See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/258837391

Hysteresis Model for Reinforced Concrete Members

Conference Paper · January 2000

CITATIONS READS

9 841

2 authors:

Alper Ilki Nahit Kumbasar

Istanbul Technical University Istanbul Technical University
189 PUBLICATIONS   1,092 CITATIONS    68 PUBLICATIONS   747 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Seismic Retrofit of Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls Designed and Constructed Prior to Enforcement of the Recent Seismic Design Codes View project

Flexural retrofit of support regions of reinforced concrete beams with anchored FRP ropes under reversed cyclic loading View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Alper Ilki on 04 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 HYSTERESIS MODEL FOR REINFORCED CONCRETE
MEMBERS

Alper ILKI Nahit KUMBASAR

Istanbul Technical University
ailki@srv.ins.itu.edu.tr nkumbasar@srv.ins.itu.edu.tr

ABSTRACT

Knowledge on the hysteretic behavior of structural members is of primary importance

for determining the earthquake response of reinforced concrete structures. Since there
are so many factors that effect the behavior of reinforced concrete members, it is very
hard to idealize the behavior with one model. Therefore it is rational to use different
models that are valid for the certain ranges of the effective variables. For this purpose
a hysteretic model for the lateral load-lateral displacement relationship of reinforced
concrete members is proposed by making use of the test data that was obtained at the
end of an experimental study which was carried out in the Structural and Earthquake
Engineering Laboratory of Istanbul Technical University.

INTRODUCTION

Different models have been utilized for representing cyclic behavior of reinforced
concrete members until today. Clough1, Takeda, Sozen and Nielsen2, Saiidi3, Stone
and Taylor4 and Jirsa and Feghali5 are some of the researchers who have proposed
hysteresis models for reinforced concrete. Among these Takeda’s Model is the most
commonly accepted one. In this study, a stiffness degrading model with a bilinear
skeleton is proposed. By using the proposed model, strength degradation and pinching
due to yielding of compressive and tensile reinforcements as well as stiffness
degradation can be taken into account. The proposed equations for the model are
obtained by statistical analysis of the data of the experimental study carried out by
İlki6.

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY

Twentyeight reinforced concrete members with the dimensions of 200 mm  200 mm

 2000 mm are tested under constant axial load and cyclic bending moment. The test
variables are the ratio of longitudinal reinforcement to concrete section, type of
longitudinal reinforcement (deformed or round bars), level of applied axial load and
concrete compressive strength. The test parameters and the considered ranges of these
are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1 The Test Variables

l fy (MPa)  f’c (MPa)
Between 0.01 and 0.03 365 and 551 Between 0.05 and 0.30 20-25 and 30

In Table 1, l and fy are the geometric ratio and yield strength of the longitudinal
reinforcement,  is the ratio of applied axial load to axial capacity of the member and
f’c is the concrete compressive strength. The loading system and the locations of
displacement transducers are shown schematically in Figure 1.

1
 Load cell (250 kN, pull, push)
Displacement transducer (internal)

V27
H11 , H12 Load cell (TML, 1000 kN)

H28

H29

H13 , H14
V26 V16 (control)

Figure 1 Test Setup

The detailed information about the expeimental study can be seen elsewhere, Ilki6,
Kumbasar and Ilki7.

MODEL

The main considered behavior characteristics are the slope of post-peak branch, the
slopes of unloading branches and level of pinching. The model is presented
schematically in Figure 2.

Post-peak branch

Pintersection

Unloading branch
un
un




Pinching

Figure 2 Proposed Model

Slope of Post-peak Branch

Experimental results show that the post-peak branch of the load-displacement

relationships can be represented by a single line that may either have positive or

2
negative slope. While strength degradation is basicly a function of achieved ductility
level, the level of axial load also plays an important role on the slope of the post-peak
branch, consequently on the rate of strength degradation. The average slopes of post-
peak branches which are assumed to be lines are presented in Table 2 for different
levels of axial load.

Table 2 The Average Slopes of the Post-peak Branches

 0.05 0.10 0.20 0.30
Average slope (kN/mm) 0.80 -2.43 -10.61 -19.1

The statistical analysis carried out on experimental data ended up with Equation 1. In
Equation 1, P is the strength degradation, Pu is theoretically determined ultimate
load,  is the achieved displacement and y is the displacement that corresponds to
yielding.

P    y 
 0.0107 5.219  80 .332   0.0071 (1)
Pu y

Note that this equation may be valid for the members that have similar type of
reinforcement as considered in this study. The slope of post-peak branch may
significantly differ according to the strengthening characteristics of steel
reinforcement.

Slope of Unloading Branch

The geometric ratio of the longitudinal reinforcement is found to be effective on the

slopes of the unloading branches, additional to the initial stiffness and achieved
displacement ductility ratio as considered by Takeda et. al2 and Saiidi3. By evaluating
the experimental data statistically Equation 2 is obtained.

k un   
 0.0452  46 .03   0.025   320 .14   5.95   0.685 (2)
ky  y 

In Equation 2, kun is the slope of unloading branch at the displacement ductility level
/y and  is the geometric ratio of longitudinal reinforcement to concrete section. k y
is determined by Equation 3.

Pu
ky  (3)
y

In Equation 3, y is the displacement at the theoretical ultimate load level, P u which is

theoretically determined by using stiffness of cracked section.

Pinching

For defining pinching, a fictitious intersection point of all the hysteresis loops on the
initial ascending branch of the load-displacement relationship is determined,
Pintersection, Figure 2. Experimental results show that there is a pinching in the

3
hysteresis loops which increases by a decrease in the geometric ratio of longitudinal
reinforcement and an increase in the level of axial load. Note that all the considered
specimens have same amount of shear reinforcement and they are tested under the
same loading conditions.

