement of the concrete can approach prietors. Pertinent discussion will be published in the November -December
1982 ACI J O U R N A L if received by Aug. 1, 1982. 002-8061/82/010013-15 $2.50.

13
AC1 JOURNAL I January-February 1982
B. D. Scott completed his BE and ME degrees in civil engineering at the
University of Canterbury, New Zealand. This paper describes the experimental
research work conducted for his ME in 1980-81. He is currently in the United
Kingdom gaining further experience in structural design.

R, Park, FAC1, is professor and head of the civil engineering department at the
University of Canterbury, New Zealand. His research interests include the inelastic
behavior of reinforced and prestressed concrete beams, columns, frames, and
1D or 12mm dia.
slabs, and earthquake engineering. He is a member of joint AC1- ASCE Hoopsets
Committees 352, Joints and Connections in Monolithic Concrete Structures; 428,
Inelastic Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Structures; 441, Rein forced Concrete
Columns; and of the ACI International Activities Committee.

M. J. N. Priestley is a reader in civil engineering at the University of Canterbury,


New Zealand, and was formerly in charge of the Structural Research Laboratory
of the New Zealand Ministry of Works and Development. His research interests
include earthquake resistance of bridges, masonry structures and building frames,
and thermal effects in concrete bridges and water-retaining structures.

draft New Zealand concrete design code requirements'


for special transverse reinforcement for seismic design
will result in available displacement ductility factors of
at least eight in columns.
This paper presents the results of an investigation in Fig. 1 — Typical details of test units
which a range of nearly full-size specimens were tested
under conditions that simulated seismic conditions.
Twenty-five concrete units containing either 8 or 12
longitudinal steel bars and different arrangements of
square or octagonal steel hoops were subjected to
either concentric or eccentric loading to failure at dif -
ferent strain rates. Full details of the tests may be seen
reported elsewhere.'

DETAILS OF TEST UNITS


The test units had a section that was 450 mm (17.7
in.) square and 1200 mm (47.2 in.) high. Twenty-five 8-bar column
units were tested.
Two distributions of longitudinal reinforcement,
each representative of current practice, were used. The
arrangement of longitudinal bars in the section is of
interest because it has been shown that the presence of
well-tied intermediate column bars between the corner
bars significantly improves the confinement of the con-
crete.'• The draft New Zealand concrete design code'
requires that in the potential plastic hinge regions of
columns in seismic design, the center-to-center spacing
of longitudinal bars across the section shall not exceed
one-third of the section dimension in that direction or
200 mm (7.9 in.), whichever is larger. The two arrange-
ments of longitudinal reinforcement used in the tests
are shown in Fig. 1 and 2. The arrangements consisted
of either 8 24 mm (0.94 in.) diameter bars givin g Q, = 12-bar column
0.0186 from Grade 380 steel (specified f, = 55 ksi), or Fig. 2 — Typical reinforcement cages
12 20 mm (0.79 in.) diameter bars giving Q, = 0.0179
from Grade 275 or 380 steel (specified f y = 40 or 55 design code' for a range of axial load levels. The quantities
ksi). also varied between about 60 and 140 percent of those
required by the UBC" provisions. All transverse
The arrangements of transverse hoop reinforcement reinforcement was from plain round bars of Grade 275
used are also shown in Fig. 1 and 2. These arrange- steel (specified f y = 40 ksi). The hoop bars were an-
ments are typical for 8-bar and 12-bar columns. The chored normally by a 135 deg bend around a longi-
quantities of transverse reinforcement were varied by tudinal bar plus an extension beyond the bend of at
adjusting the spacing of the hoop sets and are typical
of those required by the draft New Zealand concrete
NOTE - A ll d amens,ons in mm
(1mm 0.03941n1

14 ACI JOURNAL 1 January-February 1982


2Ornm do
24 ma, do

600

STRESS - MPa
400

200 2Orrun dia


12 aim dia
tOmm d,
NOTE-
Nam 0.0394 in

I as,--
1 (2105 0.06
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
STRAIN

Fig. 3 — Typical molds with reinforcement cages ACI JOURNAL / January-February 1982 Fig. 4 —
Stress-strain curves for steel reinforcement
least eight hoop bar diameters embedded in the con -
crete core. The spacing of transverse hoops was re -
duced by one-half for the 200 mm (7.9 in.) at each end mm (7.9 in.) high x 100 mm (3.9 in.) diameter cylinders
of the test units to provide extra confinement and in sure at age 6 weeks, which was close to the time of testing
that failure occurred in the 800 mm (31.5 in.) long central the units, are shown in Table 1.
region. Table 1 gives the center-to-center spacing of the
hoop sets and the volume ratios of the transverse
reinforcement for the test units. TESTING PROCEDURE
Testing machine and strain rates
Note that there is a difference between the detailing
The tests were conducted in a DARTEC electrohy-
practice in the United States and New Zealand. U.S.
draulic universal testing machine which has a vertical
practice" permits column transverse reinforcement to
load capacity of up to 10 MN (2248 kips) and a maximum
engage only alternate bars if they are within 152 mm
available clearance between the top and bottom steel
(6 in.) of a tied bar. New Zealand practice' requires the
platens (bearing plates) of 4 m (13.1 ft). The DARTEC
center-to-center spacing across the cross section be -
machine can be either load or displacement controlled.
tween tied bars to not exceed the larger of one -third
The machine is capable of recording the load carried
of the cross section dimension in that direction or 200
during the whole strain range, including the descending
mm (7.9 in.). In the test specimens all longitudinal bars
portion of the load-strain curve after maximum load.
were tied (see Fig. 1). According to New Zealand prac tice
The applied load was measured to a precision of 1 kN
all bars needed to be tied. U.S. practice would require all
(225 lb) and checked by strains measured on the columns
the bars of the 8-bar column to be tied, but would allow
of the testing machine.
one of the intermediate bars in each face of the 12-bar
column not to be tied. The tests were conducted at a controlled rate of lon -
gitudinal compressive strain of either 0.0000033/sec,
The test units were cast in the vertical position in 0.00167/sec, or 0.0167/sec, normally up to a maximum
batches of 10. The construction sequence consisted of strain of about 0.04. The high strain rate is repre sen-
assembling the reinforcing cages, fixing the strain tative of that expected during seismic loading. The low
gages, and placing the cages in the painted and oiled strain rates were for comparison.
plywood molds. The 16 mm (0.63 in.) diameter hori -
zontal bars at the third points of the test units (see Fig.
1) were passed through the sides of the mold and Instrumentation
bolted to position the cages in the mold accurately. The
Longitudinal concrete strains in the test units were
concrete was placed in th ree lifts and well vibrated.
measured using linear potentiometers over the central
Fig. 3 illustrates some of the molds.
400 mm (15.7 in.) gage length on each vertical face of
Table 1 also lists the measured yield strengths of the the units. The potentiometers were attached (screwed)
steel found from tension tests, and Fig. 4 shows the to the 16 mm (0.63 in.) diameter horizontal bars which
stress-strain curves for the bars. were at the one-third points of the units (see Fig. 1).
The concrete used was normal weight, had a max i- The average of these strains was also checked against
mum aggregate size of 20 mm (0.79 in.), used ordinary the overall longitudinal strain observed from the stroke
portland cement, and had a slump of 75 mm (3 in.). displacement of the loading jack of the DARTEC ma-
The cylinders were cured at 20 C (68 F) in 100 percent chine, and good agreement was found when allowance
relative humidity, while the test units were covered was made for the flexibility of the machine.
with hessian and polythene with the top surface kept Electrical resistance strain gages were attached to the
moist. After 7 days of curing, the cylinders and units underside of the transverse hoop bars at three different
were stripped and stood in the laboratory until testing. levels within the central 400 mm (15.7 in.) of the test
The average compressive strengths given by the 200 units. These strain gages measured the stresses induced
in the hoop reinforcement by the confining pressure.
For the tests conducted at the slow strain rate, the
15
Table 1 - Details of test specimens and test results
Average ConareteConcrete, Concrete Peak
Longitudinal Transverse Average
Unit Concrete Reinforce-
Reinforcement Type Rate Maximum Strain Concrete
Concrete
ment Reinforcement Peak Strain Core at CompressiN
Number Compress- of of Strain
Load at Stress Strain
ive Arrange- No. Dia. Yield Spacing Yield Volume Maximum at
Load Loading
of Strength Strength Ratio Core at
Cylinder ment Dia. Strain Peak
First First
Strength Bars of per Load Ratio Stress
f sh mm fyh Hoop
f' Y Transverse f' Hoop
Second cc Fracture Fracture
mm MPa mm MPa Steel P,
MPa e MN f'
c
1 25.3 0 0 0 Concentric0.00000334.38 0.0018 0.86 0.0018

