Explorer les Livres électroniques

Catégories

Explorer les Livres audio

Catégories

Explorer les Magazines

Catégories

Explorer les Documents

Catégories

0 évaluation0% ont trouvé ce document utile (0 vote)

131 vues10 pages© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

0 évaluation0% ont trouvé ce document utile (0 vote)

131 vues10 pagesAttribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 10

Y.-F. Li, S.-H. Chen, K.-C. Chang, and K.-Y. Liu

Abstract: In this paper, a total of 60 concrete cylinders 30 cm in diameter and 60 cm in length confined by steel jackets of different thicknesses and different types of lateral steel reinforcements are tested to obtain the stressstrain curves of the cylinders. A constitutive model is proposed to describe the behavior of concrete confined by steel reinforcement, steel jackets, and both steel reinforcement and steel jackets used to retrofit and strengthen reinforced concrete structures. The confined concrete stressstrain curve of the proposed model is divided into two regions: the curve in the first region is approximated using a second-order polynomial equation, and that in the second region using an nth-order power-law equation, where n is a function of the unconfined concrete strength and the lateral confining stress. The results of the experiments show that different types of lateral steel reinforcement contribute greatly to the compressive strength of concrete cylinders confined by the reinforcement. Comparing the stressstrain curves of the uniaxial test with that from the proposed model, we conclude that the proposed model for concrete confined by a steel jacket and lateral steel reinforcement can predict the experimental results very well. Key words: constitutive model, steel jacket, confined concrete. Rsum : Cet article dcrit les essais effectus sur 60 cylindres de bton dune dimension de 30 60 cm fretts par des enveloppes en acier de diffrentes paisseurs et par diffrents types de renforcement latral en acier afin dobtenir les courbes contrainte-dformation des cylindres de bton. Un modle constitutif est propos afin de dcrire le comportement du bton frett par un renforcement dacier, une enveloppe dacier, et un renforcement dacier ajout une enveloppe en acier utiliss pour post-adapter et renforcir des structures en bton arm. La courbe contrainte-dformation du bton frett du modle propos est divise en deux zones. La courbe contrainte-dformation de la premire zone est approxime en utilisant une quation polynomiale du deuxime ordre, alors que la courbe contrainte-dformation de la seconde zone est approxime en utilisant une quation de loi exponentielle du ne ordre, o n est une fonction de la rsistance du bton non frett et de la contrainte latrale de confinement. Les rsultats de ces expriences indiquent que divers types de renforcement latral en acier contribuent grandement la rsistance en compression des cylindres de bton frett par un renforcement latral en acier. En comparant les courbes contrainte-dformation du test uniaxial avec le modle propos, nous pouvons conclure que le modle propos pour le bton frett par une enveloppe en acier et un renforcement latral en acier peut trs bien prdire les rsultats exprimentaux. Mots cls : modle constitutif, enveloppe en acier, bton frett. [Traduit par la Rdaction] Li et al. 288

Introduction

Many strong earthquakes, such as the 1990 Luzon earthquake (Philippines), the 1994 Northridge earthquake (USA), the 1995 Kobe earthquake (Japan), and the 1999 Ji-Ji earthquake (Taiwan), have occurred in regions of high seismicity in the last decade. These earthquakes resulted in sgnificant

Received 5 November 2003. Revision accepted 16 September 2004. Published on the NRC Research Press Web site at http://cjce.nrc.ca on 26 March 2005. Y.-F. Li1 and S.-H. Chen. Department of Civil Engineering, National Taipei University of Technology, No. 1, Sec. 3, Chung-Hsiao E. Rd., Taipei, 106-08, Taiwan, ROC. K.-C. Chang and K.-Y. Liu. Department of Civil Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei, 106-17, Taiwan, ROC. Written discussion of this article is welcomed and will be received by the Editor until 30 June 2005.

1

loss of life and property and caused infrastructure damage. The columns are the most important structural members in a structure, and the strength and ductility of columns significantly influence the seismic capacity of a structure. Therefore, the seismic retrofit of a column has become a very important issue in countries subject to earthquake activity. In the 1990s, the steel jacketing technique was developed and experimentally verified to be effective in enhancing the seismic capacity of columns. Therefore, the steel jacketing technique has been widely applied in practical construction, particularly in Japan, Taiwan, and the state of California in the United States. The steel jacketing technique was originally developed for circular-sectioned bridge columns. Two semicircular steel plates larger than the diameter of the column are formed in the factory. The vertical seams between both half steel shells are welded in situ to become a continuous steel tube with a small annular gap between the bridge column and the steel plate. The gap is filled with pure cement or epoxy matrix to transfer the stress in the bridge column to the steel plates (Priestley et al. 1996). Therefore, concrete confined by a

