Construction and Building Materials 17 (2003) 339–351

Seismic performance of repaired hollow-bridge piers

Chin-Tung Chenga,*, Jyh-Csyang Yanga, Yeong-Kae Yehb, Shen-En Chenc
a
Department of Construction Engineering, National Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology, 1 University Road, Yenchao,
Kaohsiung 824, Taiwan, ROC
b
National Center on Research of Earthquake Engineering, 200, Section 3, Thin-high Road, Taipei 106, Taiwan, ROC
c
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294-4440, USA

Received 3 January 2002; received in revised form 2 October 2002; accepted 25 October 2002

Abstract

To develop an effective repair technique for rapid bridge restoration after an earthquake, four hollow bridge columns were
cyclically loaded to failure, repaired and retested. The repair process includes using dog-bone shape bars to replace the fractured
longitudinal bars in plastic hinges and using FRP (Fiber Reinforced Plastic) wraps to enhance the deformation capacity of
columns. The repair aims to restore seismic capacity in terms of strength and ductility. Test results indicate that the fractured
longitudinal bars can be completely repaired and the deformation capacities of the columns were enhanced by FRP wraps.
However, due to concrete deterioration and the buckling of the longitudinal bars in the inner layer of the hollow sections, the test
results also indicate the repaired column strengths are less than anticipated.
䊚 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Hollow-columns; Repair; FRP; Seismic performance; Flexure; Shear; Lap splice

1. Introduction the concept developed in this research, and the results

In order to cross the boundary of mountains in Taiwan,
high elevation bridges with large-size columns are con-
structed to accommodate the high moment demand in
plastic hinges. In practice, hollow-bridge columns may
be used to reduce their self-weights and the high bearing
demand on pile foundations. Literatures on hollow-
columns are rare with some notable works from Tylor
and Breen w1x and Mander w2x. Unlike solid sections
reinforced with longitudinal bars along the perimeter,
hollow sections are reinforced with two layers of lon-
gitudinal bars along column walls to achieve desired
ductility. Since 1997, several researchers in Taiwan
joined forces to investigate the seismic flexural and
shear capacities of these hollow-bridge piers, develop
retrofit techniques, and establish numerical models.
Series of full-size hollow-bridge piers were subsequently
constructed and tested within a 3-year period. After the
tests, the damaged columns were repaired according to
*Corresponding author. Tel.: q886-7-6011000x2118; fax: q886-
7-6011017.
E-mail address: ctcheng@ccms.nkfust.edu.tw (C.-T. Cheng).
are reported herein.
Bridge piers designed in accordance with old design
codes may suffer severe damage during seismic attacks.
Even though safety of lives is ensured, damage incurred
may terminate the bridge function after earthquake. This
was evident in the 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake. The com-
monly seen deficiency of damaged bridge columns may
be characterized as insufficient shear strength or ductil-
ity, inadequate anchorage or bonding, and insufficient
flexural strength or ductility. To mitigate column damage
for future earthquake, many retrofit techniques have
been proposed such as steel jacketing, concrete jacket-
ing, and composite jacketing. These jackets are primarily
used to provide confinement for columns. Currently,
fiber reinforced plastics (FRP) are common for retro-
fitting structures as proposed by many researchers such
as Seible et al. w3x and Saadamanesh et al. w4x. However,
it is uncertain as to how these FRP jackets may perform
in the repair of hollow sections after an earthquake. It
is also unclear how the inner layer reinforcement may
affect the performance of repair. The objective of this
research is to propose an effective repair technique for
hollow bridge columns so that bridge function can be