25.3 434 1.24 0.0052


10 72 309 0.0182 Concentric0,00000337.07 0.0036
N M V U1

N
0
25.3 434 1.54 0.0040 0.0223
8.41 0.0030

0
/Is 10 72 309 0.0182 0.0167

`.21`.
0.0215

0
25.3 434
10 72 309 0.0182 Eccentric 0.00000335.49 0.0027 0.0743

0
0.0274
25.3
\ .4 434
10 72 309 0.0182 0.0167 6.40
0.0033 0.0188 0.0609
Concentric 1.22 0.0044
1 . _________

I
25.3 394
C ,1 C, 1 N
309 0.0174 0-0.0000336.72 0.0041 1.47 0.0038 0.0325
CO CO CO CO

O
7.85

mmmm

C I N C I N

-
25.3 394

1
111111
Cr Cr 309 0.0174 Eccentric 0,0167 0.0032 0.0271

O o o
25.3 394 309 0.0174 0.0649
Q.00000335.54 6.65 0.0044 0.0206
25.3 394 309 0.0174 0.0026 - -
0.0167

11 24.8
6A .
0 0 0 Concentric 0.0167 5.75 0.0012 1.17 0.0012
24.8 1
, M M M M
434 98 309 0.0140
r-I M M M

O O N N
24.8 2 Concentric 0.0167 8.50 0.0025 1.55 0.003 0.0167
/‘
C I N N N
0 0 0 0
M

434 72 309 0.0182 0.0167 8.65 0.0035 1.65 0.004 0.0203


24.8 1 ..
\A 434 88 296 0.0224 0.0167 8.80 0.0033 1.67 0.0045 0.0289
24.8 2
434 64 296 0.0309 0.0167 9.40 0.0052 1.86 0.0055 0.0304
.4, 1 II
AC1 JOURNAL / January-February 1982

24. 2

1411
24 394 10 309 0.0134 0.0167 7.90 0.0027 1.48
co

cCO
co CI CO cr

824 1 24 394 10 309 0.0174 Concentric 0.0167 8.50 0.0025 1.60 0.004 0.0214
CO CO
M M

A 0.0025 0.0287
CO 0, 0

2 ,,

.
.8 24 394 12 296 0.0213 0.0167 8.40 0.0032 1.62
u 0.0035 0.0359
a)

24. 24 394 12 296 0.0293 0.0167 8.80 0.0039 1.75


824 0.004 0.0382
.8
.,
21 24.2 0 0 0 0:000003,4.78 0.0018 0.97 0.0018
24.2 20 272 10 309 0.0140 0.0167 7.30 0.0017 1.41 0.0028 0.0238
N

Concentric
C O N CO
N N N

24.2 20 272 10 309 0.0182 0.0167 7.45 0.0021 1.49 0.0030 0.0287
M V U1

M M M M
N N N N

24.2 r 20 272 12 309 0.0224 II 0.0167 7.80 0.0023 1.57 0.0035 0.0284
szr

24.2 20 272 12 309 0.0309 II 0.0167 8.50 0.0030 1.79 0.0040 0.0323
. . \

26 \,,, /
24.2 4 0 Concentric 0.0167 6.20 1.27 0.0010
0

27 0.0010
0 0

24.2 0 0.00167 5.40 0.0006 1.10 0.0006

Note: 1 MPa = 145 psi, 1 mm = 0.0394 in, 1 MN = 225 kips


2 2
strain gage positions were as shown in Fig. 5. For the .4k _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ w•

tests conducted at the fast strain rate, only the gages 8 3 8 l9e i wsil
10
numbered 2 and 10 were present at one one -third 3
point, 4 and 11 at midheight, and 7 and 12 at the other
one-third point. The strain gages used ha d a gage
7
length of 5 mm (0.20 in.). 4
7 X 12 11 4
For tests conducted at the low strain rate
(0.0000033/sec), the loads and strains were recorded
manually. For tests conducted at the higher strain rates Fig. 5 — Positions of
(0.00167/sec or 0.0167/sec), all measurements were re- electrical resistance strain gages for 8- and 12-bar
corded electronically. units

Test unit preparation


The concentrically loaded test units had thin layers Buckling of 24mm (0.94in.)
of plaster placed between their ends and the steel plates l o n gi t u d i na l b a r dia. bar
at the ends of the testing machine. The spherical seat ing bending support
bar with it 16 mm (0. 63i n)dia.
normally located at the top platen was removed since
support bar
it was considered that a more uniform compression
strain would be maintained at high strains if ro tation of
the platen could not occur.
For the concentrically loaded test units, a steel roller
bearing was inserted at each end of the unit between
the end plates and the platens of the testing machine.
The roller bearings were set at a predetermined eccen - Fig. 6 — Bending of bar to which linear potentiometers
tricity of 49 mm (1.93 in.) for the 12-bar units and 33 were attached
mm (1.30 in.) for the 8-bar units. The eccentric loading
produced a strain gradient which varied as the test pro-
gressed, since the distribution of concrete compressive and supported the linear potentiometers had often de-
stress depended on the shape of the concrete stress - formed near one end, indicating that initially plane sec -
strain curve which changed as the test progressed. For tions were not remaining plane for the duration of the
the chosen end eccentricity (the end eccentricity was test. This occurred despite the fact that the end sections
held constant during the test), the strain was 0 at one of the test units remained plane. It was noticed that
face of the concrete core when the compressive strain the horizontal bars bent only if they were near a buckle
at the opposite face was about 0.01. Generally, rather in the longitudinal bars, as illustrated in Fig. 6. It ap -
than zero strain, there was initially a small compressive peared that the very high localized strains associated
strain and then a small and eventually a high tens ile with longitudinal bar buckling caused local distortion
strain at one face, while the compressive strain in - of the concrete section. However, because this phe-
creased at the opposite face. nomenon occurred toward the end of testing, errors in
the longitudinal strains measured were not considered
to be great.

