INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING

Volume 3, No 3, 2013
Copyright by the authors - Licensee IPA- Under Creative Commons license 3.0

Research article

ISSN 0976 4399

Nonlinear analysis of reinforced concrete columns with holes

Ehab M. Lotfy
Associate Professor, Civil Engineering Department,
Faculty of Engineering, Ismaelia, Suez Canal University, Egypt
ehablotfy2000@yahoo.com
doi:10.6088/ijcser.2 201203013060
ABSTRACT
The behavior of reinforced concrete columns with holes under axial load is not understood,
and researches in the subject are needed to help designers and structural code officials. Holes
drilled out to install additional services or equipment, such as for ducts through columns,
beams, or walls, can lead to loss of strength and possible structural failure. Until now little
work has been done on holes in columns and, hence, this study aims to examine the amount
of strength lost due to the presence of holes in columns. Nonlinear finite element analysis on
21-column specimens was achieved by using ANSYS software. The nonlinear finite element
analysis program ANSYS is utilized owing to its capabilities to predict either the response of
reinforced concrete columns in the post-elastic range or the ultimate strength of reinforced
concrete columns. An extensive set of parameters is investigated including different
parameters; dimensions of the holes with diameter 0.1, 0.15, 0.2 and 0.3 of column length,
their relative position in columns, and the shape of holes; circle and square. A comparison
between the experimental results and those predicted by the existing models are presented.
Results and conclusions may be useful for designers, have been raised, and represented.
Keyword: Inelastic finite element analysis, columns, holes, strength and testing of materials.
1. Introduction
In the construction of modern buildings, a network of pipes and ducts is necessary to
accommodate essential services like water supply, sewage, air-conditioning, electricity,
telephone, and computer network. Usually, these pipes and ducts are placed underneath the
beam soffit and, for aesthetic reasons, are covered by a suspended ceiling, thus creating a
dead space. Passing these ducts through transverse openings in the columns leads to a
reduction in the dead space and results in a more compact design. The provision of such
openings may result in the loss of strength, stiffness and ductility and, hence, significant
structural damage may be sustained, if the provision of the openings is not considered
adequately during the design or construction stages. This is especially true for un-braced
structures, since loss of stiffness leads to redistribution of internal forces and moments.
The mechanical behavior of concrete beams and slabs with openings has been examined in
several studies and design rules have been recommended (Ashouf A.F. et al., 1999), (Tayel
M. A. et al., 2004), (Simpson D., 2003), (Jiyang Wang et al., 2008) and (Mansur, M.A.,
1998). However, in the case of concrete columns and walls with transverse openings,
minimal research has been carried out and, currently, there is a lack of appropriate design
rules. Columns are critical elements, but in general only carry a fraction of their capacity at
normal service loads.

Received on February 2013 Published on March 2013

655

Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Columns with Holes

Ehab M. Lotfy

The research reported in this paper aims to investigate the compressive resistance-capacity of
concrete columns with transverse holes with diameters 0.1, 0.15, 0.2 and 0.3 of column
length, their relative position in columns; in middle third and edge third of tested columns ,
and the shape of holes; circle and square. Four columns with different holes were tested
experimentally to evaluate the effect of hole geometry and location. Analysis of the
experimental results is used to derive appropriate design recommendations.
2. Objective of the study
The main objectives of this study could be summarized in the following points
1. To investigate the reduction in load carrying capacity of the reinforced concrete
short columns having circle and square cross-sections with hole in different places.
2. To model the RC columns using three-dimensional non-linear finite element
analysis.
3. Provide recommendations for the design engineers and the structural codes for the
design of the reinforced concrete columns.
3. Experimental program
Four concrete columns with different holes in different position and control column without
holes were cast to evaluate the effect of section loss on the compressive resistance-capacity.
The parameters examined experimentally were the diameter, relative position; where column
is divided to three parts in the columns length and also in loading direction, middle third and
edge third, and the shape of holes; circle and square shape. Figure 1 shows the details of the
holes provided in each column.
All columns were 1600mm height, 300m length and 300mm wide and contained both
longitudinal and transverse reinforcement. The longitudinal reinforcement rebars comprised
4#16 mm in diameter, and the transverse reinforcement consisted of shear links, 8mm in
diameter @ 200 mm. A clear concrete cover of 25 mm was provided in all column specimens
and a strengthening jacket was provided at both ends of each column in order to minimize the
effect of local buckling of the longitudinal reinforcement, the test matrix is shown in table 1.
Table 1: Details of tested columns specimens
No