0950-0618/03/$ - see front matter 䊚 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 5 0 - 0 6 1 8 Ž 0 2 . 0 0 1 1 9 - 8
340 C.-T. Cheng et al. / Construction and Building Materials 17 (2003) 339–351
quickly restored after an earthquake. The repair aims to
restore seismic capacity of bridge columns in terms of
strength and ductility without altering its strong beam-
weak column design principle.
2. Repair technique
As mentioned above, columns may fail in several
modes such as flexural, shear, or bond failures. For
columns failing in flexural mode, the damages may be
superficial like cracking or spalling of concrete cover,
or they may be severe such as reinforcement buckling
or even fracturing. Currently, there is no cure for bar
fracture except techniques proposed by Dutta et al. w5x
and Leman et al. w6x. In Dutta’s research, one high
strength bar (f ys1030 MPa) was used to replace two
fractured ordinary G60 reinforcements by welding these
bars on the same steel plate. In Leman’s research, the
cross-section in a plastic hinge was enlarged to encase
the existing column, and new longitudinal bars were
planted into the foundation.
In this research, dog-bone shape bars (f ys410 MPa)
are proposed to replace each fractured bar in order to
restore the flexural strength of the columns. The cross-
section of the dog-bone bar is designed in a way that
its tensile strength is less than that of the original
reinforcement to avoid damage from penetration into
the foundation. The central length of the dog-bone bars
can be designed proportional to the plastic length sug-
gested by Priestley et al. w7x as Lps0.008Lq4400´ydb,
where Lpsplastic-hinge length, Ls shear span, ´ys
yield strain of longitudinal bars, and dbslongitudinal
bar diameter. In Cheng and Mander’s w8x study, the
central length of the dog-bone bar can be tuned based
on seismic demand in order to get appropriate low cycle
fatigue life for the columns. They also showed that the
longer the central length of the dog-bone bar, the longer
the fatigue life will be, which of course, also means
higher repair costs.
After the repair of longitudinal reinforcements, FRP
is then wrapped around the columns to enhance the
deformation capacity. Seible et al. w3x recommended
using the thickness, t f (cm), of the FRP wraps to achieve
the required flexural ductility, which can be calculated
as:
DŽ´cuy0.004.f9cc
tfs0.09
ffju´ju
Bf EL
where ´cusfu=Cu and mDs1q3C y1F
u p
D fy G L
Lp E
0.5 F and Dsthe column dimension in the loading
LG
direction (cm), f9cc the confined compressive strength
of concrete (MPa), fsthe reduction factor for flexure
(taken as 0.9), f jusultimate strength of FRP (MPa),
´cusultimate compressive strain of concrete (%), ´jus
deformation capacity of FRP (%), Cusneutral depth
under ultimate curvature (cm), fusultimate curvature
of column, fysyield curvature of column, and mDs
displacement ductility factor.
For lap-splice columns, damages such as spalling of
cover concrete and bond slip in lap-splice may occur.
FRP wraps can then be used to confine the lap-splices.
Seible et al. w3x indicate that bond slip at lap-splice
would initiate as circumferential strain, which has
reached the 1000–2000 m´ range. Therefore, to limit
the circumferential strain to be under 1000 m´, the
thickness of the FRP wraps is calculated as
DŽflyfh.
tfs500 (2)
Ej
Asfy
where fls B E
and psthe perimeter
p
C q2(dbqCc)FLs
D 2n G
along the lap-spliced bars (cm), nsthe number of
spliced bars along the perimeter, Ccsthe concrete cover
to the center of main column reinforcement (cm), Lss
lap-splices length (cm), Assarea of one main column
reinforcement (cm2), f ysyield strength of main rein-
forcement (MPa), and f hsthe horizontal stress provided
by the existing hoops (MPa). It is shown through this
equation that the shorter the lap-splice length, the thicker
the wraps are needed, such that bond slippage may be
controlled.
For column failures due to insufficient shear strength,
only cracking damage may be reparable. Damage up to
hoop fracture would result in large deformations and
hence, it is beyond the scope of this research. Due to
the inner hole, direct injection of epoxy into cracks is
ineffective for hollow sections. Hence, minor cracks
were left without repair. Loose concretes, however, were
removed and replaced by non-shrinkage concrete. FRP
wraps were then applied to the column to upgrade its
shear capacity to the demand level. Seible et al. w3x
recommended the thickness of FRP wrap for column
shear reinforcement to be:
ŽVyf.yVn
(1) tjs (for circular column) (3a)
Žpy2.0.004EjD
B
=C1y
D
ŽVyf.yVn
tjs (for rectangular column) (3b)
2=0.004=EjD
where Vsshear demand with the case of full flexural
overstrength in plastic hinges (kN), fsreduction factor
 C.-T. Cheng et al. / Construction and Building Materials 17 (2003) 339–351 341