In the tests, a marked degradation in the strength of


TEST OBSERVATIONS the concrete core was always initiated by fracture of
The appearance of vertical cracks in the concrete
an inner hoop. Generally, a considerable number of
cover was always the first sign of any distress in the
hoops fractured before testing was complete, and the
test units. These cracks spread rapidly as crus hing of
concrete was still able to carry a significant load after
the concrete cover caused the cover to become ineffec -
the fracture of three or four hoops. Thus, it would be
tive. As expected, this was particularly evident for the
reasonably conservative to define the limit of us eful
units with closely spaced hoops, since closely spaced
concrete compressive strain as that strain at which
transverse steel causes a plane of weakness between the
fracture of a hoop first occurs. It should be noted that
core and cover concrete. However, with the cover con-
fracture of the outer (perimeter) hoops occurred later,
crete lost, the load still continued to increase as the
if at all, than fracture of the inner hoops. This was
core concrete became confined by arching between the
due to the loss of bond at the o uter hoops, caused by
hoops and longitudinal bars. Eventually this load de -
the loss of the concrete cover, allowing an averaging
creased. Buckling of the longitudinal bars occurred at
of the outer hoop strain across the width of the con crete
higher strains; this was invariably associated with fracture
core. Fracture of an inner hoop, and the subse quent
of the hoops at or near the buckle. As the hoops snapped,
local degradation of the strength of the concrete core,
the core concrete in the near vicinity was reduced to fine
also caused a loss of anchorage at the embedded ends of
rubble and flowed or was ejected from the core.
the outer hoop bars, resulting in a tendency for the
outer hoop bar to unwind rather than to frac ture.
After the tests, it was found that the horizontal bars
which passed through the units at the one-third points
17
ACI JOURNAL / January-February 1982
6 5 6 5
Fig. 7 — Unit 12 at various instants during the high strain rate test

Fig. 7 shows a series of time-sequence photographs Unit 12 (see also Fig. 7) and also illustrates the loss of
for Unit 12, which was loaded concentrically and at anchorage of the outer hoops. Fig. 8(d) shows the
the high strain rate. The photographs were taken at unreinforced Unit 11 after high strain rate concentric
high speed, and the time t in the figure indicates the loading. The cone of failure at each end joined by a
time in seconds after the start of loading. The hori- large vertical crack was typical of all unreinforced
zontal metal bands seen in the figure near the center units tested, and the failure was always brittle with a
of the test unit were made loose fitting, with 25 mm sudden loss of load capacity.
(1 in.) clearance all around, to provide protection to
The eccentrically loaded Units 4 and 5 at failure can
the potentiometers; the bands provided no confine -
be seen in Fig. 8(e) and (f). Note the buckling of the
ment. Fig. 7 shows that vertical cracking of the cover
longitudinal bars on the compression face and the large
concrete had occurred by t = 0.39 sec, just before a
evenly spaced tension cracks on the opposite face.
peak load of 8.5 MN (1910 kips) was reached, and by
These tension cracks are slightly inclined to the hori -
the next photograph at t = 0.79 sec the load had fallen zontal due to the shear induced by the amount gradient
to 6.4 MN (1440 kips). The next photograph at t = resulting from high, but variable, P-A moments. Since
1.13 sec was taken just before the first hoop fracture, P-A moments are maximum at mid -height and zero at
and the photograph at t = 1.48 sec is at the third hoop top and bottom, a moment gradient with height, and
fracture. By the last sequential photograph at t = 2.22 thus a shear force distribution, is involved. It is sig -
sec, six hoops had fractured; two more would do so nificant that despite the squat nature of the test units,
before the end of the test. The final photograph shows the lateral displacements finally induced P-A moments
the condition of the concrete core at the end of testing. of the same order of magnitude as moments resulting
from the end eccentricities. The extent of the final lateral
Fig. 8 shows selected features of the failures for various displacement is clearly illustrated by Fig. 8(f).
test units. Fig. 8(a) shows a typical lightly con fined unit
(Unit 17) and Fig. 8(b) shows a typical heavily confined
unit (Unit 15), both after high strain rate concentric GENERAL TEST RESULTS
loading. Failure occurred in the central region of the The main test results obtained for each unit were the
units and the longitudinal bars buckled. It is also evident relationships between total load versus longitudinal
that the core concrete of the more lightly confined Unit 17 strain, the longitudinal concrete core stress versus lon-
is significantly more damaged than that of the more gitudinal strain, and the hoop reinforcement stress ver -
heavily confined Unit 15. Fig. 8(c) shows a close-up
of the fracture of three hoops from the lightly confined
18 ACI JOURNAL I January-February 1982
p, chow
4.34 P4Po
Ad= 3770 me ,2 W Z00
60182
 303NPo rst hoop
frac t ure
25.3MF'a
t 0.0 0000 33/sec 0.01 0.02 0 .0 3 S T RA IN
NOTE
1MPa .145psf
1 MN '• 22S kips 1 ,1 H O OP S TRE SS -L O N G IFL O RAL s law,

Morleher1 Kent-Pork (ERs 1 fo 41


— L e a f 2

(Rom Concrete)

SYRON 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 S TRAW


lc 1 CORE CONCRETE STRESS -STRAW CURVE

ACI JOURNAL 1 January-February 1982 Fig. 9 —


000

en'

P , 4 0 .0 179
3 9 LA IRa
A , 3 6 )9 riv e ' I I 200

L1150 ' 0.01 7l


3 09 MP a
1s t l oo p
f r act ur e
" 2 5 , 3 6P a
Unef 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3/ s es
NOTE 0 Or 002 0.03 STRAW
MPa IlSest r1 HOOP STRESS-Lavotruorou SrRAh
INN 215kps