Table 3 The Average (Pintersection / Pu) Ratios for Different Values of  and 
 =0.05 =0.10 =0.20 =0.30
0.0113 0.52 0.48 0.34
0.0170 0.59 0.51 0.40 0.38
0.0283 0.65 0.56 0.44 0.39

Statistical evaluation of the relation between P intersection / Pu and  and  resulted with
Equation 4.

Pint er sec tion

 1.4  0.55  0.56  0.48 (4)
Pu

COMPARISONS

Two different experimental studies are considered for making comparisons between
experimental and analytical load-displacement relationships, Ilki et. al8 and Ilki6. In
the experimental study carried out by Ilki et. al8 full scale cantilever reinforced
concrete columns are tested under cyclic lateral loads. The experimental load-
displacement relationship for one of the specimens is presented in Figure 3 with the
analytical relationship which is obtained by the proposed model. The tested square
columns in that study have the dimensions of 300 mm  300 mm  4000 mm. The
names of the specimens are given according to the number and diameter of
longitudinal bars, concrete compressive strength at the day of testing and level of
applied axial load. As an example, 6D16-C41.7-N5 represents a specimen having
totally 6 longitudinal bars with the diameter of 16 mm, with the concrete compressive
strength of 41.7 MPa. The axial load applied on this specimen is 5% of its axial
capacity.

40
Column 4
30
6D16-C41.7-N5
20
Load (kN)

10
Experiment
0
-250 -200 -150 -100 -50 -10 0 50 100 150 200 250 Proposed Model
-20
-30
-40
Displacement (mm)

Figure 3 Comparison of Experimental and Analytical Load-Displacement

Relationships

The comparisons between the experimental load-displacement relationships obtained

by Ilki6 and analytical ones obtained by the proposed model are presented in Figure 4.
Note that the equations of the proposed model for determining the behavior
characteristics are obtained by analizing the results obtained at the end of this
experimental study.

4
During analytical study, the flexural rigidity of the cracked section is assumed to be
half of the rigidity of the gross section.

150
No 14
6D12-C25.4-N10 100
Load (kN)

50
Experiment
0
Proposed Model
-60 -40 -20 -50 0 20 40 60
-100
-150
Displacement (mm)

150
No 17
100
6D12-C22.7-N30
Load (kN)

50
Experiment
0
Proposed Model
-30 -20 -10 -50 0 10 20 30
-100
-150
Displacement (mm)

200
No 25
10D12-C30.0-N5 100
Load (kN)

Experiment
0
Proposed Model
-50 -30 -10 10 30 50
-100

-200
Displacement (mm)

200
No 26
10D12-C30.2-N10 100
Load (kN)

Experiment
0
Proposed Model
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60
-100

-200
Displacement (mm)

200
No 27
10D12-C30.3-N20 100
Load (kN)

Experiment
0
Proposed Model
-40 -20 0 20 40
-100

-200
Displacement (mm)

Figure 4 Comparison of Experimental and Analytical Load-Displacement

Relationships

5
 CONCLUSIONS

A simple load-displacement model for reinforced concrete members that are subjected
to axial load and cyclic flexure is proposed. The model can represent strength and
stiffness degradation and pinching of the hysteresis loops. The model seems to
produce the load-displacement relationships in good aggreement with experimental
data. Since the statistically evaluated dimensionless equations that determine basic
characteristics of the hysteresis loops depend on limited data, further research is
needed to generalize these conclusions.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This study is a part of the Ph.D. Thesis carried out by A. Ilki under the supervision of
Prof.Dr. N. Kumbasar. The experimental part of the study is financially supported by
Turkish Science Council (INTAG-559) and Istanbul Technical University Research
Fund (Grant No : 920). The supports of Maya and Gok Construction Companies are
also acknowledged.

REFERENCES

1. Clough, R.W., Effect of Stiffness Degradation on Earthquake Ductility

Requirements, Structural and Materials Research, Str. Eng. Lab., Univ. of California,
Berkeley, Report 66-16, 1966.
2. Takeda, T., Sozen, M.A. and Nielsen N.N., Reinforced Concrete Response to
Simulated Earthquakes,  J.Struct. Engrg. Div., ASCE, V. 96, No. 12, 1970, pp. 2557-
2573.
3. Saiidi, M., Hysteresis Models for Reinforced Concrete,  J. Struct. Engrg.
Div., ASCE, V. 108, No. 5, 1982, pp. 1077-1087.
4. Stone, W.C. and Taylor, A.W., A Predictive Model for Hysteretic Failure
Parameters, Proc. of Tenth World Conference on Earthquake Engrg., 1992, pp. 2575-
2580.
5. Jirsa, J.O., Feghali, H.L., Simulation of Seismic Response of Reinforced
Concrete Structures, Proc. Uğur Ersoy Symp. on Struct. Engrg., 1999, pp. 261-274.
6. Ilki, A., The Nonlinear Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Members Subjected
to Reversed Cyclic Loads,  PhD Thesis supervised by Prof.Dr. N. Kumbasar and
submitted to Istanbul Technical University, 2000.
7. Kumbasar, N. and Ilki, A., Behavior of Symmetrically Reinforced Concrete
Sections under Cyclic Loading,  Proc. Of Ugur Ersoy Symp. On Struct. Engrg.,
1999, pp.177-202.
8. Ilki, A., Yuksel, E., Darilmaz, K., Bakan, I., Zorbozan, M. and Karadogan, F.,
Prefabricated Columns Subjected to Displacement Reversals,  Seismic Safety of Big
Cities, Earthquake Prognostics World Forum, Istanbul, 1998.

View publication stats