Fig. 1. Detail of original hollow bridge columns.

for shear (typical taken as 0.85), Vnsshear capacity
(kN), and Ejsthe elastic modulus of FRP (MPa).
The repair strategy is summarized as follows:
1. All damaged areas should be sandblasted.
2. All fractured, buckled reinforcement bars are to be
replaced with dog-bone shape bars.
3. Ties are reinstalled and the cracked sections of the
column are then filled with repair concrete.
4. FRP is then wrapped around the columns.
5. Depending on the location and purpose of application,
the number of FRP layers should be determined.
3. Experiments
In order to validate the proposed repair techniques,
one square and three circular full-size columns, designed
to have distinguished failure modes such as lap-splice
failure (PI1-C), flexure-shear failure (PI2-C), shear
failure (PI2), and flexure failure (PS1-C), are construct-
ed. The suffix letter C in the specimen number indicates
circular hollow column with 150 cm outer diameter and
90 cm inner diameter. The square column has a
150=150 cm cross-section with 90=90 cm hole in the
center. The column heights are 6 m for specimens PS1-
C and PI1-C, and 4 m for specimens PI2 and PI2-C.
All columns are longitudinally reinforced with 64D22
bars (as shown in Fig. 1). Measured material strengths
and other details are presented in Table 1, where L
represents the height to the applied lateral load from the
foundation surface. The longitudinal reinforcement of
the specimen PI1-C is spliced in 50 cm (23db) length
from the foundation surface and is provided with only
four cross-ties (Fig. 1). This lap length is typical for the
pre-1987 design of bridge columns in Taiwan.

Table 1
Detail of original specimens

Specimen f 9c L P Longitudinal bar Stirrup bar

no. (MPa) (m) (kN)
Diameter fy Diameter Spacing fy
(mm) (MPa) (mm) (mm) (MPa)
PS1-C 31.7 5.5 3600 22 418.2 13 100 410
PI1-C 33.8 5.5 3600 22 418.2 13 300 410
PI2 32.6 3.5 3600 22 423.3 10 200 392
PI2-C 33.2 3.5 3600 22 423.3 10 200 392
342 C.-T. Cheng et al. / Construction and Building Materials 17 (2003) 339–351

Fig. 2. Test apparatus.

The four specimens were then tested under constant
axial load 3600 kN, representing 0.08f9cAg for rectan-
gular sections and 0.1f9cAg for circular sections. Subse-
quently, a cyclic lateral load was applied by three
1000-kN actuators, as shown in Fig. 2, with sequential
displacement increments. A test was performed under
displacement control in the form of triangular waves
with two cycles at each displacement increment: 0.5Dy,
1Dy, 3Dy, 4Dy, 5Dy, etc., where Dy is the calculated
effective yield displacement of columns. Test results
show that the failure modes of the four specimens are
all different as intended.
Flexural damage in plastic hinge of specimen PS1-C
was severe and concentrated so that the outer layer
longitudinal bars are fractured and the inner layer
reinforcements are buckled, and the concrete is crushed
into the hollow section to form a big hole at the column
wall. For specimen PI2-C, the outer layer bars fractured
at the column hinge and diagonal shear cracks across
the mid-height of column wall occurred at the same
 C.-T. Cheng et al. / Construction and Building Materials 17 (2003) 339–351 343

Fig. 3. Schematic drawing showing repair of fractured bars with dog bone bars.