Col.
No.

C1

C2

C3

C4

Dimension
fcu
(mm)
(N/mm2)

300X300

25

Reinf.

4 nos
of
16mm

Dim. Of
holes

Position
of holes

circle

D=60mm

Case (a)

circle

D=60mm

Case (b)

square

L
=60mm

Case (c)

Shape
of
holes

International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering

Volume 3 Issue 3 2013

Notes
Control
specimen

656

Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Columns with Holes

Ehab M. Lotfy

Figure 1: Details of reinforcement of tested columns

4. Numerical finite element
The analysis is carried out on 21-RC columns; the parameters of study were a holes
dimensions with diameters 0.1, 0.15, 0.2 and 0.3 of column length, their relative position in
columns; in middle third and edge third of tested columns , and the shape of holes; circle and
square as shown in table 2.
4.1. Basic fundamentals of the FE method.
The basic governing equations for two dimensions elastic plastic FEM have been well
documented, and are briefly reviewed here.
I. Strain - displacement of an element
[d]=[B][dU]
Where: [B] is the strain - displacement transformation matrix. The matrix [B] is a function of
both the location and geometry of the suggested element, it represents shape factor. The
matrix [B] for a triangle element having nodal points 1, 2 and 3 is given by

y1 y 2
0
0
x 2 x1
x 2 x1 y1 y 2
Where xi and yi represent the coordinates of the node and represents the

[B ] = 1
2

y 2 y3
0
x3 x 2

0
x3 x 2
y2 y3

y 3 y1
0
x1 x3

0
x1 x3
y 3 y1

area of the

triangular element, i.e.

International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering
Volume 3 Issue 3 2013

657

Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Columns with Holes

Ehab M. Lotfy

1 x1

y1

2 = det 1 x 2

y2

1 x3

y3

II. Stress - strain relation or field equation

[d] = [D] [d]
Here, [D] is the stress- strain transformation matrix. For elastic elements the matrix from the
e
Hooke's law leads to [D]=[D ]. For plastic elements, the Prandtl-Reuss stress-strain relations
together with the differential form of the von Mises yield criterion as a plastic potential leads
p
to [D] = [D ].
e
The elastic matrix, [D ], is given by the elastic properties of the material whereas the plastic
e
matrix, [D ], is a function of the material properties in the plastic regime and the stress-strain
e
p
elevation. Obviously, for two-dimensional analysis [D ] and [D ] depend on the stress-strain
state, i.e. plane stress versus plane strain.
p
The plastic matrix, [D ], depends on the elastic-plastic properties of the material and the
e
p
p
stress elevation. Comparing [D ] and [D ], it can be seen that the diagonal elements of [D ]
e
are definitely less than the corresponding diagonal elements in [D ]. This amounts to an
apparent (crease in stiffness or rigidity due to plastic yielding. Therefore, the plastic action
reduces the strength of the material.
III. Element stiffness matrix [Ke]
T

[ K e ] = [B ] [D ][B ]dv
T
The transpose matrix of [B] is [B] . In the case of the well-known triangular elements [k] is
represented by;

