You are on page 1of 10

Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 706715 www.elsevier.

com/locate/jcsr

Behaviour of normal and high strength concrete-lled compact steel tube circular stub columns
Ehab Ellobody a , Ben Young b, , Dennis Lam c
a Department of Structural Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Tanta University, Tanta, Egypt b Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong c School of Civil Engineering, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

Received 9 May 2005; accepted 2 November 2005

Abstract This paper presents the behaviour and design of axially loaded concrete-lled steel tube circular stub columns. The study was conducted over a wide range of concrete cube strengths ranging from 30 to 110 MPa. The external diameter of the steel tube-to-plate thickness (D/t) ratio ranged from 15 to 80 covering compact steel tube sections. An accurate nite element model was developed to carry out the analysis. Accurate nonlinear material models for conned concrete and steel tubes were used. The column strengths and loadaxial shortening curves were evaluated. The results obtained from the nite element analysis were veried against experimental results. An extensive parametric study was conducted to investigate the effects of different concrete strengths and cross-section geometries on the strength and behaviour of concrete-lled compact steel tube circular stub columns. The column strengths predicted from the nite element analysis were compared with the design strengths calculated using the American, Australian and European specications. Based on the results of the parametric study, it is found that the design strengths given by the American Specications and Australian Standards are conservative, while those of the European Code are generally unconservative. Reliability analysis was performed to evaluate the current composite column design rules. c 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Composite columns; Concrete; High strength; Steel tubes; Finite element; Modeling; Connement; Structural design

1. Introduction Concrete-lled steel tube columns have been increasingly used in many modern structures. Their usage provides high strength, high ductility, high stiffness and full usage of construction materials. In addition to these advantages, the steel tubes surrounding the concrete columns eliminate permanent formwork which reduces construction time. Furthermore, steel tubes not only assist in carrying axial load, but also provide connement to the concrete. However, concrete connement depends on many factors such as the column diameter, the thickness of the steel tube, the concrete strength and the yield stress of the steel tube. Experimental research has been carried out to investigate the strength and behaviour of concrete-lled steel tube columns. Schneider [1] studied the behaviour of short axially loaded
Corresponding author. Tel.: +852 2859 2674; fax: +852 2559 5337.

E-mail address: young@hku.hk (B. Young). 0143-974X/$ - see front matter c 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2005.11.002

concrete-lled steel tube columns. Fourteen specimens were tested to investigate the effect of the tube shape and steel tube plate thickness on the composite column strength. It was concluded that circular steel tubes offer much more post-yield axial ductility than square and rectangular tube sections. Like Schneider [1], Huang et al. [2] tested 17 concrete-lled steel tube column specimens but with a higher column diameter-to-steel tube plate thickness ratio. The same conclusion was achieved even for the higher column diameterto-steel tube plate thickness ratio of 150. Sakino et al. [3] tested 114 specimens of centrally loaded concrete-lled steel tube short columns. In addition, Sakino et al. [3] studied the effect of steel tube tensile strength and concrete strength on the behaviour of the composite columns. Giakoumelis and Lam [4] carried out 15 tests on circular concretelled tube columns. The effects of the steel tube plate thickness, the bond between the steel tube and the concrete as well as the concrete connement on the behaviour of these columns were studied. The test results were compared

E. Ellobody et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 706715

707

Nomenclature Ac As CP COV D E cc Fm f fc f cc f cu fl f su fy K k1 k2 k3 L Mm PACI/AS PEC4 PFE Pm PTest R RE R R r t VF VM VP X Y Z c cc su cc 1 , 2 Cross-sectional area of concrete Cross-sectional area of steel tube Correction factor in reliability analysis Coefcient of variation External diameter of steel tube Youngs modulus of conned concrete Mean value of fabrication factor Equivalent uniaxial stress Unconned compressive cylinder strength of concrete Conned compressive strength of concrete Unconned compressive cube strength of concrete Lateral conning pressure Ultimate stress of steel tube Yield stress of steel tube Ratio of ow stress in triaxial tension to that in compression Coefcient for conned concrete Coefcient for conned concrete Coefcient for conned concrete Length of column Mean value of material factor Ultimate load obtained from ACI/AS Ultimate load obtained from EC4 Ultimate load obtained from nite element analysis Mean value of tested-to-predicted load ratios Ultimate load obtained from test Coefcient for conned concrete Coefcient for conned concrete Coefcient for conned concrete Coefcient for conned concrete Reduction factor for conned concrete Plate thickness of steel tube Coefcient of variation of fabrication factor Coefcient of variation of material factor Coefcient of variation of tested-to-predicted load ratios Local x-coordinate Local y-coordinate Local z-coordinate Equivalent uniaxial strain Unconned concrete strain Conned concrete strain Ultimate strain of steel tube Material angle of friction Reliability index (safety index) Resistance (capacity) factor Poissons ratio of conned concrete Coefcients of connement for concrete and steel