2005 NRC Canada

doi: 10.1139/L04-093

280

steel jacket can be seen as that confined by continuous lateral steel reinforcement. Steel jacketing has proven to be effective because none of the bridges retrofitted with a steel jacket suffered damage during the 1994 Northridge earthquake (CALTRANS 1994). In Taiwan, the steel jacketing technique has also become a very popular seismic retrofit technique after the 1999 Ji-Ji earthquake. The steel jacket mounted around the column can increase the compressive strength, shear strength, and ductility of the column. By doing so, the constitutive behavior of the concrete is changed due to the increase in the confinement stress of the concrete (Moehle 1992; Priestley and Seible 1991; Priestley et al. 1996). Therefore, it is necessary to develop a suitable constitutive model for concrete confined by a steel jacket in the structural analysis and also the retrofit design. In this paper, a constitutive model of concrete confined by both steel reinforcement and a steel jacket in the use of retrofitting and strengthening reinforced concrete structures is proposed, and test results are also recorded from 60 concrete cylinders, 30 cm in diameter and 60 cm in length, confined by steel jackets of different thicknesses and different types of lateral steel reinforcement. The stressstrain curves of the test results are compared with that of the proposed constitutive model to show that the proposed model is effective.

The constitutive model for concrete plays an important role in the analysis and design of concrete structures. The frequently cited models to predict the peak stress or the stressstrain curve of confined concrete are introduced in this section. Richart et al. (1928) were the first to study the nominal strength of concrete confined by either hydrostatic pressure or spiral reinforcement. The peak stress formula proposed by Richart et al. was used for a long time and was also cited in many textbooks. Kent and Park (1971) proposed a constitutive model for confined concrete using a parabolic stress strain curve for the ascending branch and a linear stress strain curve for the descending branch. Muguruma et al. (1978) later proposed a model of two second-order parabolic stressstrain curves. Park et al. (1982) modified the Kent and Park stressstrain model by adding the affect factor of the unconfined concrete strength, the volume ratio, and the yield strength of lateral steel reinforcement. Mander et al. (1988a, 1988b) proposed a parabolic functional expression to represent the stressstrain behavior of concrete confined by lateral (hoop) reinforcement. This model was widely used in the last decade to calculate the required thickness of steel plate for the retrofit design of columns (Chai et al. 1991). Saatcioglu and Razvi (1992) proposed a stressstrain curve, which was formulated by a parabolic ascending branch followed by a linear descending branch for confined concrete with circular and rectangular hoop types. According to their experimental data, Hoshikuma et al. (1997) proposed a general form of an nth-order polynomial equation for the ascending branch of the stressstrain curve. The aforementioned stressstrain models were developed for concrete confined by lateral steel reinforcements. The following models are developed for concrete confined by carbon fiber reinforced plastics (CFRP) or glass fiber reinforced plastics (GFRP).

Mirmiran and Shahawy (1997), based on test results from 30 concrete cylinders and compared with other confined concrete models, proposed an equation to predict the peak stress of concrete confined by GFRP. Hosotani et al. (1998) and Hosotani and Kawashima (1999) proposed a series of stress strain models for concrete confined by CFRP and by both steel reinforcement and CFRP together. They used the regression analysis of the experimental results and modified the model proposed by Hoshikuma et al. (1997) to extend the application to different confinement materials by adjusting the coefficients. Daudey and Filiatrault (2000) introduced the seismic evaluation and retrofit of reinforced concrete (RC) bridge piers using steel jackets. Karabinis and Rousakis (2001) used the low volume ratio of CFRP to replace the steel reinforcement in confining concrete cylinders and found that the strength and ductility of confined concrete increased. Li et al. (2003), based on the results of tests on 108 concrete cylinders confined by CFRP material, proposed a theoretically based constitutive model for concrete confined by CFRP. The peak strength of this constitutive model is derived from the MohrColumb failure envelope theory and can be explicitly expressed as a function of the unconfined concrete strength, the lateral confining stress, and the angle of internal friction of concrete. The strain at the peak strength in this model is obtained from the regression analysis of the experimental results. A second-order polynomial equation is used to present the stressstrain curve of the model. Li and Fang (2004) then modified their model and extended the application of this model to concrete confined by both steel reinforcement and CFRP. Thirty-six concrete cylinders 30 cm in diameter and 60 cm in length were tested to verify the effectiveness of the proposed model. A review of earlier literature indicates that the existing constitutive models for confined concrete were developed for lateral steel reinforcement and fiber reinforced plastics; they might not be suitable for concrete confined by a steel jacket. Only a few researchers have explored the constitutive model for concrete confined by a steel jacket. If we look into the mechanism of concrete confined by a steel jacket, we see that the concrete inside the steel jacket expands outward and extrudes the steel jacket; in other words, the steel jacket applies confining stress to the concrete under the uniaxial load (Nataraja et al. 1999). The expansion of the steel jacket is therefore caused by the failure of the concrete and then results in the redistribution of the axial stress to the steel jacket. The strength and ductility of concrete will increase due to this triaxial state of stress. Walter et al. (2001) proposed a stressstrain behavior of epoxy polymer concrete confined by a steel tube under uniaxial loading. The research results show that epoxy polymer concrete with low Youngs modulus and low strength behaves like a fluid when a uniaxial load is applied. The stressstrain behavior of the steel tube infilled with low Youngs modulus and low-strength epoxy polymer concrete is different from that infilled with normalstrength concrete or high-strength epoxy polymer concrete.