— • — m or ta re d K en t- Pa rk s rt. Ll

Tato, — U n t o 6

(Moo Conuerel

LLB

0.02 0 .0 3 0 mor 0.02 0.03 S


S T RA
011030-STRAW CURVES tot CORE CONCRETE STRESS -.509Adi4 CURVE

Fig. 10 — Unit 6 — Concentric loading at the low


strain rate

Unit 2 — Concentric loading at the low strain rate


rate. Some error is introduced in using the results of
Unit 1 to represent the behavior of the cover concrete
Fig. 8 — Features of failure for various test units for the units with the high strain rate, but the error is
small. For example, an error of 0.15 f c ' in the stress
carried by the concrete cover would cause a 2 percent
sus the longitudinal strain. These results are plotted for difference to the stress carried by the concrete core.
six typical test units in Fig. 9 to 14. The plotted results The load-longitudinal strain curve for the core concrete
for all the units may be seen elsewhere.' Some infor- was attained by subtracting the contributions of the
mation on measured stresses and strains is given in longitudinal steel and the cover concrete from the total
Table 1. load-longitudinal strain curves. Dividing by the core
area enabled the core concrete stress-longitudinal strain
Concentrically loaded units curve to be obtained; this curve has been plotted in
Fig. 9 to 12 illustrate the results obtained from typ ical Fig. 9 to 12 up to the stage of first hoop fracture as
concentrically loaded units with low and high strain a fraction of cylinder compressive strength. The core
rates. The load-longitudinal strain curves show the area was measured to the outside of the peripheral
sequential fracture of the hoops as steps of de creasing hoop, in keeping with the definition in the AC1 code.'
load. Superimposed on those figures are also the load-
longitudinal strain curves for the longitudinal steel and Examination of Fig. 9 to 12 indicates that substantial
the cover concrete. The load-strain curve for the enhancement of peak co ncrete core comp res sive
longitudinal steel in compression was calculated using strength was obtained as a result of the confinement.
the stress-strain curves measured in tension at a low For Units 2 and 6, tested at the low strain rate, the
loading rate on bar samples. The load-strain curve for strength enhancement was about 20 percent, while for
the concrete cover was calculated from the stress-strain Units 3 and 15, tested at the high strain rate, the
curve measured up to a strain of 0.01 on the strength enhancement was about 70 percent, related to
unreinforced Unit 1 which was tested at the low strain the unconfined cylinder compressive strength. The con-
sistent strength enhancement found in these tests as a
result of confinement contradicts earlier conclusions by
19
Af = 0.0186 f y NOTE --
400 = 1 3 4 ,4 Pa A s, IMPo = 145ps,
3770 mm' 1 MN x 7251Es
A s = aotez fam = 0.094 in
P1 . 0 .01e 6 9,, 309 mPa =
c3em, 2 5 .3 0 1 P a e =
Ap p 3770 mm' 200 hOmm C
Ps = 0.0182
Fs! ha, 0.0167/sec
?: 23'5,9
fracture
=3 AfRo
U nd 3 0 .0 ,67 /sea
Tension stroln __Compression strain
NoTE
mRo 0.01 0.02 0:03 ST.:.
NAN = 225kgos 10) HOOP smrss-Lororuo.. STRAIN

- • - m o d • b e d k e n , - P o r k ( C gs
1.6
N, Und 3
------- a n d I
1st hoof.
(Mom Concrete fracture ,st hoop 1St hoop
1.
frocfure fracfare

08
Z 04
a
0.' rst NA V
frac,
-003 0.02 -OW 001 00 0.03 0 . 0 4
0.2
STRAIN 0.0S 0.06 0.07
101 LOAD - STRAIN CURVES

00, 0,02 0 ,0 3 S T RA N 0 001 0.02 0.03 STRAIN


lo) LIMO -STRAIT cuRVES CORE CONCRETE smEss-srRany CURVE

Fig. 11 - Unit 3 - Concentric loading at the high


strain rate
Fig. 12 - Unit 15 - Concentric loading at the high
0.0186
I MP,, = 14 .5 psi
4 3 4 .MPa
1 MN = 225 kips
A, 3770 mtn2
- Mo d i f i e d Ke n t - Pa rk ( t c ,5 1 t o 1 1
.05 = 0.0309 - U n d 1 5
tyh= 196 MPa Un a r
= 24.131400 !Ro c, Co n crete!
0 .3 t67 / se c

A VER AGE S TR AI N A VER AGE S TR AI N


9 0 1 LO A D- A VE R A G E S TR A W CU R VE c) MOMENT- AVERAGE STRAIN CURVE

Fig. 14 - Unit 5 - Eccentric loading at the high strain


rate

S rR4 IN 0 0.0t 0.07 0.03 STRAIN

(a) WAD-STRAW CURVES lot CORE CONCRETE STRESS-STRAIN CURVE Roy and Sozen" that confinement did not increase
compressive strength of rectangular sections.
strain rate Fig. 9, 10, and 11 also show the measured hoop re-
inforcement stress-longitudinal strain curves and indi-
cate when the hoops have yielded relative to the lon -
gitudinal strain. The hoop stress plotted for each unit
is an average of all hoop stresses measured for the unit
at that longitudinal strain.

Eccentrically loaded units


Fig. 13 and 14 illustrate results obtained from typical
eccentrically loaded units with low and high strain
rates. The load -strain curve in each figure plots the
load carried versus the longitudinal strains at opposite
extreme fibers at the outside of the core concrete and
an average of these longitudinal strains. Note that ini -
raI LO AD-S TR AI N CU R VES
tially both extreme fibers were in compression. How -
ever, as the test progressed the increase in curvature
300
t of the unit resulted in an increase in the eccentricity
Measured from + Measured from
of applied load (P-A effect). This caused a chan ge in
-
051 of Um t
Cak uta fed from
fest al
Co/c4/404,/
Una
Nom
4
the strain gradient resulting in tension at one extreme
st re ss- d ra m c u rv e stress strain curve
o f O ld 2 of Und 1. fiber, as may be also observed from the tension cracks
W 200
in Fig. 8(e) and (f).

100 Also plotted in Fig. 13 and 14 is a comparison of


the measured and calculated load and moment at the
midheight section of the units plotted against the av-
Ne _ 00 _

CLOT 002
AVERAGE STRAIN
06 001 0.02
AVERAGE STRAIN
0.03
erage longitudinal strain. The measured moment in -
Fr, MOMENT - AVERAGE STRAIN CURVE
( 0) LOAD-AVERAGE STRAIN CURVE
cludes the P-A moment which was found from the
Fig. 13 - Unit 4 - Eccentric loading at the low strain measured lateral deflection of the units as the test pro -
rate gressed. The calculated values for load and moment,

20 ACI JOURNAL / January-February 1982


U ni t 21
Experimental Results
= 0.0000033 /sec Units 6,7 8 18
1:i= 0.0174
Unit 26
--- Modified Kent 8 Park (4,1 to 41
= 0.0167 /sec Unit 18
1. 8 - - Pr o p ose d Cu rv e f or h i gh st r ai n r at e
L0.0167/sec (E95.7,2,5,6)
U ni t 27
0.00167/sec
1.6
Unit 7
i=0.0167/sec
t.4
CONCRETE STRESS /

1,2

1.0

0.8
Una' 6
e .0.0000033/sec
0.6

0.4
1st hoop
fracture
0.1

)11■
0.07 0.02 0.03 STRAIN
Fig. 15 — Stress-strain curves for unrein forced con-
crete units loaded at different strain rates Fig. 16 — Stress-strain curves for concrete core of 8-
bar units with similar transverse hoops loaded con-
centrically at different strain rates
corresponding to a number of measured strain distri-
butions, were found from a laminar analysis in which
the section was divided into nine 50 mm (2 in.) deep
strips. For a given measured strain gradient, the strain
in each strip was taken as that at its midpoint. The
stress in the concrete core at that strain in the strip was
calculated from the core concrete stress-strain curve for
the corresponding unit with the same longitudinal and Experimental Results
Units 1.3 d 13
transverse reinforcement which had been loaded con - P, .0.0182
centrically at the same strain rate. The stress in the --- Modi fi ed Ken t & Park lE qs.1 t o 41 -
--- Proposed Curve for high strain rate
cover concrete in the strip was calculated from the ( E 9 5 1 2 5 ,6 )
stress-strain curve of the corresponding unreinforced
CORE CONCRETE SIRE

concentrically loaded unit. Load and moment at the Unit 2


midheight section were t hen calculated from the e .0.0000033/sec

stresses found in each strip. It is evident from Fig. 13


and 14 that the measured loads and moments are much
higher than those calculated from the concentric stress-
1st hoop
strain curves for the concrete. Hence, the presence of fracture
the strain gradient has significantly improved the
stress-strain curve for the concrete by reducing the
slope of the falling branch of the curve.
0.01 0.02 0.03 STRAIN