[K ] = [B ]T [D ][B ]V
The element volume is V and for a two-dimensional body equals the area of the element
multiplied by its thickness t.
IV. The overall stiffness matrix [K]
e
The stiffness matrixes [K ] of the elements are assembled to form the matrix [K] of the whole
domain. The overall stiffness matrix relates the nodal load increment [dP] to the nodal
displacement increment [du] and can be written as
[dP] = [K] [du]
International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering
Volume 3 Issue 3 2013

658

Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Columns with Holes

Ehab M. Lotfy

This stiffness relation forms a set of simultaneous algebraic equations in terms of the nodal
displacement, nodal forces, and the stiffness of the whole domain. After imposing appropriate
boundary conditions, the nodal displacements are estimated, and consequently the stress
strain field for each element can be calculated.
4.2. Material modeling
A linear-elastic, isotropic constitutive relation is adopted to describe the behavior of
uncracked concrete elements in tension or compression figure 2 and figure 3.
For steel reinforcement, elastic stress-strain behavior was assumed to obey the linear relation
of Hook's law described as:

[ ]

[ ]

{ } = E D e { } = 2G (1 + ) D e { }
Where {} and {} are column matrices of stress ij and ij respectively, G is the shear
modulus; E is the modulus of elasticity and

is the Poisson's ratio.

In the plastic regime the stress-plastic strain; -p, behavior of steel was assumed to obey a
simple power law as shown in figure 4 with a strain hardening exponent of 0.02.

Figure 2: Stress-strain relation for plain

concrete in tension

Figure 3: Stress-strain relation for plain

concrete in compression

Figure 4: Stress-Strain relation for steel reinforcement

International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering
Volume 3 Issue 3 2013

659

Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Columns with Holes

Ehab M. Lotfy

4.3. Resume about used program

The implementation of nonlinear material laws in finite element analysis codes is generally
tackled by the software development industry in one of two ways. In the first instance the
material behaviour is programmed independently of the elements to which it may be
specified. Using this approach the choice of element for a particular physical system is not
limited and best practice modelling techniques can be used in identifying an appropriate
element type to which any, of a range, of nonlinear material properties are assigned. This is
the most versatile approach and does not limit the analyst to specific element types in
configuring the problem of interest. Notwithstanding this however certain software
developers provide specific specialised nonlinear material capabilities only with dedicated
element types.
ANSYS (ANSYS Manual Set, 1998) and (Installation Guide ANYSYS) provides a
dedicated three-dimensional eight nodes solid isoparametric element, Solid65, to model the
nonlinear response of brittle materials based on a constitutive model for the triaxial behaviour
of concrete (William, K.J. et al., 1975).
4.4. Finite element modeling
4.4.1 Geometry
The details of tested columns were shown in Figure 5 and 6. Analyses were carried out on 21columns specimens, where all columns had square cross-section with a 300 mm side and
1600 mm height, the longitudinal reinforcement rebars comprised 4#16 mm in diameter, and
the transverse reinforcement consisted of shear links, 8mm in diameter@200mm, a clear
concrete cover of 25 mm was provided in all column specimens
4.4.2 Element types
Extensive inelastic finite element analyses using the ANSYS program are carried out to study
the behavior of the tested columns. Two types of elements are employed to model the
columns. An eight-node solid element, solid65, was used to model the concrete. The solid
element has eight nodes with three degrees of freedom at each node, translation in the nodal x,
y, and z directions. The used element is capable of plastic deformation, cracking in three
orthogonal directions, and crushing. A link8 element was used to model the reinforcement
polymer bar; two nodes are required for this element. Each node has three degrees of freedom,
translation in the nodal x, y, and z directions. The element is also capable of plastic
deformation (ANSYS Users Manual).
4.4.3 Material properties
Normal weight concrete was used in the fabricated tested columns. The stress-strain curve is
linearly elastic up to about 30% of the maximum compressive strength. Above this point, the
stress increases gradually up to the maximum compressive strength fc\, after that the curve
descends into softening region, and eventually crushing failure occurs at an ultimate strain.
4.4.4 Loading and nonlinear solution