As discussed previously, the stressstrain curve of concrete confined by steel reinforcement and a steel jacket depends extensively on the lateral confining stress and the core

2005 NRC Canada

Li et al.

281 Fig. 1. Illustration of the stressstrain curve of concrete confined by a steel jacket under uniaxial loading and notations of the proposed model.

concrete strength. It is not easy to use a single equation to represent the entire stressstrain curve of concrete confined by a steel jacket. Therefore, we divide the stressstrain curve into two regions: region I represents the steep ascending branch of the stressstrain curve, and region II the less steep ascending or descending branch of the stressstrain curve. Figure 1 illustrates the stressstrain curve of concrete confined by a steel jacket under uniaxial loading. In the stressstrain coordinate system, the position ( c1 , fc1 ) is the intersection point of regions I and II, and it is evident that the intersection point of the stressstrain curve plays an important role when modeling the curve in regions I and II. In the next section, the axial stress and strain at the intersection point and the stressstrain curves in regions I and II are discussed in detail.

It is known that the increase in strength of confined concrete is a result of the combination of lateral pressure and axial compression, which put the concrete in a triaxial stress state. The lateral pressure is provided by lateral steel reinforcement and a steel jacket. In general, we assume that the strength of confined concrete is related to the contribution of the confinement pressure. Therefore, the strength of confined concrete can be expressed as the sum of the strength of unconfined concrete and the strength increase due to the confining stress: [1] fc1 = fco + f l a where fc1 is the compressive strength of confined concrete at the intersection point, fco is the compressive strength of unconfined concrete, f l is the effective lateral confining stress, and the constitutive parameter a is the coefficient of the power-law equation which can be obtained from experimental data using regression analysis. If the effective lateral confining strength is provided by both lateral steel reinforcement and a steel jacket, eq. [1] can be rewritten as the following equation to express the strength at the intersection point: [2] fc1 = fco + ( fl1 + fl2) a where fl1 is the effective lateral confining strength provided by the lateral steel reinforcement, and fl2 is the effective lat eral confining strength provided by the steel jacket. In eq. [2], fl1 and fl2 can be represented as follows: [3] [4] fl1 = kes fyh / 2 fl2 = 2kctEs s /D [7]

Also in eq. [3], s is the ratio of the volume of the lateral confining steel reinforcement to the volume of the confined concrete core, and fyh is the yield strength of the transverse reinforcement. In eq. [4], kc is the coefficient of the sectional shape (Priestley et al. 1996), t is the thickness of the steel jacket, Es is the elastic modulus of the steel jacket, s is the yield strain of the steel jacket, and D is the diameter of the cylinder. As the steel jacket reaches its yield strain, the steel reinforcement also reaches yielding strain. Therefore, eqs. [3] and [4] are reasonable equations to express the confining stress of the concrete. In eqs. [5] and [6], Ae is the area of the effectively confined core concrete, Acc is the area of the core of the column section within center lines of the perimeter spiral, s is the clear spacing between the spiral or hoop bars, ds is the diameter of the spiral, and cc is the ratio of the area of the axial steel to the area of the core of the section.

When axial stress reaches the compressive strength fc1 , the corresponding strain of the confined concrete is c1 , and the strain of the intersection point depends on the lateral confining stress, which is provided by lateral steel reinforcement and the steel jacket. The form of eq. [7] was suggested by previous researchers (Balmer 1949; Mander et al. 1998b; Li et al. 2003a), who found that it could produce good predictions of experimental values, shown as follows: (f +f ) c1 = co 1 + b l1 l 2 fco

In eq. [3], ke is the confinement effectiveness coefficient and depends on the type of lateral steel reinforcement. Equations [5] and [6] show the formulas for the coefficient ke with different kinds of circular hoop and spiral steel reinforcement, respectively: [5] [6] ke = ke = Ae [1 (s/2ds)]2 = Acc 1 cc 1 (s/2ds) 1 cc (for a circular hoop)

where co is the strain of the unconfined concrete, usually set as co = 0.002; and the parameter b can be obtained from experimental data.