EFFECT OF RATE OF STRAIN Fig. 17 — Stress-strain curves for concrete core of 12-bar
The low rate of strain, 0.0000033/sec, was represen - units with similar transverse hoops loaded con-
centrically at different strain rates
tative of the strain rate used in many previous column
research projects in which the columns were loaded to
failure (typically over a period of 10 min to 2 hr). A effect of the variation from the low to high strain rates
medium rate of strain, 0.00167/sec, was included to used in these tests, which involved a factor of 0.0167/
determine the sensitivity of the strength increase to 0.0000033 = 5000.
changes in rate of strain. The high rate of strain, Fig. 15, 16, and 17 illustrate the effect of strain rate
0.0167/sec, could be regarded as being indicative of the on the stress-strain curves for unreinforced concrete
strain rate expected during the response of reinforced (Units 21, 26, and 27) and for the core concrete of 8-
concrete to earthquakes. This rate may in fact be ex - bar units (Units 6, 7, 18) and 12 -bar units (2, 3, and
ceeded in some structures with a short fundamental 13), respectively. All of these units were loaded con -
period of vibration during earthquakes. However, the centrically. The curves in Fig. 16 and 17 were found
effect of increasing the strain rate by a factor of 1 to by subtracting the loads carried by the cover concrete
4 times is likely to be small in comparison with the and longitudinal reinforcement from the total load carried
and dividing by the core area, as described earlier.
ACI JOURNAL / January-February 1982
21
r r o p o s e a c u r ve r o r R l e g
r 5 % L i m i t o f p r o p o s e d c u r ve Experimental
Modifiedd Kent a Pork for K (Eq. 31 Results

-- -- Proposed
 12 Bar unit K for high 15 Curves
+ 8 Ba r u n it (Eqs 1,2.5,61
strain rate 0
 Plain unit :0.0t67/sec 625
1.8
+20 1.6

7.1

1.4 Unit 15
1.6 -+-- 9
P5 = 0.0309
-0. 0167/sec
Cc '77+ N
f '
c 1.4
N
N
 0
,Unit t3
1.2 p .r0.01132
K f o r l o w s t ra in
ra t e i :0 Lu
ct 0.8 Unit 14
0000033/sec Unit 12
ps = 0.0224
1.0 o P5= 0.0140

0.6

NOTE:- Units 1,2 ,6 and 21 were 1st hoop


0.8 fracture
tested at the law strain
0.4
rate All other units were
tested at the high st rain rate.
0.6 1
.0 2 Unit
= 0.0000033/sec I
0.01 0.02 0.03 ID,

0.01 0.02 0.03 STRAIN


Fig. 18 - Strength increase of concrete core versus
volume ratio of transverse hoop reinforcement Fig. 20 - Stress-strain curves for concrete core of 12-
bar units with different transverse hoops loaded con-
centrically at the high strain rate
Experimental
Results

7.8 -- Proposed
Curves l'Eqs 1
strain curve for the high strain rate tends toward the
1.6
curve for the low strain rate.
Unit 20
The approximately 25 percent increase in the peak
1.4 0.0293
stress due to the high strain rate of 0.0167/sec found
1.2 in these tests may be compared with the results for
=0.0167/sec N
ti (unreinforced) concrete cylinders found by Watstein."
Li, 1.0
ES The average increases in concrete cylinder strength
6, -Unit 19 found by Watstein for strain rates of 0.01/sec and 0.1/
4 0.8 P, = 0.0213
0 Unit 18
sec were 17 and 39 percent, respectively, for concrete
'3 0.6 Unit 17 ps = 0.0174 with a cylinder strength of 17 MPa (2500 psi), and 16
0.0134
and 23 percent, respectively, for concrete with a cyl -
0.4 1st hoop
inder strength of 45 MPa (6500 psi).
fracture
Unit 1
e =0.0000033/sec
0.2
EFFECT OF DISTRIBUTION OF TRANSVERSE
0 I AND LONGITUDINAL REINFORCEMENT
001 0.02 0.03 STRAIN

The effects of the quantity and distribution of hoop


Fig. 19 - Stress-strain curves for concrete core of 8- reinforcement on the stress-strain behavior of the core
bar units with different transverse hoops loaded con- concrete for the units with 8 and 12 longitudinal bars
centrically at the high strain rate
tested with concentric loading at the high strain rate
are shown in Fig. 19 and 20. For comparison, the
stress-strain curve obtained for the unreinforced Unit
The increase in concrete strength due to increase in 1, which was tested at the low strain rate, is also shown
strain rate can be observed in Fig. 15 to 17 and from in these figures. The large increase in concrete strength
the 1 If' ratios listed in Table 1 and plotted in Fig. due to concrete confinement and to high strain rate is
18 versus the volume ratio of hoop reinforcement. The again apparent. The curves also illustrate the effect of
ratio of fi c / f c ' for the high strain rate to f!, f,' for the the center-to-center spacing of the hoops, s„ as well
low strain rate gives the increase in peak stress due to as the volume ratio of hoops, Q . For example, Unit 18 s

strain rate alone. The increase in the peak concrete had Q, = 0.0174 and s h = 72 mm (2.8 in.), and Unit 19
stress due to the high strain rate was typically 25 per - had Q, = 0.0213 and s h = 88 mm (3.5 in.). However, in
cent. Fig. 15 to 17 also show that at a strain of 0.015 Fig. 19 the curves for Units 18 and 19 are close to -
to 0.02, this strength increase has generally fallen to gether, indicating that the effect of the lower volume
about 10 percent. Thus, the slope of the falling branch of ratio of hoop steel of Unit 18 was largel y offset b y
the stress-strain curve from the peak stress to about 0.02 the greater spacing of the larger diameter hoop ste el
strain is much steeper for the high strain rate than for the of Unit 19. The curves for Units 13 and 14 in Fig. 20
low strain rate, and at large strains the stress - are also close together for the same reason.

22 ACI JOURNAL / January-February 1982


Unit
15
p1 ID,
COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS WITH THE
0.0186 0.0309
20 0.0179 0.0293 MODIFIED KENT AND PARK STRESS-STRAIN
14
19
0.0186
0.0179
0.0224
0.0213
CURVE FOR CONFINED CONCRETE
13 0.0186 0.0182 Low strain rate
18 0.0179 0.0174
12 0.0186 0.0140 The stress-strain relation for concrete confined by
17 0.0179 0.0134
rectangular hoops proposed by Kent and Park,' and
12 Bar Units more recently modified by Park, Pries tley, and Gill',
8 Bor Units
1.8 0 Unit Number was derived from tests with low strain rates. In the
modified Kent and Park relation, the maximum stress
1.6 attained, Kf', is assumed to be reached at a strain of
N
0.002K, and the stress-strain relation is
1.4
For E, < 0.002K
e = 0.0167 /sec
[ 0
E,
= - .002K (1)
2r,
0.002K
0.6
f'
For E, > 0.002K
0.4

= Kf' fl - Z.(E, - 0.002K)] (2)


0.2

but not less than 0.2Kf:


0.01 0.02 0.03 S MAIN

where
Fig. 21 - Stress-strain curves for concrete core of Sand
12-bar units with different transverse hoops loaded K = 1 + Qft,
concentrically at the high strain rate , (3)