International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering

Volume 3 Issue 3 2013

660

Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Columns with Holes

Ehab M. Lotfy

The analytical investigation carried out here is conducted on 21-RC columns; all columns are
raised in vertical position with by vertical load on top surface. At a plane of support location,
the degrees of freedom for all the nodes of the solid65 elements were held at zero. In
nonlinear analysis, the load applied to a finite element model is divided into a series of load
increments called load step. At the completion of each load increment, the stiffness matrix of
the model is adjusted to reflect the nonlinear changes in the structural stiffness before
proceeding to the next load increment. The ANSYS program uses Newton-Raphson
equilibrium iterations for updating the model stiffness. For the nonlinear analysis, automatic
stepping in ANSYS program predicts and controls load step size. The maximum and
minimum load step sizes are required for the automatic time stepping.
The simplified stress-strain curve for column model is constructed from six points connected
by straight lines. The curve starts at zero stress and strain. Point No.1, at 0.3 fc\ is calculated
for the stress-strain relationship of the concrete in the linear range. Point Nos.2, 3 and 4 are
obtained from Equation (1), in which is calculated from Equation (2). Point No. 5 is at
and f c. In this study, an assumption was made of perfectly plastic behavior after Point No. 5
as shown in figure 7, which shows the simplified compressive axial stress-strain relationship
that was used in this study

..(1)

..(2)
..(3)

Figure 5: Finite element mesh for a typical column model

International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering
Volume 3 Issue 3 2013

661

Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Columns with Holes

Ehab M. Lotfy

Case (a)

Case (b)

Case (c)

Case (d)

Case (e)

Figure 6: Details of tested columns specimens

Figure 7: Simplified compressive axial stress-strain relationship

International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering

Volume 3 Issue 3 2013

662

Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Columns with Holes

Ehab M. Lotfy

Table 2: Details of tested columns specimens

Col.
No.
C1

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
C17
C18
C19
C20
C21

No

Dim.
(mm)

fcu
(N/mm2)

300*300

25

Reinf.

Shape of
holes
-

4#16 mm
Case (a)

300*300

25

4#16 mm

Case (b)

300*300

25

4#16 mm

Case (c)

300*300

25

4#16 mm

Case (d)

300*300

25

4#16 mm

Case (e)

Dim of holes
0.1L
0.15L
0.2L
0.3L
0.1L
0.15L
0.2L
0.3L
0.1L
0.15L
0.2L
0.3L
0.1L
0.15L
0.2L
0.3L
0.1L
0.15L
0.2L
0.3L

Notes
Control
specimen

Circle
holes

Square
holes

5. Inelastic analysis results and discussion

The parametric studies included in this investigation are holes dimensions with diameters 0.1,
0.15, 0.2 and 0.3 of column length, their relative position in columns; case (a), (b), (c) and (d),
and the shape of holes; case (a) and (d). Table 3 shows the analytically results of the ultimate
loads, deformations and compressive stress of concrete, respectively.
Table 3: Theoretical results of tested columns specimens

Col.
No.
C1

Concrete stress
(N/mm2)
25

Ultimate Def.
(mm)
1.30

Ultimate Load
(KN)
139.00

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13

25
25
24.8
24.6
25
25
24.8
24.6
25
25
24.7
24.6

1.24
1.24
1.24
1.19
1.22
1.15
1.10
0.90
1.05
0.89
0.79
0.58

138.50
137.40
127.44
112.32
135.50
131.76
123.12
103.68
121.40
107.60
93.40
65.70

No

International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering

Volume 3 Issue 3 2013

Notes
Control
specimen

663

Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Columns with Holes

Ehab M. Lotfy

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

C14
C15
C16
C17
C18
C19
C20
C21

25
25
24.7
24.6
25
25
24.8
24.6

0.96
0.89
0.86
0.82
1.12
1.06
1.03
0.98

116.50
106.00
102.10
98.00
130.50
119.50
111.20
101.52

5.1. Experimental validation

The validity of the proposed analytical model is checked through extensive comparisons
between analytical and experimental results of RC columns under compression load. Figure 8
shows the theoretical and experimental load-deformation curve of from C1 to C4 and control
column.
The theoretical results from finite element analysis showed in general a good agreement with
the experimental values.