Based on previous studies (Muguruma et al. 1978; Li et al. 2003), the ascending branch of most constitutive models of confined concrete is usually formulated by a second-order

2005 NRC Canada

282

parabolic equation. In region I, where the strain c falls between 0 and c1 , the stress fc and strain c relationship of the confined concrete can be expressed as follows: [8]

2 fc = A c + B c + C

0 c c1

Three boundary conditions are used to determine the coefficients A, B, and C in eq. [8]. The three boundary conditions are the initial point, the stress continuity, and the firstorder differential continuity conditions at the intersection point, shown as follows: [9] [10] [11] fc = 0 fc = fc1 at c = 0 at c = c1 at c = c1

d fc / d = fc1 (n / c1 )

where n is the constitutive parameter of the power-law equation, shown in eq. [13]. Substituting the three boundary conditions into eq. [8], the three coefficients can be determined. Equation [8] can be rewritten as follows: [12] fc = fc1 [(n 1)( c / c1 ) 2 + (2 n)( c / c1 ) ] where 0 c c1

where fc1 is the stress of the intersection point, and c1 is its corresponding strain; these two terms can be calculated from eqs. [2] and [7], respectively.

As seen in Fig. 1, the stressstrain curve in region II is an ascending or descending curve with smaller slope than that of the curve in region I, and it is due to the difference in the unconfined concrete strength. We use an nth-order polynomial equation to model the stressstrain relationship in region II as follows: n c1 [13] c c1 fc = fc1 1 + c c1 where n is a function of the unconfined concrete strength and lateral confining stress.

lateral reinforcement, spiral steel reinforcement, circular (hoop) steel reinforcement, and spiral steel wire cable. It should be noted that the lap length of the circular steel reinforcement is 30 cm. Each group also has 2 and 5 mm thick steel jackets. For group A, three concrete cylinders for each design parameter are used for the uniaxial compression test. Since the test results of the three cylinders for each design parameter in group A showed little variation, we decided to use two concrete cylinders for each parameter in group B. The rules used to name the 60 concrete cylinders are as follows. The first letter indicates the group name, where A and B denote unconfined concrete strengths of 7.06 and 19.91 MPa, respectively. The second letter indicates the type of lateral steel reinforcement, where N denotes no lateral steel reinforcement, S denotes spiral steel reinforcement, H denotes circular (hoop) steel reinforcement, and W denotes spiral steel wire cable. The first number gives the thickness in millimetres of the steel jacket applied to the concrete cylinder, and the second number gives the serial number of the concrete cylinder for each design parameter. For example, cylinder B-S-2-2 indicates the following: the concrete strength is 19.91 MPa (group B), the concrete cylinder is confined by spiral steel reinforcement and 2 mm thick steel jacket, and the serial number of the concrete cylinder is 2. In this paper, the size of the lateral steel reinforcement used in the concrete cylinders is No. 3, and its yield strength is 274.5 MPa (2800 kgf/cm2). The material properties of the steel jacket and steel wire cable are listed in Tables 2 and 3, respectively. The tensile stressstrain relationships of steel wire cables are shown in Fig. 2.

To prevent the steel jacket from contacting the piston of the universal testing machine, steel jacket tubes 30 cm in diameter and 56 cm in length were used. Two plastic pipes 30 cm in diameter and 2 cm in length were placed on both ends of the steel jacket. After grouting the concrete, the two plastic pipes were removed from the cylinder. Therefore, the stressstrain behavior of confined concrete will not be influenced by the steel jacket in the uniaxial direction. To determine the compressive strength of plain concrete for groups A and B, three concrete cylinders 10 cm in diameter and 20 cm in length were cast with the same concrete used to pour the concrete cylinders (30 cm in diameter and 60 cm in length) for each group. Premixed concrete was used in the experiment. Three types of lateral reinforcements were prepared and tied on four longitudinal rebars with 10 cm spacing. Two circular steel blocks 29 cm in diameter and 5 cm in thickness were also placed symmetrically on the bottom and top of the concrete cylinder. Because of these devices, the steel jacket will not come into contact with the piston of the universal testing machine when concrete crushes and compresses the steel jacket tube. Therefore, the test results will more truthfully represent the stressstrain behavior of concrete confined by the steel jacket only.