Fig. 21 shows measured stress-strain curves for the


and
core concrete of the 8-bar and 12-bar units with similar
amounts of longitudinal and transverse steel loaded
concentrically at the high strain rate. In each case the Z. - 0 . 5 (4)
stress-strain curve for the 12-bar unit lies above the 145f: - 1000 4 sh
curve for the comparable 8-bar unit, indicating that 3 + 0.29f:+ 3 re
better concrete confinement is obtained when the lon- Q, - 0.002K
gitudinal bars are closely spaced. That is, the concrete
confinement is improved when a large number of where E, = longitudinal strain in concrete, f = longi
smaller diameter longitudinal bars is used to make up tudinal stress in concrete (MPa), = concrete com-
the required area of longitudinal reinforcement. pressive cylinder strength (MPa), f y, = yield strength of
hoop reinforcement (MPa), Q s = ratio of volume of
Most of the test units had longitudinal reinforcement hoop reinforcement to volume of concrete core mea -
with f y = 394 to 434 MPa (57 to 63 ksi), but four test sured to outside of the hoops, h" = width of concrete
units had longitudinal reinforcement with f y = 272 MPa core measured to outside of the peripheral hoop (mm),
(39 ksi). Comparison of the load -strain curves mea- and 5, = center-to-center spacing of hoop sets (mm),
sured during the tests showed that the yield strength where 1 MPa = 145 psi and 1 mm = 0.0394 in.
of the longitudinal reinforcement had only a minor
effect on the confinement of the concrete. Neverthe - The modified Kent and Park relation is shown com -
less, it was noticeable that the use of the lower yield pared with the measured core concrete stress -strain
longitudinal reinforcement did result in a reduction of curves for concentrically loaded units in Fig. 9 to 12,
the effective confinement of the core concrete com - and 16 and 17. On the whole, the agreement with mea-
pared with the higher yield longitudinal reinforcement sured curves for the low strain rate is good. For the
(the peak concrete stress f c ,' was reduced by about 10 high strain rate, as expected, the relatio n is conservative.
percent), and also resulted in an increase in the lon -
gitudinal strain at first hoop fracture (also by about High strain rate
10 percent). On the basis of the observed stress -strain behavior
in these tests, the modified Kent and Park stress-strain
The ratio of hoop center-to-center spacing to lon- relation may be adapted for the high strain rate by
gitudinal bar diameter varied between 2.7 and 4.9 in
the test units, and this ratio was found to be adequate "Park, R.; Priestley, M. J. N.; and Gill, W. D., "Ductility of Square Confined
Reinforced Concrete Columns," accepted by the Structural Division, American
to delay buckling of the longitudinal bars until the late Society of Civil Engineers, in press.
stages of each test.
23
ACI JOURNAL / January-February 1982
applying a multiplying factor of 1.25 to the peak stress, to volume of concrete core, Q: = ratio of total volume of
the strain at the peak stress, and the slope of the falling transverse plus longitudinal compression reinforcement to
branch. Thus, for the high strain rate the stress -strain volume of concrete core, d = effective depth of section
relation is given by Eq. (1) and (2), where the values (mm), c = neutral axis depth (mm), b = width of
of K and 4, are altered to section (mm), z = distance from critical section to point
of contraflexure (mm), and f y , = yield strength of hoop
steel (MPa), where 1 mm = 0.0394 in. and 1 MPa =
) 145 psi.
K = 1.25 +Q s f y t r (5)
fc' The concrete core compressive strains measured at
first hoop fracture are shown compared with the ulti mate
and concrete strains calculated from Baker's and Corley's
equations in Table 2. The ratios d/c and b/z were
0 . 6 2 5 considered to be 1.0 and 0, respectively, for the ec -
Zm — (6) centrically loaded units, and 0 for the concentrically
3 + 0.29f;3 h" loaded units. The term Q: in Corley's equation was
+ Q, — 0.002K
145f: – 1000 4 sh calculated including all longitudinal reinforcement in
the section as well as the hoop reinforcement. The very
Fig. 18 shows the values of K given by Eq. (3) and conservative nature of both the Baker and the Corley
(5) compared with the test results, and the agreement equations is evident from Table 2. The column tests
is seen to be reasonable. The proposed stress-strain re- previously conducted by Park, Priestley, and Gill', and
lation for high strain rate is shown compared with the Priestley, Park, and Potangaroa 7, have also shown the
measured curves in Fig. 16 and 17 and 19 to 21, and conservative nature of the Baker and Corley equations.
it is evident that the agreement is good.
As indicated in Tables 1 and 2, the core concrete
compressive strain at first hoop fracture measured in the
units varied between 0.020 and 0.038 for the con-
MAXIMUM CONCRETE COMPRESSIVE STRAIN centrically loaded units, and between 0.061 and 0.074 for
The test results suggest that the limit of maximum the eccentrically loaded units. In each case there is an
compressive strain in the core concrete could be taken increase in strain at first hoop fracture with in crease in
conservatively as the strain at which the first hoop the volume ratio of transverse reinforcement, and a
fractures. The maximum concrete strain used in ductility decrease in strain at first hoop fracture with in crease in
calculations could be defined as the above limit strain. strain rate.
Examination of Fig. 21 shows that the compressive
It was difficult to establish the compressive strain at
strain in the concrete core at first h oop fracture is
which the cover concrete commenced to crush and separate
greater in each case for the 8-bar unit than for the 12-
from the core concrete and become ineffective in the high
bar unit. This appears to be because the length of the
strain rate tests, but for the concentric load tests at the
side of the hoop, between the changes in direction of
low strain rate it was about 0.004, and for the eccentric
the hoop bar, is greater for the internal diamond -
load tests at the low strain rate it was about 0.005.
shaped hoop of an 8-bar unit than for the internal oc-
tagonal-shaped hoop of a 12-bar unit. Therefore, the Fig. 22 shows the measured longitudinal core con crete
length of hoop bar side over which yield can spread compressive strains in the units at first hoop fracture
is greater for the 8-bar unit than for the 12-bar unit. plotted against the volume ratio of transverse re-
This reasoning also explains why the first fracture of inforcement Q s. As an approximate lower bound to the
hoop reinforcement always occurred in an inner hoop longitudinal strains measured, it is suggested that the
rather than in a peripheral hoop. maximum available concrete compressive strain could be
taken as
Empirical equations for the ultimate concrete com-
pressive strain for use in calculations of plastic hinge
rotations in reinforced concrete members have been fy „
Erna, = 0.004 + 0.9Q5 ________________ (9)
proposed by Baker"
[300]

0.01 (7) where f,., = yield strength of the transverse reinforcement


Ecn = 0.0015 [1 + 150Q, + (0.7 – 10Q,) —d
i in MPa (1 MPa = 145 psi). In this expression, it is
assumed that e,„, for unconfined concrete is 0.004, which
is a lower-bound value for the strain at crushing of the
and by Corley" cover concrete found in these tests and in the previous
b[Q! f„1 2
column tests.'" Also, it is assumed that the
E cn = 0.003 + 0.02 — +
z 138 (8)
'Park, R.; Priestley, M. J. N.; and Gill, W. D., "Ductility of Square Con fined
Reinforced Concrete Columns," accepted by the Structural Division, American
where Q, = ratio of volume of transverse reinforcement Society of Civil Engineers, in press.