with column strengths calculated from current codes of practice. Little success has been achieved so far in developing an accurate model due to the complexity in modeling the concrete connement. Schneider [1] developed a 3-D nonlinear nite element model for concrete-lled steel tube circular columns. The ABAQUS program was used for the model. The unconned uniaxial stressstrain curve for concrete provided in the ABAQUS material library was used. Strain-hardening was not considered for the steel tube. Hu et al. [5] developed a nonlinear nite element model using the ABAQUS program to simulate the behaviour of concrete-lled steel tube columns. The concrete connement was achieved by matching the numerical results by trial and error via parametric study. The main objective of this study is to develop an accurate nite element model to simulate the behaviour of concretelled compact steel tube circular stub columns. The nite element program ABAQUS [6] was used in the analysis. The effects of concrete strength and concrete connement were considered in the analysis. A multi-linear stressstrain curve for the steel tube was used. The interface between concrete and the steel tube was also modeled. The results obtained from the model were veried against the results of the tests conducted by Giakoumelis and Lam [4] and Sakino et al. [3]. Parametric studies were performed to investigate the effect of concrete strength and cross-section geometries on the behaviour of axially loaded concrete-lled compact steel tube circular columns. The results obtained from the parametric study were compared with design strengths calculated using Eurocode 4 [7], American Specications [8,9] and Australian Standards [10,11] for concrete-lled steel tube circular columns. The current composite column design rules were examined using reliability analysis. 2. Finite element modeling 2.1. General In order to accurately simulate the actual behaviour of concrete-lled steel tube circular columns, the main three components of these columns have to be modeled properly. These components are the conned concrete, the circular steel tube and the interface between the concrete and the steel tube. In addition to these parameters, the choice of the element type and mesh size that provide accurate results with reasonable computational time is also important in simulating structures with interface elements. 2.2. Finite element type and mesh Different element types have been tried in order to nd a suitable element to simulate the behaviour of concrete-lled steel tube circular columns. Since it had been decided to model only the compact steel tubes, solid elements were found to be more efcient in modeling both the steel tube and the concrete as well as the clearly dened boundaries of their elements. A ne mesh of three-dimensional eight-node solid elements

708

E. Ellobody et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 706715

Fig. 1. Finite element mesh of concrete-lled steel tube circular column.

(C3D8) is used in this study. The efciency of the elements was rst veried by modeling empty circular compact steel tubes and comparing the FE results with the results of the tests conducted by Giakoumelis and Lam [4] and Sakino et al. [3]. Different mesh sizes were tried in order to nd a reasonable mesh that provides both accurate results and less computational time. It is found that a mesh size of 1 (length):1 (width):2 (depth), for most of the elements, can achieve accurate results. Fig. 1 shows the nite element mesh of a circular concrete-lled steel tube of 5 mm plate thickness having an outer diameter of 114 mm with a column length of 300 mm. 2.3. Boundary conditions and load application Following the testing procedures conducted by Giakoumelis and Lam [4] and Sakino et al. [3], the top and bottom surfaces of the concrete-lled steel tube circular columns were xed against all degrees of freedom except for the displacement at the loaded end, which is the top surface, in the direction of the applied load. Due to symmetry, only a quarter of the column was modeled, as shown in Fig. 1. The nodes on symmetry surfaces 1 and 2 were prevented from displacing in X and Y directions, respectively, due to symmetry, as shown in Fig. 1. The nodes on the column centreline are prevented from displacing in both X and Y directions. Other nodes were free to displace in any direction. The load was applied in increments using the modied RIKS method available in the ABAQUS library. The RIKS method is generally used to predict nonlinear collapse of a structure such as in post-buckling analysis. The load was applied as static uniform loads using the displacement control at each node of the loaded top surface, which is identical to the experimental investigation. 2.4. Material modeling of steel tubes The measured stressstrain curves presented by Giakoumelis and Lam [4] for circular steel tubes of 3.6 and 5.0 mm nominal plate thicknesses with 114 mm nominal external diameter have

been simulated as two multi-linear stressstrain curves. The experimental measured yield stresses ( f y ) were 343 MPa and 365 MPa for steel tubes with nominal plate thicknesses of 3.6 mm and 5.0 mm, respectively, as summarized in Table 1. Tri-linear stressstrain curves were used to model the circular steel tubes of 4.54 mm plate thickness with 238 and 360 mm nominal external diameters tested by Sakino et al. [3]. The main dening parameters for the tri-linear stressstrain curves are the experimental measured yield stresses ( f y ), the ultimate stresses ( f su ) and the ultimate strains (su). The experimental measured yield stresses ( f y ) were 507 MPa and 525 MPa, the ultimate stresses ( f su ) were 531 MPa and 548 MPa, and the ultimate strains were 0.0065 and 0.006 for steel tubes with the nominal external diameters of 238 mm and 360 mm, respectively. The material behaviour provided by ABAQUS (using the *PLASTIC option) allows a multi-linear stressstrain curve to be used. The rst part of the multi-linear curve represents the elastic part up to the proportional limit stress with a measured Youngs modulus of 205 GPa and Poissons ratio equal to 0.3. 2.5. Material modeling of conned concrete Concrete-lled steel tube circular columns with a high value of the D/t ratio provide inadequate connement for the concrete. This is attributed to the premature failure of the columns due to local buckling of steel tubes. On the other hand, concrete-lled steel tube circular columns with a small value of the D/t ratio provide remarkable connement for the concrete. In this case, the concrete strength is considerably improved and the conned concrete model can be taken as the concrete model. In this study, it is intended to develop a conned concrete model and compare with experimental investigation. Fig. 2 shows equivalent uniaxial presentations for the stressstrain curves of unconned and conned concrete, where fc is the unconned concrete cylinder compressive strength which is equal to 0.8( f cu ) and f cu is the unconned concrete cube compressive strength. The corresponding unconned strain (c ) is taken as 0.003. The conned concrete compressive strength ( f cc ) and the corresponding conned stain (cc ) can be determined from Eqs. (1) and (2), respectively, proposed by Mander et al. [12]: f cc = f c + k1 fl cc = c fl 1 + k2 fc (1) (2)