time—typical of a flexural-shear failure mode. For
specimen PI2, two distinguished diagonal cracks across
the mid-height of the column wall resulted from insuf-
ficient shear capacity. Spalling of cover concrete at the
column hinge and bond slip at lap-splices along the
loading direction, were observed in the test of specimen
PI1-C. Due to the limitation of paper length, some
photos showing pictures of failure for original columns
can be referred to the research of Yeh et al. w9,10x.
All specimens were repaired following the technique
described in the previous section. To repair the fractured
longitudinal reinforcements, loose concrete was first
removed; the fractured or severely buckled bars in the
outer layer of cross-section were cut and were replaced
by the dog-bone bar as shown in Fig. 3. The central
length of the dog-bone bar is equal to the plastic length
suggested by Priestley et al. w7x. The dog-bone bars for
specimens PS1-C are longer than that of specimen PI1-
C due to its column height. Since the buckled bars in
the inner layer were difficult to reach, hence, they were
not replaced. Original stirrups were reinstalled before
the quickset non-shrinkage concrete was poured. To
enhance the column ductility, FRP wraps were applied
to the columns. The thickness and coverage of the FRP
wrap on the columns are shown in both Table 2 and
Fig. 4. The thickness of the FRP is 0.1375 mmylayer
supplied by Advanced Group Co., Taiwan. Material
strengths of FRP and steel are presented in Table 3 for
comparison. From Eq. (1), two layers of FRP are
required to achieve a target displacement ductility of 6
for specimen PS1-C. From Eq. (2), 27 layers of FRP
would be required to prevent bond slip at lap-splice due
344 C.-T. Cheng et al. / Construction and Building Materials 17 (2003) 339–351

Table 2
Detail of repaired specimens

Specimen f 9c (MPa) FRP wraps Replaced bar

no.
Original Repair Inside Height Outside Height Diameter fy
plastic (m) plastic (m) (mm) (MPa)
hinge hinge
t f (mm) t f (mm)

RPS1-C 31.7 38.8 0.26 1.1 – – 20 471.3

RPI1-C 33.8 34.6 0.78 0.75 0.26 5.0 – –
RPI2 32.6 38.1 0.52 – 0.52 3.0 – –
RPI2-C 33.2 41.2 0.52 – 0.52 3.0 20 484.3

to a short lap length. However, since it is unrealistic to
apply such thick FRP wrap to the damaged column, the
repair strategy is set to increase the energy dissipation
and the deformation capacity, instead of preventing bond
slippage. Hence, only six layers of FRP at lap-splice
region were provided for a target ductility of 2.7 based
on 4% cumulative plastic drift from theoretical predic-
tions (Fig. 9). In this way, the repair technique is limited
to columns in low to medium seismic activity regions.
For the strengthening of specimens PI1-C and PI2, four

Fig. 4. Applied FRP wraps in each specimen.

 C.-T. Cheng et al. / Construction and Building Materials 17 (2003) 339–351 345

Table 3
Comparison of material strengths between steel and carbon fiber

Type Tensile Tensile Ultimate Density

strength modulus strain (Nycm3)
(MPa) (MPa)
Steel 280 2.06=105 0.06 0.025
Carbon fiber 3560 2.35=105 0.015 0.019
(FAW 250)

layers of FRP wraps are required based on Eqs. (3a)