Figure 8: The theoretical and experimental load-deformation curve of tested columns from
C1 to C4 and control column.
5.2. Holes dimensions
Figures 9, 10, and 11 show the theoretical load-deformation of columns (C1, C2, C3, C4 and
C5), (C1, C6, C7, C8 and C9) and (C1, C18, C19, C20, and C21); which have hole
International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering
Volume 3 Issue 3 2013

664

Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Columns with Holes

Ehab M. Lotfy

dimensions 0.00, 0.10, 0.15, 0.2, and 0.3 of columns length respectively; increasing hole
dimensions decrease the toughness and ductility of tested columns.
From Table 3, it can be seen that, ultimate loads, and ultimate strain of C2, C3, C4 and C5 to
C1 are (99.6, 98.8, 91.6 and 80.5%), and (95.3, 95.3, 95.3 and 91.5%) respectively.
Ultimate loads, and ultimate strain of C6, C7, C8 and C9 to C1 are (97.4, 94.7, 88.5 and
74.5%), and (93.4, 88.4, 84.6 and 69.2%) respectively.
Ultimate loads, and ultimate strain of C18, C19, C20 and C21 to C1 are (93.8, 91.9, 80.2 and
72.8%), and (86.2, 81.5, 79.2 and 75.4%) respectively. Figure 12 shows the effect of the
increasing hole dimensions on the ultimate load of columns resists, where the increasing of
hole dimensions more than 0.15 of tested columns length leads to reduction in ultimate loads
of tested columns to 80%. The increasing of hole dimension more than 0.15 of column length
decrease the toughness and ductility of cross section, where it is increase the buckling effect
of tested column, so it has a significant effect on ultimate strain, and ultimate loads that the
columns resist.

Figure 9: The theoretical load-deformation

of columns C1, C2, C3, C3 and C5

Figure 10: The theoretical load-deformation

of columns C1, C6, C7, C8 and C9

Figure 11: The theoretical load-deformation

of columns C1, C18, C19, C20, and C21

Figure 12: Ultimate load of tested columns to

control and hole dimensions/col. Length ratio

5.3. Position of holes in columns

Figures 13 and 14 show the theoretical load-deformation of columns (C3, C7, C11, C15 and
C1) and (C4, C8, C12, C16 and C1) respectively; which have position of holes case (a), case
International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering
Volume 3 Issue 3 2013

665

Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Columns with Holes

Ehab M. Lotfy

(b), case (c), case (d), and control specimen; holes in the edge third has significant effect on
the ultimate loads and deformations of tested columns, hence affect the toughness of tested
specimens, but holes in middle third has limited effect on the ultimate loads and deformations
of tested columns
From Table 3, it can be seen that, ultimate loads, and ultimate strain of C3, C7, C11, C15 and
C1 are (98.8, 94.8, 77.4 and 76.2%), and (95.3, 88.4, 68.4 and 68.9%) respectively. Ultimate
loads, and ultimate strain of C4, C8, C12, C16 and C1 are (91.6, 88.5, 77.4 and 73.4%), and
(95.3, 84.6, 68.4 and 66.15%) respectively
Figure 15 shows that; hole with case (c ) and (d) has a significant effect on the ultimate load
of tested columns with hole dimensions 0.15 and 0.2 of column length
Figure 16 shows that; hole with case (b), case (c ) and (d) has a significant effect on the
deformation of tested columns with hole dimensions 0.15 and 0.2 of column length

Figure 13: The theoretical load-deformation

of columns C3, C7, C11, C15 and C1

Figure 14: The theoretical load-deformation

of columns C4, C8, C12, C16 and C1

Figure 15: Position of holes and Pu/P

control for hole Dim. (0.15L and 0.2L)

Figure 16: Position of holes and Def./Def.

control for hole Dim. (0.15L and 0.2L)

5.4. Shape of holes

Figures 17 and 18 show the theoretical load-deformation of tested columns (C3 and C19 to
C1) and (C4 and C20 to C1); which confirm that using square hole in tested column has a
significant effect on the ultimate loads and deformation so it decreased the toughness and
ductility of tested columns.