where f l is the lateral conning pressure imposed by the circular steel tube. The lateral conning pressure ( f l ) depends on the D/t ratio and the steel tube yield stress ( f y ). The approximate value of ( fl ) can be calculated from empirical equations given by Hu et al. [5]. The equations were proposed for a wide range of D/t ratios, from 21.7 to 150. Based on these equations, the value of ( fl ) has a signicant effect for steel tubes with a small D/t ratio. On the other hand, a small value of ( f l ) is obtained for steel tubes with a high D/t ratio. The factors (k1 ) and (k2 ) are taken as 4.1 and 20.5, respectively, as given by Richart et al. [13]. Knowing ( f l ), (k1 ) and (k2 ), the values

E. Ellobody et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 706715 Table 1 Measured specimen dimensions and material properties Specimen C1 C2 C7 C9 C8 C12 C11 C14 CC6-C-0 CC6-D-0 CC6-C-2 CC6-C-4-2 CC6-C-8 CC6-D-2 CC6-D-4-1 CC6-D-8 Dimensions D (mm) t (mm) 114.0 115.0 114.9 115.0 115.0 114.3 114.3 114.5 238.0 360.0 239.0 238.0 238.0 361.0 361.0 360.0 3.87 5.02 4.91 5.02 4.92 3.85 3.75 3.84 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 4.54 D/t 29.4 22.9 23.4 22.9 23.4 29.7 30.5 29.8 52.4 79.3 52.5 52.4 52.4 79.4 79.4 79.3 L (mm) 298.9 300.0 300.5 300.5 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 714.0 1080.0 717.0 714.0 714.0 1083.0 1083.0 1080.0 L/D 2.62 2.61 2.61 2.61 2.61 2.62 2.62 2.62 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Material properties Concrete strength (MPa) 34.7a 57.6a 104.9a 31.9a 57.6a 98.9a 25.4b 40.5b 77.0b 25.4b 41.1b 85.1b Tested by Steel tube f y (MPa) 343 365 365 365 365 343 343 343 507 525 507 507 507 525 525 525

709

Giakoumelis and Lam [4]

Sakino et al. [3]

a f is the unconned compressive cube strength of concrete. cu b f is the unconned compressive cylinder strength of concrete. c

uniaxial stress ( f ) and strain () values dening this part of the curve. The strain values () are taken between the proportional strain, which is equal to (0.5 f cc /E cc ), and the conned strain (cc ), which corresponds to the conned concrete strength. The stress values ( f ) can be easily determined from Eq. (4) by assuming the strain values (): E cc f = 2 3 1 + (R + R E 2) (2R 1) + R cc cc cc (4) where RE and R values are calculated from Eqs. (5) and (6), respectively: E cc cc (5) RE = f cc 1 R E (R 1) (6) R= R (R 1)2 while the constants R and R are taken equal to 4 as recommended by Hu and Schnobrich [15]. The third part of the conned concrete stressstrain curve is the descending part from the conned concrete strength ( fcc ) to a value lower than or equal to r k3 f cc with the corresponding strain of 11cc. The reduction factor (k3 ) depends on the D/t ratio and the steel tube yield stress ( f y ). The approximate value of k3 can be calculated from empirical equations given by Hu et al. [5]. The equations were proposed for a wide range of D/t ratios ranging from 21.7 to 150. The reduction factor (r ) takes into account the effect of the concrete strength. The equations proposed by Hu et al. [5] for the factor (k3 ) were based on the investigation of concrete cube strengths with a maximum value of 31.2 MPa. The experimental investigation conducted by Giakoumelis and Lam [4] showed that the value k3 proposed by Hu et al. [5] is workable only for concrete cube strength up to 30 MPa. It is also shown that even for the same D/t ratio and the same yield stress of the steel tube ( fy ), the descending

Fig. 2. Equivalent uniaxial stressstrain curves for conned and unconned concrete.