and (3b). The proposed repair procedure for each
column is estimated to be complete within 1 week.
After repair, the four specimens were tested again
following the same procedure as the original tests.
Failure modes of the repaired specimens are all identical Fig. 5. Photo showing bars fracture after test for specimen RPI1-C.
to their original counterparts except specimen PI2-C
where flexure-shear failure mode was upgraded to flex- suggested that in addition to plastic hinge region, FRP
ure-dominant mode. Visual observations show that the wraps should be applied to the whole column height in
FRP in column hinge was separated in tension and order to take care of the cracks that have gone beyond
bulged in compression between the fibers under first the hinge region. For the repair of the lap-splice column,
cycle of 3Dy loading for specimen RPS1-C and 4Dy bond slip at the inner layer was left without repair so
loading for specimen RPI2-C. Fracture of dog-bone bars that only 77% of strength is restored. However, the FRP
occurred in the first cycle of 4Dy loading for specimen
RPS1-C and 5Dy loading for specimen RPI2-C, as shown
in Fig. 5. Throughout the test of RPI1-C, only separation
of FRP fibers in the lap-splice region was observed. For
the test of RPI2, the FRP bulged due to shear observed
in the first cycle of 5Dy loading. In this case, the damage
was so severe that a 90=50 cm empty hole in 1.5 m
height of column wall was formed after removal of the
FRP and loose concrete as shown in Fig. 6.
Hysteresis of all specimens is shown in Fig. 7, where
the dotted straight line represents the nominal strength
of the columns following ACI provisions with the
consideration of PyD effect. The PyD effect can be
calculated based on the configuration of test set-up (Fig.
2), where axial load was transferred by tendons anchored
to the steel beams at strong floor. For repaired columns,
the inner layers of longitudinal rebar, which were not
repaired, are excluded from the calculation of nominal
strengths. Test results in terms of strength and ductility
are listed in Table 4, where yield and ultimate displace-
ments have the same definition as in Priestley and Park
w11x. Ultimate displacement was defined as the displace-
ment corresponding to the column strength reduced to
80% of ultimate strength on the load displacement
envelop.
As shown in Table 4, only 76% of strength and part
of the deformation capacity for specimen PS1-C are
restored, even though fractured bars in outer layer were
successfully repaired. The reason may be attributed to
the severe damage in previous test with ductility up to
10. Besides, buckled bars in inner layer and cracks Fig. 6. Photo showing deterioration of concrete wall after test for
beyond hinge region were all left without repair. It is specimen PI2.
346 C.-T. Cheng et al. / Construction and Building Materials 17 (2003) 339–351

Fig. 7. Hysteresis of specimens before and after repair.

wraps did increase the ultimate column displacements
as expected.
Shear damage in specimen PI2-C was less severe than
that in specimen PI2. Therefore, 85% of strength for
specimen PI2-C compared to only 58% for specimen
PI2 have been recovered. Although the severely deteri-
orated concrete in the cracked region was replaced by
new concrete and wrapped with FRP, shear failure in
specimen PI2 cannot be avoided. Test results show that
the shear damage in PI2 is much more severe than
expected. The repair of damaged concrete was ineffec-
tive and difficult due to the hollow section. However,
 C.-T. Cheng et al. / Construction and Building Materials 17 (2003) 339–351 347

Table 4
Test results of all specimens

Specimen Yielding Ultimate Ductility Ultimate moment Failure

no. displacement displacement factor (kNØm) mode
Dy (mm) Du (mm) (DuyDy)
Pull Push Average Ratio
(%)
Push Pull Push Pull

PS1-C
Original 36.2 360.1 359.8 9.7 10.2 8470 8921 8696 100 Flexure
Repair 72.7 150.0* 149.8* 2.0 2.1 6451 6806 6629 76 Flexure
PI1-C
Original 32.5 90.1 89.6 2.6 2.9 7473 8078 7775 100 Bond
Repair 48.9 120.1 115.3 2.4 2.4 5367 6671 6002 77 Bond
PI2
Original 18.9 75.2 67.5 4.0 3.6 9277 9155 9216 100 Shear
Repair 17.5 110.2 88.5 6.5 4.9 5209 5501 5355 58 Shear
PI2-C
Original 20.1 104.1 100* 5.3 4.9 8192 7844 8018 100 Flexure
-shear
Repair 44.8 158.2 180.3 3.6 3.9 6866 6671 6768 85 Flexure
*
Maximum displacement recorded when test concluded with strength descended higher than 80% of ultimate strength.