24 ACI JOURNAL / January-February 1982


Table 2 - Comparison of limiting compression strains of concrete core
Measured
peak
concrete core
compression
strain at
first hoop Baker Corley Proposed
Unit fracture, Eq. (7), Eq. (9), ITV crop Ceop
Eq. (8),
number aeXp
ECU Em ernax Baker ac „ Corley ecti Proposed Enwx
0.0223 0.0056 0.0113 0.0209 3.98 1.97 1.07
0.0215 0.0056 0.0113 0.0209 3.84 1.90 1.03
0.0743 0.0064 0.0113 0.0209 11.61 6.58 3.56
0.0609 0.0064 0.0113 0.0209 9.52 5.39 2.91
0.0325 0.0054 0.0106 0.0201 6.02 3.07 1.62
0.0271 0.0054 0.0106 0.0201 5.02 2.56 1.35
0.0649 0.0062 0.0106 0.0201 10.47 6.12 3.23
12 0.0167 0.0047 0.0096 0.0170 3.55 1.74 0.98
13 0.0203 0.0056 0.0113 0.0209 3.63 1.80 0.97
14 0.0289 0.0065 0.0122 0.0239 4.45 2.37 1.21
15 0.0304 0.0085 0.0161 0.0314 3.58 1.89 0.97
17 0.0214 0.0045 0.0091 0.0164 4.76 2.35 1.30
18 0.0287 0.0054 0.0106 0.020 5.31 2.71 1.43
19 0.0359 0.0063 0.0114 0.0229 5.70 3.15 1.57
20 0.0382 0.0081 0.0149 0.0300 4.72 2.58 1.27
22 0.0238 0.0047 0.0096 0.0170 5.06 2.48 1.40
23 0.0287 0.0056 0.0113 0.0209 5.13 2.54 1.37
24 0.0284 0.0065 0.0122 0.0239 4.37 2.33 1.19
25 0.0323 0.0085 0.0161 0.0314 3.80 2.00 1.03
*Units loaded eccentrically. All other units were loaded concentrically.

effects of variations in the yield strength of the hoop Concentric Eccentric


reinforcement are taken into account by the f y ,/300 Symbols Loa d toad

term, since the value for f,„ in these units was close to H ig h s t ra in ra t e
• •
i =0.0 16 7/sec
300 MPa (43,500 psi). Further, the enhancement in L o w s t ra in ra t e
0.08 0 0
strain capacity due to the presence of a strain gradient £ = 0.0000033/sec

(such as in eccentric loading) is ignored. Eq. (9) is


shown plotted in Fig. 22. Table 2 also shows a com -
parison of Eq. (9) with the measured strains. Although
Peak Concrete Core Compressive Strain at First Hoop Fracture

0
conservative, Eq. (9) gives a far more realistic value 0.06 
for the maximum available concrete compressive strain
than the equations of Baker and Corley.
Emay= 0.004 +0.9 ps
The maximum curvature that a reinforced concrete for fyh = 300 MPa( 43.5 ks
beam or column section can achieve before fracture of
0.04
the hoop reinforcement can be calculated from L. =

E„,,„/c, where r„,,„ is given by Eq. (9) and c is the distance 0
from the extreme compression fiber of the core concrete

Se
to the neutral axis. The neutral axis depth c is found
S
from anal ysis by satisfying the co nditions of 0.02
 from Corley 's Eq. 8

equilibrium for the internal forces in the section and the


compatibility of strains.' The concrete compressive stress
distribution is obtained from the concrete stress-strain
curve up to strain E ax . Note that in calculations for the E cce nt ric ] E c u from Ba ker's Eq. 7
C o n c e n t r i c
flexural capacity and curvature of the member at such 0.01 0.02 0.03
far advanced concrete compressive strains, it should be
Volume at Transverse Rein forcement
assumed that all cover concrete with compressive strains V o lu me o f Co nc re te Co re
Ps