of the equivalent uniaxial conned concrete strength ( f cc ) and the corresponding conned strain (cc ) can be determined using Eqs. (1) and (2). To dene the full equivalent uniaxial stressstrain curve for conned concrete as shown in Fig. 2, three parts of the curve have to be identied. The rst part is the initially assumed elastic range to the proportional limit stress. The value of the proportional limit stress is taken as 0.5( f cc ) as given by Hu et al. [5], while the initial Youngs modulus of conned concrete (E cc ) is reasonably well calculated using the empirical Eq. (3) given by ACI [8], and the Poissons ratio (cc ) of conned concrete is taken as 0.2: E cc = 4700 f cc MPa (3)

The second part of the curve is the nonlinear portion starting from the proportional limit stress 0.5( f cc ) and going to the conned concrete strength ( f cc ). This part of the curve can be determined from Eq. (4) which is a common equation proposed by Saenz [14]. This equation is used to represent the multidimensional stress and strain values for the equivalent uniaxial stress and strain values. The unknowns of the equation are the

710

E. Ellobody et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 706715

of concrete is increased with increase of the concrete strength above 30 MPa. Since the main objective of this study is to introduce an accurate conned concrete model, it is proposed to base the reduction factor (r ) on the experimental investigation carried out by Giakoumelis and Lam [4]. The value of r is taken as 1.0 for concrete with the cube strength ( f cu ) equal to 30 MPa, while the value of r is taken as 0.5, as recommended by Tomii [16], and Mursi and Uy [17], for concrete with fcu greater than or equal to 100 MPa, which is the maximum concrete cube strength tested by Giakoumelis and Lam [4]. Linear interpolation is used to determine the value of r for concrete cube strength between 30 and 100 MPa. The yielding part of the conned stressstrain curve for concrete, which is the part after the proportional limit stress, is treated using the DruckerPrager yield criterion model available in the ABAQUS material library. The model is used to dene yield surface and ow potential parameters for materials subjected to triaxial compressive stresses. Two parameters (*DRUCKER PRAGER and *DRUCKER PRAGER HARDENING) are used to dene the yield stage of conned concrete. The linear DruckerPrager model is used with associated ow and the isotropic rule. The material angle of friction () and the ratio of ow stress in triaxial tension to that in compression (K ) are taken as 20 degrees and 0.8, respectively, as recommended by Hu et al. [5]. 2.6. Concretesteel tube interface The contact between the steel tube and the concrete is modeled by interface elements. The interface elements consist of two matching contact faces of steel tube and concrete elements. The friction between the two faces is maintained as long as the surfaces remain in contact. The coefcient of friction between the two faces is taken as 0.25 in the analysis. The interface element allows the surfaces to separate under the inuence of a tensile force. However, the two contact elements are not allowed to penetrate each other. 3. Verication of nite element model 3.1. Experimental results Recent experimental investigations on concrete-lled steel tube circular columns conducted by Giakoumelis and Lam [4] and Sakino et al. [3] were used to verify the FE model developed in this study. Table 1 summarizes the measured dimensions and material properties of the tested specimens. The specimens used in the tests conducted by Giakoumelis and Lam [4] had nominal outer diameter (D) and nominal length (L) of 114 mm and 300 mm, respectively. The specimens C1 and C2 were circular steel tube columns without concrete inll having the nominal plate thicknesses of 3.6 mm and 5.0 mm, respectively. Specimens C7, C9 and C8 had the same steel tube with nominal plate thickness of 5.0 mm but with nominal concrete cube strengths of 30 MPa, 60 MPa and 100 MPa, respectively, while specimens C12, C11 and C14 had the same nominal plate thickness of 3.6 mm but with nominal concrete

cube strengths of 30 MPa, 60 MPa and 100 MPa respectively. The tests were conducted on concrete-lled steel tube circular columns compressed between xed ends. The yield stresses of the steel tubes were 343 MPa and 365 MPa for the nominal plate thicknesses of 3.6 mm and 5.0 mm, respectively. The nominal length-to-external diameter (L/D) ratio was 2.63 for all columns. The external diameter-to-thickness (D/t) ratio of the steel tubes was 31.7 and 22.8 for the steel tubes with nominal plate thicknesses of 3.6 mm and 5.0 mm, respectively. Circular concrete-lled steel tube specimens for the tests conducted by Sakino et al. [3] had a steel tube plate thickness of 4.54 mm and a length of 3D. Two nominal diameters of 238 mm and 360 mm were used with the D/t ratios of 52.4 and 79.3, respectively. Specimens CC6-C-0 and CC6-D-0 were empty steel tubes with diameters of 238 mm and 360 mm, respectively. Specimens CC6-C-2, CC6-C-4-2 and CC6-C-8 were concrete-lled steel tubes with the nominal diameter of 238 mm and the concrete cylinder strengths of 25.4 MPa, 40.5 MPa and 77.0 MPa, respectively. Specimens CC6-D-2, CC6-D-4-1 and CC6-D-8 were concrete-lled steel tubes with the nominal diameter of 360 mm and the concrete cylinder strengths of 25.4 MPa, 41.1 MPa and 85.1 MPa, respectively. The yield stresses of the steel tubes were 507 MPa and 525 MPa for diameters of 238 mm and 360 mm, respectively. 3.2. Comparison of nite element results with experimental results In order to verify the nite element model, a comparison between the experimental results and nite element results was carried out. The ultimate loads obtained from the tests (PTest ) and nite element analysis (PFE ) as well as the loadaxial shortening curves and deformed shapes after failure have been investigated. Table 2 shows a comparison of the ultimate loads of the concrete-lled steel tube circular columns obtained experimentally and numerically using the nite element model. It can be seen that good agreement has been achieved between the two sets of results for most of the columns. A maximum difference of 7% was observed between experimental and numerical results for column specimens C9 and C11. The mean value of the PTest /PFE ratios is 0.98 with the corresponding coefcient of variation (COV) of 0.037 as shown in Table 2. The experimental loadaxial shortening curves were compared with the numerical results, and good agreement had been achieved. Fig. 3 plots the loadaxial shortening curves for the columns without concrete inll specimens C1 and C2. It can be seen that the nite element model successfully predicted the ultimate load of the columns and the loadaxial shortening behaviour. The buckling behaviour of the columns without concrete inll was veried very well when using the mesh of C3D8 elements in the nite element model. The verication ensures that the material model of the steel tube efciently represented the experimental investigation of the steel tube material properties. Fig. 4 plots the loadaxial shortening behaviour of concrete-lled steel tube specimens C9 and C11. The specimens had the same nominal concrete cube