Experimental program

For RC buildings and bridges in Taiwan that need to be seismically retrofitted using steel jackets, the compressive concrete strength is between 7.85 MPa (80 kgf/cm2) and 20.6 MPa (210 kgf/cm2), which is obtained from core and nondestructive inspection of the existing aged RC buildings and bridges. In this paper, 60 concrete cylinders were made with two different strengths. The target concrete compression strengths of 7.85 MPa (80 kgf/cm2) and 20.6 MPa (210 kgf/cm2) at 28 d were used for groups A and B, respectively. Ready-mixed concrete was used, and the average strengths of concrete cylinders at 28 d are 7.06 MPa (72 kgf/cm2) for group A and 19.91 MPa (203 kgf/cm2) for group B. Table 1 shows the design parameters of the 60 concrete cylinders, such as the strength of unconfined concrete, the type of lateral reinforcement, and the thickness of the steel jacket. Each group contains concrete cylinders with no

The test program was undertaken using a displacementcontrolled 500 t universal testing machine. The test equipment includes a load cell, a data logger with an analog to

2005 NRC Canada

Li et al. Table 1. Design parameters of concrete cylinders. Parameter Strength of unconfined concrete (MPa) Type of lateral reinforcement Thickness of steel jacket (mm) No. of cylinders Group A 7.06 Nil (N), circular (H), spiral (S), wire (W) 0, 2, 5 3 Group B

283

Table 2. Material specifications and properties of steel jacket. Yield strength (MPa) Yield strain (%) 255.06 0.13

Table 3. Material properties of steel wire cable. Diameter (mm) Strand number Wire number per strand Gross area (mm2) Youngs modulus (MPa) Ultimate force (kN) Ultimate stress (MPa) Ultimate strain (%) 6 6 19 31.17 38 259 24.53 784.8 3.0 Fig. 3. The stressstrain curves of the concrete confined by different lateral steel reinforcements of group A specimens.

digital (A/D) converter, and a personal computer. During the test, each specimen was placed in the center of the universal machine. To make sure that the uniaxial force was applied uniformly on the top and bottom surfaces of the concrete cylinder, both surfaces were paved with gypsum horizontally. All the concrete cylinders were tested with a velocity of 0.03 mm/s.

Plain concrete cylinders Plain concrete cylinders with concrete strengths of 7.06 and 19.91 MPa experience shear failure, which is determined by the conical shape of its failure mode. During the uniaxial loading test, cracks on the surface of each cylinder occurred quickly when the cylinder reached 70%80% of its peak stress, and the increase in axial load accompanied the increase in the width and number of cracks. Cover concrete starts to spall when the ultimate load is reached. Figures 3 and 4 are the stressstrain curves of the concrete confined by different lateral steel reinforcements of group A and group B specimens, respectively. Concrete cylinders confined by lateral reinforcement Concrete specimens confined by spiral steel reinforcement, circular (hoop) steel reinforcement, or steel wire cable also fail by shearing. As the confined concrete reaches its peak stress, cover concrete starts to crack and peel off, but the core concrete does not crush yet, and the longitudinal rebar starts to buckle. The stressstrain curves of the concrete confined by different lateral steel reinforcements and 2 mm steel jackets are illustrated in Fig. 5 for group A and in Fig. 6 for group B.

2005 NRC Canada

Fig. 4. The stressstrain curves of the concrete confined by different lateral steel reinforcements of group B specimens.

284

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 32, 2005 Fig. 5. The stressstrain curves of the concrete confined by different lateral steel reinforcements and 2 mm steel jackets of group A specimens.