greater than about 0.004 has separated from the core


concrete and is ineffective. Fig. 22 - Limiting compressive strain of concrete core
versus volume ratio of transverse hoop reinforcement
EFFECT OF STRAIN GRADIENT ACROSS
SECTION the eccentrically loaded Units 4 and 5 shown in Fig.
13 and 14 (and the comparisons given elsewhere' for
The stress-strain curve for the core concrete when a
Units 8 and 9) show that a stress-strain curve with a
strain gradient is present could not be derived from the
less steep falling branch is appropriate for members
results of the eccentric load tests. However, the com -
with a strain gradient. The neutral axis depth in these
parisons between the concentrically loaded units and
tests was quite deep. Normally, almost the whole sec -
ACI JOURNAL / January-February 1982
25
tion was in compression, and therefore this conclusion units with 8 longitudinal bars. However, this difference
applies to beams and to almost all columns. Hence, was not large enough to cause concern and was com-
using stress-strain curves from concentric load tests to pensated by the better confinement before first hoop
calculate the distribution of concrete compressive stress fracture of the units with the greater number of col -
in a beam or column will lead to a conservative result. umn bars.
Such members will undoubtedly have a greater moment 5. The earlier yielding of Grade 275 (fy = 40 ksi) lon-
capacity at high strains and greater flexural ductility gitudinal reinforcement compared with Grade 380
than those calculated using the curves obtained from (f y = 55 ksi) longitudinal reinforcement resulted in a
such tests. lower peak concrete core stress being reached (about
It has already been noted that the peak compressive 10 percent less) and an increase in the longitudinal
strain measured in the core concrete at first hoop fracture strains at first hoop fracture (about 10 percent more).
in the eccentric load tests was much higher (2 to 3 However, the ratio of hoop center-to-center spacing to
times) than that obtained from concentric load tests. longitudinal bar diameter of up to about five used in
Although the equations of Baker and Corley [Eq. (7) these tests effectively delayed longitudinal buckling of
and (8)] make some allowance for the presenc e of the bars until the late stages of each test.
strain gradient, there is still a large degree of conser -
6. The modified Kent and Park stress-strain relation
vatism in Eq. (7) and (8), as is shown in Fig. 22. Never-
for compressed concrete confined by hoop reinforce-
theless, until more test results for confined concrete
ment gave good agreement with the stress-strain curves
with strain gradient become available, it is suggested
measured for the concrete core in the concentric load
that Eq. (9), which is based on the maximum concrete
tests conducted at the low strain rate. For the high
compressive strain at first hoop fracture found from
strain rate tests, good agreement with the measured
concentric load tests, be used to estimate the maximum
curves was obtained from the relation by applying a
available concrete compressive strain.
multiplying factor of 1.25 to the peak stress, the strain
at peak stress, and the slope of the falling branch.
7. Predictions of the ultimate concrete compressive
CONCLUSIONS strain for the confined concrete core using the equa-
tions by Baker and Corley are unduly conservative. It
1. The concentric load tests conducted on nearly full
is proposed that the limit of maximum concrete com -
size concrete column units, containing either 8 or 12
pressive strain in the concrete core can be conserva -
longitudinal reinforcing bars and transverse reinforce -
tively taken as that strain when the first hoop frac -
ment consisting of either overlapping square hoops or
tures. On that basis, the maximu m av ail able core
square and octagonal hoops, showed large increases in
concrete compressive strain obtained from the con -
the compressive strength of the concrete core due to
centrically loaded column units in these tests ranged
effective confinement and high strain rate. Concrete
from 0.017 to 0.038, with the larger values applying
core strengths of up to 186 percent of the concrete
to the high volume ratios of confining steel, Q,. Based
compressive cylinder strength were obtained from these
on these test results, the maximum available concrete
tests.
compressive strain can be conservatively taken as 0.004
2. The longitudinal strain rate influenced both the + 0.9 Q,(f y „/300), where f",,, is the hoop steel yield
peak stress and the slope of the falling branch of the strength in MPa (1 MPa = 145 psi).
stress-strain curve of the concrete core. For the high
strain rate in these tests (0.0167/sec), the peak stress 8. The presence of a strain gradient across the column
and the slope of the falling branch were increased by unit due to eccentric loading increased the peak
about 25 percent compared with those for the low longitudinal concrete compressive strain measured at
strain rate (0.0000033/sec). first hoop fracture very significantly (to 2 to 3 times
the strain at first hoop fracture measured in the con -
3. An increase in the volume ratio of transverse re-
centric load tests). The presence of a s train gradient
inforcement in these tests increased the peak concrete
also resulted in a smaller decrease in load and moment
core stress attained and the longitudinal compressive
carried with increasing strain after peak load than was
strain at first hoop fracture, and decreased the slope
predicted by analysis using stress-strain curves for con-
of the falling branch of the concrete core stress-strain
crete obtained from the concentric load tests. Hence,
curve. An increase in the spacing of hoop sets, while
the use of concrete stress-strain curves obtained from
maintaining a constant volume ratio of transverse re -
concentric load tests to calculate the distribution of
inforcement by the use of larger diameter hoop bars,
concrete compressive stress in a beam or column, when
tended to reduce the efficiency of the concrete con -
the neutral axis lies within the section depth, is un -
finement.
doubtedly conservative. Such members will actually
4. An increase in the number of longitudinal rein - have a greater flexural capacity and ductility at high
forcing bars resulted in better confinement of the strains than calculated.
core concrete for a given longitudinal reinforcement
area, due to the closer spacing of the longitudinal bars.
Nevertheless, it was noticeable that the longitudinal
strain at first hoop fracture was smaller for the column ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Gratefu l thanks are due to the National Roads Board of New
units with 12 longitudinal bars than for the column Zealand and to the University of Canterbury for supporting funds.
26 ACI JOURNAL I January-February 1982
ne experimental work reportea in this paper was part of a M.E re- Hoops," Research and Development Bulletin No. RD053.01D, Port-
port by B. D. Scott, supervised by R. Park and M. J. N. Priestley. land Cement Association, Skokie, 1978, 12 pp.
4. Vellenas, J.; Bertero, V. V.; and Popov, E. P., "Concrete Con-
NOTATION fined by Rectangular Hoops and Subjected to Axial Loads," Report
No. UCB/EERC-77/13, Earthquake Engineering Research Center,
A,, = t ot al area of lon git udin al rein forcement
College of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, Aug.
b = width of section
1977, 114 pp.
c = distance from extreme compression fiber to neutral axis 5. Sheikh, S. A., and Uzumeri, S. M., "Properties of Concrete
d = distance from extreme compression fiber to centroid of ten - Confined by Rectangular Ties," AICAP -CEB Symposium on Struc-
sion reinforcement
tural Concrete Under Seismic Actions (Rome, May 1979), Bulletin
e = eccentricity of load with respect to centroid of section d'Information No. 132, Comite Euro-International du Beton, Paris,
= concrete compressive stress 1979, pp. 53-60.
fc = concrete compressive cylinder strength (unconfined) 6. Park, R., and Priestley, M. J. N., "Code Provisions for Con fining
fcc' = peak compressive stress reached by confined concrete Steel in Potential Plastic Hinge Regions of Columns in Seismic Design,"
4 = yield strength of longitudinal reinforcement Bulletin, New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering
= yield strength of transverse hoop reinforcement (Wellington), V. 13, No. 1, Mar. 1980, pp. 60 -70.
h" = width of confined core concrete measured to outside of the 7. Priestley, M. J. N.; Park, R.; and Potangaroa, R. T.; "Duc tility
perimeter hoop of Spirally-Confined Reinforced Concrete Columns," Proceedings,
K = factor defined by Eq. (3) and (5) ASCE, V. 107, ST1, Jan. 1981, pp. 181 -202.
sh = center-to-center spacing between hoop reinforcement sets 8. "Draft New Zealand Standard Code of Practice for the Design
t = time after start of loading of Concrete Structures," (DZ3101:Part 1), Standards Association of
z = distance from section of maximum moment to point of con - New Zealand, Wellington, 1980.
traflexure 9. Scott, B. D.; Park, R.; and Priestley, M. J. N., "Stress-Strain
Z m = fact or d efi n ed b y Eq . (4 ) an d (6 ) Relationships for Confined Concrete: Rectangular Sections," Re-
= rate of strain search Report No. 80-6, Department of Civil Engineering, University
E, = concrete strain of Canterbury, Christchurch, Feb. 1980, 106 pp.
Ec. = ultimate concrete strain according to Baker or Corley 10. Uniform Building Code, International Conference of Building
E„,„ = maximum available compressive strain in the core concrete,
Officials, Whittier, 1979, 728 pp.
defined as the strain at first hoop fracture
11. Roy, H. E. H., and Sozen, Mete A., "Ductility of Concrete,"
= ratio of total volume of transverse reinforcement to volume Flexural Mechanics of Reinforced Concrete, SP-12, American Con-
of concrete core measured to outside of the perimeter hoop crete Institute/American Society of Civil Engineers, Detroit, 1965,
Q; = ratio of total volume of transverse reinforcement plus lon - pp. 213-224.
gitudinal reinforcement to volume of concrete core mea - 12. Kent, Dudley Charles, and Park, Robert, "Flexural Me mbers
sured to outside of the perimeter hoop with Confined Concrete," Proceedings, ASCE, V. 97, ST7, July
Q, = ratio of total area of longitudinal reinforcement to area of 1971, pp. 1969-1990.
concrete section
13. Watstein, D., "Effect of Straining Rate on the Compressive
Strength and Elastic Properties of Concrete," ACI J O U R N A L , Pro-
REFERENCES ceedings V. 49, No. 8, Apr. 1953, pp. 729 -744.
1. ACI Committee 318, "Building Code Requirements for Rein - 14. Baker, A. L. L., and Amarakone, A. M. N., "Inelastic Hy-
forced Concrete (ACI 318-77)," American Concrete Institute, De - perstatic Frames Analysis," Flexural Mechanics of Reinforced Con-
troit, 1977, 102 pp. crete, SP-12, American Concrete Institute/American Society of
2. Park, Robert, and Paulay, Thomas, Reinforced Concrete Struc- Civil Engineers, Detroit, 1965, pp. 85-142.
tures, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1975, 769 pp. 15. Corley, W. Gene, "Rotational Capacity of Reinforced Concrete
3. Kaar, P. H.; Fi orat o, A. E. ; Carp en t er, J . E.; an d Corle y, Beams," Proceedings, ASCE, V. 92, ST5, Oct. 1966, pp. 121146.
W. G ., "Li mi t i n g St rain s of Con cret e Con fi n ed b y Rect an gu lar

ACI JOURNAL I January-February 1982 27

Você também pode gostar