E. Ellobody et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 706715 Table 2 Comparison between test and nite element analysis of concrete-lled steel tube column strengths Specimen C1 C2 C7 C9 C8 C12 C11 C14 CC6-C-0 CC6-D-0 CC6-C-2 CC6-C-4-2 CC6-C-8 CC6-D-2 CC6-D-4-1 CC6-D-8 Mean COV PTest (kN) 539.0 805.8 1 380.0 1 413.0 1 787.0 998.0 1 067.0 1 359.0 1 768.0 2 778.0 3 035.0 3 647.0 5 578.0 5 633.0 7 260.0 11 505.0 PFE (kN) 534.9 801.0 1 364.0 1 511.5 1 805.6 1 015.9 1 144.0 1 419.3 1 764.0 2 772.0 3 228.0 3 820.0 5 280.0 6 000.0 7 440.0 11 640.0
PTest PFE

711

1.01 1.01 1.01 0.93 0.99 0.98 0.93 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.94 0.95 1.06 0.94 0.98 0.99 0.98 0.037

Fig. 4. Comparison of experimental and nite element analysis loadaxial shortening curves for specimens C9 and C11.

(a) Experimental.

(b) FE analysis.

Fig. 3. Comparison of experimental and nite element analysis loadaxial shortening curves for specimens C1 and C2.

Fig. 5. Comparison of experimental and nite element analysis failure modes of specimen C14.

4. Parametric study and discussion strength of 60 MPa, the same nominal diameter of 114 mm but with different steel tube nominal plate thicknesses of 5.0 mm and 3.6 mm, respectively. It can be shown that there is good agreement between experimental and numerical loadaxial shortening behaviour. The column strengths predicted using the nite element model for both columns were 7% greater than that observed from the tests. The deformed shapes of the columns after failure observed from the tests were also compared with the nite element analysis prediction. The ABAQUS viewer [6] has been used to plot the deformed shapes for all columns. Good agreement was found between the experimental and numerical deformed shapes of the columns. Fig. 5 shows a comparison between the deformed shapes of the column observed experimentally and numerically for specimen C14. The concrete-lled steel tube circular column C14 had a nominal diameter of 114 mm, a steel tube plate thickness of 3.6 mm and a column length of 300 mm. The column had a yield stress of the steel tube of 343 MPa and a concrete cube strength of 100 MPa. A total of 40 columns were analyzed in the parametric study and the dimensions and material properties of the columns are summarized in Table 3. The columns were divided into 8 groups with different (D/t) ratios which is different from the approach used in the experimental investigations conducted by Giakoumelis and Lam [4] and Sakino et al. [3]. The rst four groups of columns G1, G2, G3 and G4 had the same overall length of 300 mm and the same diameter of 114 mm which are the same length and diameter as the specimens in the tests conducted by Giakoumelis and Lam [4] had. The steel tube plate thicknesses of the rst four groups of columns G1, G2, G3 and G4 were 7.60 mm, 2.85 mm, 2.07 mm and 1.63 mm, respectively. The diameter-to-steel tube plate thickness (D/t) ratio was 15, 40, 55 and 70 for groups G1, G2, G3 and G4, respectively. The slenderness ratio (D/t) was chosen less than a value of 125/( f y /250) which is equal to 91.1 in this case based on the Bradford et al. [18] ndings, to prevent local buckling. The ve columns investigated in each group had concrete cube strengths of 30, 50, 70, 90 and 110 MPa. The