When a concrete cylinder is confined by steel reinforcement, its ultimate compressive strength is higher than that without steel reinforcement, and the compressive stressstrain curve is highly dependent on the types of steel reinforcement. Based on the test results, we know that concrete confined by spiral steel reinforcement exhibits higher compressive strength than that confined by circular (hoop) steel reinforcement and spiral steel wire cable under the same axial strain condition. This is due to the fact that the spiral steel reinforcement provides larger confining stress than that of the circular (hoop) steel reinforcement; the confining stress can be derived from eqs. [5] and [6]. When the concrete cylinder reaches its ultimate stress, we assume that the strains of the steel reinforcements and steel wire cables are the same as the ultimate strain of the concrete, i.e., 0.3%. Because the spacing of the steel reinforcement and steel wire cable inside the concrete cylinder is 10 cm, the confining force per 10 cm provided by No. 3 steel reinforcement is 19 561 kN (1996 kgf). The confining force provided by 6 mm steel wire cable is only 5500 kN (561 kgf). Concrete cylinders confined by both lateral reinforcement and steel jackets For the 7.06 MPa concrete strength concrete cylinders (group A) confined by steel jackets, the buckling occurred on the surface of the steel jacket. The buckling failure commonly occurs sporadically on the steel jacket tubes because the coarse aggregate of the concrete cannot provide enough stiffness and strength. During the uniaxial loading of group B concrete cylinders confined by steel jackets, cracking sounds of the concrete were audible due to bond failure of the aggregatecement interface. The coarse aggregates then moved outward to the steel jacket tube. Lastly, the middle of the steel jacket buckled as a result of the expansion of the relatively high modulus of concrete strength compared with the strength of group A. Stressstain curves of concrete confined by 2 and 5 mm steel jackets are shown in Fig. 5 for group A and in Fig. 6 for group B. The stressstrain curves of group A show strainhardening phenomena after the intersection point, but those of group B show strain-softening phenomena after the intersection point. The main reason for the strain-hardening or strainsoftening phenomena is the strength of unconfined concrete. These phenomena are discussed in detail as follows. The void ratio inside the lower strength concrete is higher than that of the higher strength concrete. The mechanisms of the low-strength concrete confined by a steel jacket under uniaxial loading are similar to those of unsaturated soil in a cylindrical tube under consolidation. As the void ratio of the concrete decreases gradually under the uniaxial loading test, the aggregates of the concrete are packed more closely and can offer greater resistance to further reductions in volume. When the consolidation process has finished under the uniaxial loading test, concrete starts to extrude the steel jacket, and in the meantime the jacket starts to apply a passive confining stress to the concrete. As the uniaxial loading is applied continuously, the increase of the stress of the concrete is less than the increase of the axial strain of the concrete in terms of ratio, i.e., the stiffness of the concrete is degraded with respect to the axial strain. This is the strain hardening.

Fig. 6. The stressstrain curves of the concrete confined by different lateral steel reinforcements and 2 mm steel jackets of group B specimens.

For higher strength concrete confined by a steel jacket under a uniaxial loading test, the strength of the concrete increases and reaches its ultimate strength immediately due to its low void ratio. The concrete cylinder exhibits very little strain-hardening behavior and then exhibits brittle failure inside the steel jacket. As the uniaxial loading is applied continuously, the strength of the concrete decreases as the axial strain increases. This is the strain softening. For groups A and B concrete cylinders confined by steel reinforcement and steel jackets, the buckling also occurs on the surface of the steel jacket. Stressstain curves of concrete confined by different steel reinforcements and 2 and 5 mm steel jackets are shown in Fig. 5 for group A and in Fig. 6 for group B. The stressstrain curves of group A show strain hardening after the intersection point, but those of group B show strain softening after the intersection point. The reasons for the strain hardening and strain softening were discussed earlier. It should be noted that the strength of concrete confined by both a steel jacket and steel reinforcement is higher than that of concrete confined by a steel jacket only. The lateral steel reinforcement plays an important role in increasing the

2005 NRC Canada

Li et al.

285 Fig. 7. Comparison of the proposed and experimental stresses at the intersection point of the two regions of the stressstrain curve. R2, regression coefficient.

strength of confined concrete. Therefore, we should consider the contribution of the lateral steel reinforcement when calculating the strength of the confined concrete in the constitutive model, as shown in eq. [2].

Constitutive modeling

In this paper, we use the stressstrain curves of concrete cylinders under uniaxial loading to determine the following three constitutive parameters. By using the stress and strain values of the intersection points and the regression analysis, we can determine that the parameter a from eq. [2] is 1.186 and the parameter b from eq. [7] is 16.9. The R2 value is 0.985 for parameter a and 0.979 for parameter b. The comparisons of the proposed and experimental stresses and strains at the intersection point are shown in Figs. 7 and 8, respectively. As discussed earlier in the paper, the constitutive parameter n in eq. [13] depends on the strengths of the unconfined concrete and the confining stress. The larger the unconfined concrete strength, the smaller the n value, and the larger the confining stress, the larger the n value. In this paper, we use the stressstrain curves of the concrete cylinders to determine the constitutive parameter n for two different concrete strengths, and the expressions are shown as follows: [14] [15] n = 0.1 + 0.075( fl / fco ) n = 0.16( fl / fco ) 0.135 for group A for group B

Fig. 8. Comparison of the proposed and experimental strains at the intersion point of the two regions of the stressstrain curve.

It should be noted that if test results with more unconfined concrete strengths and lateral confining stresses are available, the constitutive parameter n can be fine-tuned.