International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering

Volume 3 Issue 3 2013

666

Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Columns with Holes

Ehab M. Lotfy

From Table 3, it can be seen that, ultimate loads, and ultimate strain of C3 and C19 to C1 are
(98.8, and 85.9%), and (95.3 and 81.53%) respectively, ultimate loads, and ultimate strain of
C4 and C20 to C1 are (91.6, and 80%), and (97.6 and 79.2%) respectively.
Using square hole in tested column has a significant effect on the behavior of tested columns;
where it reduced the ductility, toughness, ultimate load and increased deformation

Figure 17: The theoretical load-deformation

of columns C3, C19, and C1

Figure 18: The theoretical load-deformation

of columns C4, C20, and C1

5.5 Conclusion
The inelastic behavior of 21 columns are investigated in the current study under the effect of
increasing loading employing the inelastic FE analysis program ANSYS. Several parameters
are investigated including the parameters of study were a holes dimensions with diameters
0.1, 0.15, 0.2 and 0.3 of column length, their relative position in columns; in middle third and
edge third , and the shape of holes; circle and square. The study focuses on the consequences
of the investigated parameters on the deformation and ultimate resisting load. The
conclusions made from this investigation are:
1. The theoretical results from Finite Element Analysis showed in general a good
agreement with the experimental values.
2. The hole with diameter more than 0.15 of columns length has significant effect of the
column behavior; reducing the ductility and toughness of tested columns.
3. The increasing of hole dimensions to more than 0.15 of columns length leads to
reduction in ultimate loads of tested columns to 80%.
4. Using square hole in tested column has a significant effect on the behavior of tested
columns
5. Holes can be made in middle third of columns with diameter up to 0.15 column length.
6. References
1. Ashouf A.F. and Rishi G., (1999), Tests of reinforced concrete continuous deep
beams with web openings, ACI structural journal, 97(3), pp 418-426.
2. Tayel M. A., Soliman M. H. and Ibrahim K. A., (2004), Experimental behavior of flat
slabs with openings under the effect of concentrated loads, Alexandria engineering
journal, 43(2), pp 203-214.

International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering

Volume 3 Issue 3 2013

667

Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Columns with Holes

Ehab M. Lotfy

3. Simpson D., (2003), The provision of holes in reinforced concrete beams, Concrete
(London), 37(3), pp 24-25.
4. Jiyang Wang, Masanobu SAKASHITA, Susumu Kono, Hitoshi Tanaka, Makoto
Warashina., (2008), A macro model for reinforced concrete structural walls having
various opening ratios, 14 th world conference on earthquake engineering, October 1217, Beijing, China
5. Mansur, M.A., (1998), Effect of openings on the behavior and strength of R/C beams
in shear, Cement and concrete composites, Elsevier science Ltd., 20(6), pp 477-486.
6. ANSYS Manual Set, (1998), ANSYS Inc., Southpoint, 275 Technology Drive,
Canonsburg, PA 15317, USA.
7. Installation Guide (2010), ANYSYS VERSION
structural engineering.

,10Computer software for

8. William, K.J. and Warnke, E.D., (1975), Constitutive model for the Triaxial behavior
of concrete, Proceedings of the international association for bridge and structural
engineering, 19, p 174, ISMES, Bergamo, Italy

International Journal of Civil and Structural Engineering

Volume 3 Issue 3 2013

668