712

E. Ellobody et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 706715

Table 3 Specimen dimensions and material properties for the parametric study Group Specimen S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 S22 S23 S24 S25 S26 S27 S28 S29 S30 S31 S32 S33 S34 S35 S36 S37 S38 S39 S40 Dimensions L (mm) 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 714 714 714 714 714 714 714 714 714 714 1080 1080 1080 1080 1080 1080 1080 1080 1080 1080 D (mm) 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 114 238 238 238 238 238 238 238 238 238 238 360 360 360 360 360 360 360 360 360 360 t (mm) 7.60 7.60 7.60 7.60 7.60 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.85 2.07 2.07 2.07 2.07 2.07 1.63 1.63 1.63 1.63 1.63 11.90 11.90 11.90 11.90 11.90 3.97 3.97 3.97 3.97 3.97 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 6.55 6.55 6.55 6.55 6.55 D/t 15 15 15 15 15 40 40 40 40 40 55 55 55 55 55 70 70 70 70 70 20 20 20 20 20 60 60 60 60 60 45 45 45 45 45 55 55 55 55 55 Material properties Concrete f cu (MPa) 30 50 70 90 110 30 50 70 90 110 30 50 70 90 110 30 50 70 90 110 30 50 70 90 110 30 50 70 90 110 30 50 70 90 110 30 50 70 90 110 Steel tube f y (MPa) 343 343 343 343 343 343 343 343 343 343 343 343 343 343 343 343 343 343 343 343 507 507 507 507 507 507 507 507 507 507 525 525 525 525 525 525 525 525 525 525

G1

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

G7

G8

measured stressstrain curve of a steel tube with a nominal plate thickness of 3.6 mm having a yield stress of 343 MPa was used in the nite element model for G1, G2, G3 and G4. The concrete-lled steel tube columns of groups G5 and G6 had a diameter of 238 mm as used in the tests conducted by Sakino et al. [3] and plate thicknesses of 11.9 mm and 3.97 mm, respectively. The (D/t) ratio was 20 and 60 for groups G5 and G6, respectively. The slenderness ratio (D/t) was also chosen less than a value of 125/( f y /250) which is equal to 61.6 in this case, to prevent local buckling. A tri-linear stressstrain curve for specimen CC6-C-0 having a yield stress of 507 MPa was used in the material model for groups G5 and G6. The concrete-lled steel tube columns of groups G7 and G8 had a diameter of 360 mm, which is the same diameter as the specimens used in the tests conducted by Sakino et al. [3] had, and plate thicknesses of 8 mm and 6.55 mm respectively. The

(D/t) ratios were 45 and 55 for groups G7 and G8, respectively. The slenderness ratio (D/t) was chosen less than a value of 125/( f y /250) which is equal to 59.5. A tri-linear stressstrain curve for specimen CC6-D-0 having a yield stress of 525 MPa was used in the nite element model for groups G7 and G8. The strength of the concrete-lled steel tube circular columns and the loadaxial shortening behaviour were obtained from the parametric study. Table 4 summarizes the column strengths analyzed in the parametric study using the nite element model. For groups G1, G2, G3 and G4 having the same diameter of 114 mm, it can be clearly seen that the column strength increases due to the decrease of the D/t ratio up to 55. The column strength slightly increases for D/t ratios of 55 and 70. It is also shown that the relationship between the column strengths and the concrete cube strengths increases approximately linearly as the concrete strength increases, as

E. Ellobody et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 706715 Table 4 Comparison of column strengths obtained from parametric study and design calculation Group Specimen S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 S22 S23 S24 S25 S26 S27 S28 S29 S30 S31 S32 S33 S34 S35 S36 S37 S38 S39 S40 Analysis PFE (kN) 1 560.0 1 664.0 1 760.0 1 848.0 1 936.0 757.5 877.3 1 009.7 1 155.5 1 290.8 567.9 700.1 847.1 992.8 1 140.2 491.3 641.1 791.1 938.1 1 085.6 7 360.0 7 920.0 8 520.0 9 080.0 9 600.0 2 932.0 3 580.0 4 240.0 4 880.0 5 520.0 8 440.0 9 880.0 11 360.0 12 800.0 14 280.0 7 200.0 8 680.0 10 160.0 11 600.0 13 080.0 Design PEC4 (kN) 1 554.2 1 670.4 1 786.9 1 903.6 2 020.7 798.5 939.6 1 081.6 1 224.0 1 366.9 654.3 800.4 947.3 1 094.9 1 242.8 459.1 612.5 766.7 921.4 1 076.4 7 782.3 8 455.1 9 130.4 9 808.1 10 488.1 3 694.8 4 487.8 5 286.1 6 088.4 6 893.8 10 391.5 12 150.5 13 920.7 15 699.9 17 486.3 9 127.1 10 924.5 12 733.9 14 552.4 16 378.1 PACI/AS (kN) 1 028.2 1 132.5 1 236.8 1 341.1 1 445.4 529.5 654.8 780.1 905.5 1 030.8 443.2 572.2 701.2 830.1 959.1 329.7 463.4 597.2 730.9 864.7 5 206.5 5 819.4 6 432.2 7 045.1 7 657.9 2 540.9 3 247.9 3 954.8 4 661.8 5 368.7 7 017.3 8 598.0 10 178.6 11 759.2 13 339.9 6 231.0 7 838.4 9 445.8 11 053.2 12 660.6 Comparison PFE /PEC4 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.97 0.96 0.95 0.93 0.93 0.94 0.94 0.87 0.87 0.89 0.91 0.92 1.07 1.05 1.03 1.02 1.01 0.95 0.94 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.79 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.81 0.81 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.79 0.79 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.90 0.096 2.22