deformation capacities for both specimens PI2-C and
PI2 are enhanced as shown in Table 4.
In addition to the FRP wraps, to fill concrete into the
hollow section or to enlarge the cross-sections could
provide other possible alternatives for the repairs. The
advantages are increases in lateral stiffness and strength,
and the decrease in yield displacement. However, the
increased weight due to concrete filling may also raise
the bearing demands on the pile foundations and increase
the inertial force during earthquake excitation.
Displacement at the top of columns is attributed to
the deformations due to shear and flexure, and can be
separated into two components as shown in Fig. 8. The
flexural displacement at the top of the column can be
calculated by the moment–curvature areas measured
from the displacement transducers installed at the col-
umn hinge. The flexural displacements measured by
transducers for specimens PI1-C and RPI1-C, as shown
in Fig. 8, include the bond slip at the lap splice. The
shear component can be obtained by deducting the
flexural displacement from the total displacements. As
shown in Fig. 8, shear displacement in short columns
are low due to FRP wraps. It is especially true for
specimen RPI2-C where a similar proportion of shear
displacement as in the test of the flexure-dominated
column PS1-C was obtained.
4. Seismic evaluation
Due to various failure mechanisms in columns, the
methods of strength evaluation may differ. For example,
the strength of the flexural dominant column can be
estimated in accordance with ACI provisions w12x
(inverse of z-dotted line in Fig. 7), and the strength in
the lap-splice column can be evaluated by an energy
model proposed by Mander and Dutta w13x. The follow-
ing are the descriptions of four shear models for columns
without FRP wrap, as proposed by several researchers.
The last model introduced here, is applied for columns
with FRP wraps.
The first model is based on ACI shear design equa-
tion, which can be expressed as:
VnsVcqVs (4)
B P E A f d
where Vcs0.167C1q Fyf9cbwd and Vss V yh ,
D 14Ag G S
Vcsshear resistance provided by concrete (kN), Vss
shear resistance provided by hoops (kN), Psaxial loads
(MN), Agscolumn gross area (m2), f9csconcrete com-
pressive strength (MPa), f yhsyield strength of hoops
(MPa), Sshoop spacing (cm), bwsweb width (cm),
dseffective depth (cm), Avshoops area (cm2). For
rectangular hollow sections, bw is equal to the whole
column width minus the hollow width. For circular
hollow sections, bw is equal to the outside diameter
minus the inside diameter, and then multiplied by 0.886.
d is also multiplied by 0.886 for circular sections. In
this way (0.8862spy4), shear area in circular sections
can be transformed into shear area of a square section
and applied in Eq. (4).
The second model is proposed by Priestley et al. w14x
and is expressed as:
VnsVcqVsqVa (5)
348 C.-T. Cheng et al. / Construction and Building Materials 17 (2003) 339–351

Fig. 8. Displacement component at point of lateral loads application.

where Vcskyfc9Ae where Vcsfactor1=factor2=yf9cAeF1y3yf9cAe, Vss

AVfyhhc r0fyh
Avfyhhc , 0.3Gfactor1s q3.67ymDG3.0, 1.0F
Vss cotu S 1.034
S B P E
factor2sC Fq1F1.5, r0 volume ratio of hoops,
D 14Ag G
Dyx
Vas P and f9c and f yh are in megaPaschals (MPa).
2DŽMyVD. For columns wrapped by FRP, a model proposed by
Seible et al. w3x is used to evaluate its shear strength:
where Vasshear resistance provided by axial load, ks
deterioration factor for concrete, Aes0.8 times bwd VnsVcqVsqVaqVf (8)
(m2), hcscentral distance between closed hoops (m),
usangle between cracks and vertical gravity lines, xs where Vc, Vs and Va are following the same definition
depth of compressive zone in column (m), MyVsshear as in Priestley’s Model w14x, and V f shear resistance
span (m). The deterioration factor can be calculated as provided by FRP wraps (kN) is calculated as:
ks0.29 for mD-2.0 Vfs2=0.004=tjEjD for rectangular column
ks0.29y0.095ŽmDy2. for 2.0FmDF4.0
Vfspy2=0.004=tjEjD for circular column
ks0.1 for mD)4.0
Figs. 9 and 10 show the strength deterioration of the
where mDsdisplacement ductility factor. columns failed due to bond loss and shear, respectively.
A third model, as proposed by Aschhiem et al. w15x, As shown in Fig. 9, it is noted that the analytical results
is expressed as: are in good agreement with the experimental results.
Analytical results show that bond loss for repaired
VnsVcqVS (6) column is commenced earlier at cumulative plastic drift
angle of 0.031(rad) than that of the original column at
B 0.043(rad) due to ignoring the inner lap-splices. How-
P E A f d
where Vcs0.29Ckq Fyf9cAe, Vss V yh 0 , and ever, the rate of strength deterioration for the repaired
D 14Ag G Stan30 column tends to mitigate due to the confinement of FRP
4ymD wraps. As shown in Fig. 10, the Priestley model is the
1Gks G0. The parameters f9c and f yh are in SI
3 best fit with experiments among models for original
units (MPa). The fourth model is proposed by Caltrans columns in terms of strength as well as failure mode
w16x and is expressed as: predictions, e.g. PI2 failed by shear and PI2-C failed by
flexure-shear. For repair columns, Seible’s prediction
VnsVcqVs (7) shows that FRP should provide enough shear capacity
 C.-T. Cheng et al. / Construction and Building Materials 17 (2003) 339–351 349