As seen from the stressstrain curves of Figs. 36, the concrete cylinders of group A exhibit strain-hardening phenomena after the intersection point. The increase in confining stress will magnify the strain-hardening slope and the stress value of the intersection point. The stressstrain curve of these phenomena can be modeled by eqs. [2], [13], and [14]. When we increase the confining stress, the concrete cylinders of group B will magnify the stress value of the intersection point and then exhibit strain softening after the intersection point. The stressstrain curve of these phenomena can be modeled by eqs. [2], [13], and [15]. Figure 9 is the comparison between the stressstrain curves of the experiment and that of the proposed model for group A concrete cylinders confined by a 2 mm steel jacket. The stressstrain curve of the proposed model fits the experimental stressstrain curves well. Figures 1012 are the comparisons between the stressstrain curves of the experiment and those of the proposed model for group A concrete cylinders confined by a 2 mm steel jacket plus one of the following reinforcements: spiral steel reinforcement, circular (hoop) reinforcement, or steel wire cable. The stressstrain curves of the proposed model fit the experimental stress strain curves very well. Similarly, Fig. 13 is a comparison between the stressstrain curves of the experiment and that of the proposed model for

group B concrete cylinders confined by a 5 mm steel jacket. Figures 1416 show the comparisons between the stressstrain curves of the experiment and that of the proposed model for group B concrete cylinders confined by a 5 mm steel jacket plus one of the following reinforcements: spiral steel reinforcement, circular (hoop) reinforcement, or steel wire cable. Figures 1316 show that the stressstrain relationships of the proposed model agree well with the experimental stressstrain relationships.

Conclusions

The following conclusions are drawn based on this study: (1) From the uniaxial loading test results, using a steel jacket to confine concrete is an efficient method to improve the strength and ductility of concrete. (2) When concrete cylinders are confined by different types of steel reinforcement, the compressive strength is highly dependent on the type of steel reinforcement. Under the same spacing condition, the performance of the reinforcements are ranked as follows: spiral steel re 2005 NRC Canada

286 Fig. 9. Comparison between the stressstrain curves of the experiment and that of the proposed model for group A concrete cylinders confined by a 2 mm steel jacket.

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 32, 2005 Fig. 12. Comparison between the stressstrain curves of the experiment and that of the proposed model for group A concrete cylinders confined by steel wire cable and a 2 mm steel jacket.

Fig. 10. Comparison between the stressstrain curves of the experiment and that of the proposed model for group A concrete cylinders confined by spiral steel reinforcement and a 2 mm steel jacket.

Fig. 13. Comparison between the stressstrain curves of the experiment and that of the proposed model for group B concrete cylinders confined by a 5 mm steel jacket.

Fig. 11. Comparison between the stressstrain curves of the experiment and that of the proposed model for group A concrete cylinders confined by circular (hoop) steel reinforcement and a 2 mm steel jacket.

Fig. 14. Comparison between the stressstrain curves of the experiment and that of the proposed model for group B concrete cylinders confined by spiral steel reinforcement and a 5 mm steel jacket.

Li et al. Fig. 15. Comparison between the stressstrain curves of the experiment and that of the proposed model for group B concrete cylinders confined by circular (hoop) steel reinforcement and a 5 mm steel jacket.

287

Acknowledgements

This work has been funded by the National Center of Research for Earthquake Engineering, and the authors would like to thank the structural laboratory of National Taiwan University for the use of the 500 t universal testing machine.