713

PFE /PACI/AS 1.52 1.47 1.42 1.38 1.34 1.43 1.34 1.29 1.28 1.25 1.28 1.22 1.21 1.20 1.19 1.49 1.38 1.32 1.28 1.26 1.41 1.36 1.32 1.29 1.25 1.15 1.10 1.07 1.05 1.03 1.20 1.15 1.12 1.09 1.07 1.16 1.11 1.08 1.05 1.03 1.24 0.111 3.38

G1

G2

G3

G4

G5

G6

G7

G8

Mean, Pm COV, VP Reliability index,

shown in Fig. 6. The loadaxial shortening curves of the concrete-lled steel tube circular columns obtained from the parametric study were plotted for all groups. Figs. 7 and 8 show the loadaxial shortening curves of groups G2 (D = 114 mm and D/t = 40) and G5 (D = 238 mm and D/t = 20), respectively. It can be seen that the ductility of the columns is decreased as the concrete strength increases. 5. Comparison with design rules The ultimate axial strengths of concrete-lled steel tube circular columns obtained from the parametric study were compared with the design strengths predicted by the Eurocode

4 (EC4) [7], American Specications (ACI) [8] and (AISC) [9] and Australian Standards (AS3600) [10] and (AS4100) [11]. In calculating the design strengths, the unity material partial safety factors were used. The EC4 provides design rules for concrete encased as well as partially encased steel sections and concretelled sections with or without reinforcement. The code takes into account the concrete connement by the circular steel hollow sections. The EC4 equation for ultimate axial capacity (PEC4 ) of a concrete-lled steel tube circular column is given as PEC4 = As f y 2 + Ac f c 1 + 1 t fy D fc (7)

714

E. Ellobody et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 706715

(PACI/AS ) of a concrete-lled circular column is given as PACI/AS = 0.85 Ac f c + As f y (8)

Fig. 6. Column strength and concrete cube strength relationships obtained from parametric study.

Table 4 shows the comparison of the column strengths obtained from the parametric study with the design strengths calculated from Eqs. (7) and (8) for EC4 and ACI/AS, respectively. It can be seen that the American Specications and Australian Standards ACI/AS are conservative in calculating the design strengths for all columns. The reason is that the ACI/AS does not take into consideration the connement of the concrete by the steel tubes, which has a very signicant effect on concrete-lled compact steel columns. For example column strengths predicted by the ACI/AS (PACI/AS ) for groups G6 and G8 are less than that predicted from the FE model (PFE ) by 3 to 16% for different concrete strengths. On the other hand, the column strengths PACI/AS of group G1 are considerably less than PFE , by 34% to 52% for different concrete strengths. The mean value of the PFE /PACI/AS ratio is 1.24 with the corresponding coefcient of variation (COV) of 0.111. The design strengths predicted by EC4 are generally unconservative, except for the specimens in group G4 (D/t = 70) and specimen S1. The EC4 design strengths were close to that of the FE model prediction for groups G1, G5, G2 and G4 having the D/t ratios of 15, 20, 40 and 70, respectively, with a maximum deviation of 8%. The mean value of the PFE /PEC4 ratio is 0.9 with the corresponding COV of 0.096. 6. Reliability analysis

Fig. 7. Loadaxial shortening curves for different concrete strengths for columns of group G2.

Fig. 8. Loadaxial shortening curves for different concrete strengths for columns of group G5.

where As is the cross-sectional area of the steel tube, Ac is the cross-sectional area of the concrete and 1 and 2 are coefcients of connement for concrete and steel tube, respectively. In the calculation of column strengths using EC4, the effective length of the column is taken as one-half of the column length. The American Specications and Australian Standards (ACI/AS) use similar formulas for calculating the ultimate axial capacity of the concrete-lled columns. Neither of these specications takes into consideration the concrete connement. The ACI/AS equation for ultimate axial capacity

The reliability of the column design rules is evaluated using reliability analysis. The reliability index () is a relative measure of the safety of the design. In general, a larger value of reects that the design is more reliable. The resistance factor () of 0.85 was used in the reliability analysis. A load combination of 1.2 DL + 1.6 LL as specied in the American Society of Civil Engineers Standard (ASCE) [19] was used in the reliability analysis, where DL is the dead load and LL is the live load. The statistical parameters Mm = 1.10, Fm = 1.00, VM = 0.10 and VF = 0.05 were used, which are the mean values and coefcients of variation for material properties and fabrication factors. The statistical parameters Pm and VP are the mean value and coefcient of variation for the column design rules, as shown in Table 4. A correction factor CP in the reliability analysis was also used to account for the inuence of the small number of tests as suggested by Pek z o and Hall [20], and Tsai [21]. Reliability analysis is detailed in the commentaries of the AISC Specication [9] and the NAS Specication [22]. The reliability index of 3.38 was obtained for the American Specications and Australian Standards, but a smaller value of the reliability index of 2.22 was obtained for the Eurocode 4, as shown in Table 4. Hence, the column design rules in the American Specications and Australian Standards are considered to be more reliable than those in the Eurocode 4. 7. Conclusions An accurate nonlinear nite element model for the analysis of normal and high strength concrete-lled compact steel