Fig. 9. Strength deterioration for lap-splice column.

Fig. 10. Strength evaluation for specimens PI2-C and PI2 before and after repair.
350 C.-T. Cheng et al. / Construction and Building Materials 17 (2003) 339–351

for both specimens as evident in the test of another Cc: concrete cover to the center of main column
project w17x where an identical undamaged specimen reinforcement,
was retrofitted with the same amount of FRP. However, Cu: neutral depth under ultimate curvature,
test results show that shear capacity in specimen RPI2 D: column dimension in the loading direction,
is severely deteriorated due to previous damage. As Ej: modulus of FRP,
shown in Fig. 10, column RPI2 may fail with the L: shear span,
resistance of FRP (1466 kN) only. This means only Lp: plastic-hinge length,
resistance by FRP can be accounted for. Ls: lap-splices length,
MyV: shear span,
5. Conclusions P: axial loads,
S: hoops spacing,
Bridge piers are designed to dissipate earthquake- V: column shear demand on full flexural
induced energy and should behave in a strong beam- overstrength in plastic hinges,
weak column fashion. If the traditional capacity design Va: shear resistance provided by axial load,
is considered alone, bridge piers will be vulnerable Vc: shear resistance provided by concrete,
under severe earthquake attack. This research aims to V n: shear capacity,
develop a repair technique for damaged columns, in Vs: shear resistance provided by hoops,
order to restore quickly the bridge functions after earth- V f: shear resistance provided by FRP wraps
quakes. Different failure modes have been considered. bw: web width,
The primary objectives are to enhance the column d: effective depth
deformation capacity and to restore their strength. To db: Longitudinal bar diameter,
achieve this objective, a newly designed dog-bone shape f9c: concrete compressive strength,
bar is applied to replace fractured longitudinal bars. FRP f9cc: confined compressive strength of concrete,
wraps are then utilized to enhance deformation capacity f h: horizontal stress level provided by existing
for hollow-columns failed due to shear, bond loss and hoops,
flexural damage. f ju: ultimate strength of FRP,
Test results of four full-size hollow bridge columns
f y: yield strength of main reinforcement,
show that the hollow columns reinforced with two layers
f yh: yield strength of hoops,
of longitudinal rebar can achieve the desired strength
and with excellent ductility, provided sufficient hoops hc: central distance between closed hoops,
are used. Test results also show that the flexural damage k: Deterioration factor for concrete,
caused by the fracture of outer layer longitudinal bars n: number of spliced bars along p,
were successfully repaired by dog-bone shape bars. p: perimeter along the lap-spliced bars,
While buckled rebars in the inner layer, which were left t f: FRP thickness,
without repair due to construction feasibility, resulted in x: depth of compressive zone in column,
lower restored column strength. Test results indicate that ´y: yield strain of longitudinal bars,
FRP wraps not only increase the ultimate displacements ´cu: ultimate compressive strain of concrete,
for the columns, but also reduce column shear defor- ´ju: Deformation capacity of FRP,
mation. In addition, flexural-shear failure mode in the f: reduction factor,
circular column was upgraded to flexural dominance. fu: ultimate curvature of column,
Among the models for columns without FRP, the fy: yield curvature of column,