References

Balmer, G.G. 1949. Shearing strength of concrete under high triaxial stress-computation of Mohrs envelope as a curve. Structural Research Laboratory Report SP-23, US Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, Colo. CALTRANS. 1994. The Northridge earthquakepost-earthquake investigation report. Division of Structures, California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS), Sacramento, Calif. Chai, Y.-H., Priestley, M.J.N., and Seible, F. 1991. Flexural retrofit of circular reinforced concrete bridge columns by steel jacketing experimental study. Report SSRP 91-06, Department of Applied Mechanics and Engineering Science, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, Calif. Daudey, X., and Filiatrault, A. 2000. Seismic evaluation and retrofit with steel jackets of reinforced concrete bridge piers detailed with lap-splices. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 27: 116. Hoshikuma, J., Kawashima, K., Nagaya, K., and Taylor, A.W. 1997. Stressstrain model for confined concrete in bridge piers. ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 123: 624633. Hosotani, M., and Kawashima, K. 1999. A stressstrain model for concrete cylinders confined by both carbon fiber sheets and hoop reinforcement. Civil Engineering, JSCE, 43: 2542. [In Japanese.] Hosotani, M., Kawashima, K., and Hoshikuma, J. 1998. A stress strain model for concrete cylinders confined by carbon fiber sheets. Civil Engineering, JSCE, 39: 3752. [In Japanese.] Karabinis, A.I., and Rousakis, T.C. 2001. Carbon F.R.P. confined concrete elements under axial load. In FRP Composites in Civil Engineering: Proceedings of the International Conference, Hong Kong, 1215 December 2001. Edited by J.-G. Teng. Elsevier Science Ltd., Essex, U.K. Vol. I, pp. 309316. Kent, D.C., and Park, R. 1971. Flexural members with confined concrete. ASCE Journal of the Structural Division, 97: 1969 1990. Li, Y.-F., and Fang, T.-S. 2004. A constitutive model for concrete confined by steel reinforcement and carbon fiber reinforced plastic sheet. Structural Engineering and Mechanics, 18: 2140. Li, Y.-F., Lin, C.-T., and Sung, Y.-Y. 2003. A constitutive model for concrete confined with carbon fiber reinforced plastics. Mechanics of Materials, 35: 603619. Mander, J.B., Priestley, M.J.N., and Park, P. 1988a. Observed stressstrain behavior of confined concrete. ASCE Journal of the Structural Division, 114: 18271849. Mander, J.B., Priestley, M.J.N., and Park, R. 1988b. Theoretical stressstrain model for confined concrete. ASCE Journal of the Structural Division, 114: 18041826. Mirmiran, A., and Shahawy, M. 1997. Behavior of concrete columns confined by fiber composites. ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 123: 583590. Moehle, J.P. 1992. Displacement-base design of RC structures subjected to earthquakes. Earthquake Spectra, 8: 403428. Muguruma, H.S., Watanabe, S., and Tanaka, S. 1978. A stress strain model of confined concrete. JCA Proceedings of Cement and Concrete, 34: 429432. Nataraja, M.C., Dhang, N.A., and Gupta, P. 1999. Stressstrain curves for steel-fiber reinforced concrete under compression.

2005 NRC Canada

Fig. 16. Comparison between the stressstrain curves of the experiment and that of the proposed model for group B concrete cylinders confined by steel wire and a 5 mm steel jacket.

(3) (4)

(5)

(6)

inforcement, circular (hoop) steel reinforcement, and then 6 mm steel wire cable. An increase in the thickness of the steel jacket, i.e., increase the lateral confining stress, can increase the stress of the confined concrete. This paper provides a systematic method to obtain the constitutive parameters of concrete confined by a steel jacket. If more test results of unconfined concrete strengths and lateral confining stresses are available, the constitutive parameters a, b, and n can be fine-tuned. The mechanism of the stressstrain relationship of concrete confined by a steel jacket depends on the strength of the unconfined concrete. The stressstrain curves of lower strength concrete show the strain hardening after the intersection point, but the stressstrain curves of higher strength concrete show the strain-softening after the intersection point. The proposed model can fit the stressstrain curves of concrete cylinders confined by steel reinforcement, by a steel jacket, and by both steel reinforcement and a steel jacket very well.

288 ASCE Journal of Cement and Concrete Composites, 20: 383 390. Park, R., Priestley, M.J.N., and Gill, W.D. 1982. Ductility of squareconfined concrete columns. ASCE Journal of the Structural Division, 108: 929950. Priestley, M.J.N., and Seible, F. 1991. Seismic assessment and retrofit of bridges. Report SSRP-93/06, Department of Applied Mechanics and Engineering Science, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, Calif. Priestley, M.J.N., Seible, F., and Calvi, G.M. 1996. Seismic design and retrofit of bridges. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York. Richart, F.E., Brandtzaeg, A., and Brown, R.L. 1928. A study of the failure of concrete under combined compressive stresses. Illinois University, Engineering Experimental Station, Bulletin 185. Saatcioglu, M., and Razvi, S.R. 1992. Strength and ductility of confined concrete. ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 118(6): 15901607. b ds D Es fc fco fc1 f l fl1 fl2 fyh kc ke n s t c co c1 s cc s

Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 32, 2005 constitutive parameter of power-law equation diameter of spiral diameter of circular bridge column section elastic modulus of steel reinforcement compressive strength of confined concrete compressive strength of unconfined concrete compressive strength of unconfined concrete at intersection point effective lateral confining stress effective lateral confining strength due to stirrup effective lateral confining strength due to CFRP yield strength of transverse reinforcement coefficient of section shape confinement effectiveness coefficient constitutive parameter of power-law equation clear spacing between spiral or hoop bars thickness of CFRP per layer axial strain of confined concrete (compressive side is positive) strain at compressive strength of unconfined concrete fco strain at compressive strength of confined concrete fc1 yielding strain of steel jacket ratio of area of axial steel to area of core of section ratio of volume of transverse confining steel to volume of confined concrete core

List of symbols

a constitutive parameter of power-law equation A, B, C coefficients in the stressstrain relationship Acc core area of bridge section within center lines of perimeter spiral Ae effective area of bridge column section