E. Ellobody et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006) 706715

715

tube circular stub columns has been presented. The conned concrete model has been accurately introduced. The measured stressstrain curves for steel tubes were used to simulate the actual material of the steel tubes. The comparison between the nite element results and the experimental results for the columns with different concrete strengths and different geometric dimensions showed good agreement in predicting the behaviour of the columns. The column strengths, loadaxial shortening curves and deformed shapes of the columns have been predicted using the nite element model and compared well with the experimental results. A parametric study of 40 concrete-lled compact steel tube circular columns with different external diameters of the steel tube-to-plate thickness (D/t) ratio ranging from 15 to 70 and different concrete cube strengths ranging from 30 to 110 MPa was performed using the nite element analysis. The results of the parametric study showed that the column design rules specied in the American Specications and Australian Standards are conservative. However, the design strengths predicted by the Eurocode 4 are generally unconservative. The column design rules in the American Specications and Australian Standards are capable of producing reliable limit state design when calibrated with the resistance factor = 0.85 for the axially loaded concrete-lled compact steel tube circular stub columns. Acknowledgments The authors are grateful to Professor Brian Uy, Department of Civil, Mining and Environmental Engineering, University of Wollongong, Australia, for his useful comments. References
[1] Schneider SP. Axially loaded concrete-lled steel tubes. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 1998;124(10):112538. [2] Huang CS, Yeh YK, Hu HT, Tsai KC, Weng YT, Wang SH et al. Axial load behavior of stiffened concrete-lled steel columns. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 2002;128(9):122230. [3] Sakino K, Nakahara H, Morino S, Nishiyama I. Behavior of centrally loaded concrete-lled steel-tube short columns. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 2004;130(2):1808. [4] Giakoumelis G, Lam D. Axial capacity of circular concrete-lled tube columns. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 2004;60(7):104968.

[5] Hu HT, Huang CS, Wu MH, Wu YM. Nonlinear analysis of axially loaded concrete-lled tube columns with connement effect. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 2003;129(10):13229. [6] ABAQUS Standard Users Manual. Hibbitt, Karlsson and Sorensen, Inc. Vol. 1, 2 and 3, Version 6.3, USA; 2003. [7] Eurocode 4. Design of composite steel and concrete structures. Part 1.1, General rules and rules for buildings (with UK national application document), DD ENV 1994-1-1. London (UK): British Standards Institution; 1994. [8] ACI. Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary, ACI 318-99. Detroit (USA): American Concrete Institute; 1999. [9] AISC. Load and resistance factor design specication for structural Steel buildings. AISC Specication. Chicago: American Institute of Steel Construction; 1999. [10] Australian Standards AS3600. Concrete structures, AS3600-1994. Sydney (Australia): Standards Australia; 1994. [11] Australian Standards AS4100. Steel structures, AS4100-1998. Sydney (Australia): Standards Australia; 1998. [12] Mander JB, Priestley MJN, Park R. Theoretical stressstrain model for conned concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 1988;114(8): 180426. [13] Richart FE, Brandzaeg A, Brown RL. A study of the failure of concrete under combined compressive stresses. Bull. 185. Champaign (IL, USA): University of Illinois Engineering Experimental Station; 1928. [14] Saenz LP. Discussion of Equation for the stressstrain curve of concrete by P. Desayi, and S. Krishnan. Journal of the American Concrete Institute 1964;61:122935. [15] Hu HT, Schnobrich WC. Constitutive modeling of concrete by using nonassociated plasticity. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering 1989; 1(4):199216. [16] Tomii M. Ductile and strong columns composed of steel tube, inlled concrete and longitudinal steel bars. In: Proc., 3rd int. conf. on steelconcrete composite structures. Association of SteelConcrete Structures, Fukuoka, Japan. 1991 [special volume]. [17] Mursi M, Uy B. Strength of concrete lled steel box columns incorporating interaction buckling. Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE 2003;129(5):62639. [18] Bradford MA, Loh HY, Uy B. Slenderness limits for lled circular steel tubes. Journal of Constructional Steel Research 2002;58:24352. [19] ASCE, Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures, ASCE Standard 7-02, American Society of Civil Engineers Standard; 2003. [20] Pek z TB, Hall WB. Probabilistic evaluation of test results. In: Proceedo ings of the 9th international specialty conference on cold-formed steel structures. Rolla (MO): University of Missouri-Rolla; 1988. [21] Tsai M. Reliability models of load testing. Ph.D. thesis. Department of Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, 1992. [22] NAS. Specication for the design of cold-formed steel structural members. In: North American cold-formed steel specication. Washington, DC: American Iron and Steel Institute; 2001.

You might also like