Priestley shear model is the best fit with experiments in mD: Displacement ductility factor.
terms of strength and prediction of failure modes. For u: angle between cracks and vertical gravity
repaired columns, Seible’s evaluation overestimated the lines,
shear capacity due to the poor efficiency of concrete r0: volume ratio of hoops,
repair in the column wall. The energy model proposed
by Dutta and Mander made a reasonable prediction of
strength deterioration for the lap-splice column.
Acknowledgments
6. Nomenclature
Financial support from the National Science Council
Ae: effective shear area equal to 0.8 times bwd, in Taiwan under grant NSC89-2625-Z-327-006 and tech-
Ag: column gross area nical help from Mr Chih-Hsiung Chou in National
Av: hoops area, Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering are
As: area of one main column-reinforcing bar, gratefully appreciated.
 C.-T. Cheng et al. / Construction and Building Materials 17 (2003) 339–351
References
w1x Tylor AW, Breen JE. Design recommendations for thin-walled
box piers and pylons.Concrete International, 1994. p. 36 –41.
w2x Mander JB. Seismic design of bridge piers. PhD Dissertations.
Christchurch, New Zealand: Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Canterbury, 1984.
w3x Seible F, Priestley MJN, Hegemier GA, Innamorato D. Seismic
retrofit of RC columns with continuous carbon fiber jackets. J
Compos Constr 1997;1(2):52 –62.
w4x Saadamanesh H, Ehsani MR, Jin L. Seismic strengthening of
circular bridge pier models with fiber composites. ACI Struct
J 1996;93(6):639 –47.
w5x Dutta A, Mander JB, Kokorina T. Retrofit for control and
reparability of damage. Earthquake Spectra 1999;15(4):657 –
79.
w6x Lehman DE, Gookin SE, Nacamuli AM, Moehle JP. Repair of
earthquake-damaged bridge columns. ACI Struct J
2001;98(2):233 –42.
w7x Priestley MJN, Park R, Seible F, Calvi GM. Seismic design
and retrofit of bridges. John Wiley and Sons, 1996. (p. 308).
w8x Cheng C-T, Mander JB. Seismic design of bridge columns
based on control and reparability of damage. Technical report,
NCEER 97-0013. Buffalo, New York: National Center of
Earthquake Engineering Research, 1997.
351
w9x Yeh Y-K, Mo YL, Yang CY. Seismic performance of hollow
circular bridge piers. ACI Struct J 2001;98(6):862 –71.
w10x Yeh Y-K, Mo YL, Yang CY. Full-scale tests on rectangular
hollow bridge piers. Mater Struct 2002;35:117 –25.
w11x Priestley MJN, Park R. Strength and ductility of concrete
bridge columns under seismic loading. ACI Struct J
1987;84(1):61 –75.
w12x ACI Committee 318-95. Building code requirement for rein-
forced concrete and commentary. Detroit: American Concrete
Institute, 1995.
w13x Mander JB, Dutta AA. Practical energy-based design method-
ology for performance base seismic engineering. SEAOC
Annual Convention, Maui, Hawaii. 1996.
w14x Priestley MJN, Seible F, Xiao Y, Verma R. Steel jacket
retrofitting of RC bridge columns for enhanced shear strength-
part1: Theoretical consideration and test design. ACI Struct J
1994;91(4):394 –405.
w15x Aschhiem M, Moehle JP, Werner SD. Deformability of concrete
columns. Project report under contract no. 59Q122. Sacramen-
to, California: California Department of Transportation, Divi-
sion of Structure, 1993.
w16x Caltrans. Memo to designers change letter 02. Sacramento,
California: California Department of Transportation, 1995.
w17x Yeh YK, Mo YL, Chou TK. Full scale tests on ductility, shear
strength and retrofit of reinforced concrete hollow columns
(III). Technical report no. 01-034. Taiwan: National Center on
Research of Earthquake Engineering, 2001.