th

The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering

October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

M-P Curves for Strengthened Concrete Columns

With Active Confinement

M. Reisi1, D. Mostofinejad2 and N. Azizi3

1
faculty of Islamic Azad university, Khomeinishahr branch, IRAN
2
Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology. IRAN
3
PHD student of Civil Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology, IRAN
Email: [email protected]

ABSTRACT:
Many existing reinforced concrete buildings suffer from lack of strength and ductility against lateral loads,
especially earthquake load, due to design style based on old codes. Such buildings should be strengthened and
retrofitted to comply with new loading and design requirements. Confinement of concrete is an effective and
commonly used method in strengthening of columns. Confining of concrete increases compressive strength of
concrete and enhances the ductility. Passive and active confinements are two methods for confining of concrete.
In this study, effect of active confinement on axial and bending capacity of strengthened concrete columns using
steel angle profiles is investigated and M-P curves are illustrated. Stress-strain curve of confined concrete is
obtained using Drucker-Pruger model of ANSYS. This curve is modified to a parabolic curve; then is used for
determination of bending moment-axial load (M-P) diagrams of aforementioned strengthened concrete columns.
The diagrams are drawn for specific square columns with different reinforcement ratios and different
compressive strength of concrete. These diagrams highlight the effectiveness of the method used for
achievement of confinement of concrete columns.

KEYWORDS: Reinforced concrete structures, Active confinement, M-P curves.

1. INTRODUCTION

There are many reasons for strengthening of concrete columns; among them it can be referred to differences in
old codes especially in respect to earthquake load, changes in the vertical loads, deficiencies in the construction,
etc. Confining of concrete columns is one of the most important procedures which has been used by many
researchers and engineers from many years ago. The reason is that we can get strength and ductility
improvement in concrete with confinement techniques
In general, there are two different methods for confining concrete. In the first method which is known as passive
confinement, lateral expansion is limited by confining concrete with some elements such as steel jackets or FRP
sheets; therefore tension axial forces are created in these confining elements. The increase of axial load in the
column in this case increases the degree of confinement. Close stirrups in concrete columns also provide a kind
of passive confinement. The stirrups limit lateral expansion of concrete leading to tensile stress in stirrups.
Efforts have been done to present a numerical model for the effects of stirrups in confinement of concrete.
Among these researches, it can be referred to researches done by Richart et al., Ahmad et al., Mander et al.,
Kent and Park, Sheikh and Uzumeri and Saatcioglu et al. Each researcher presents an equation for stress-strain
relationship of confined concrete. Many researchers also studied the effects of confinement provided by FRP
wraps on compressive capacity, bending capacity and stress-strain curve of concrete.
In the second method of confinement which is famous as active confinement, from the beginning of confinement,
a primary lateral pressure is applied on column. Near Surface Mounted (NSM) technique is a sample of active
confinement. In this method, FRP reinforcement is pre-tensioned and then glued in a groove that was made in
the column. The pre-tensioning here provides a primary confinement pressure in concrete.
In the current study, active confinement method is used to strengthen the rectangular concrete columns. Four
angles are put in the corners of columns and confining pressure is applied by fastening bolts. This method is
illustrated in Fig. 1. Fig. (1-a) shows the concrete column with four angles on the corners. It can be seen in Fig.
(1-b) that bolts are passed inside the thick plates and by fastening bolts, lateral pressure is exerted. As it is
shown in Fig. (1-c), some plates are welded in the space between two thick plates and finally as it is shown in
Fig. (1-d), the bolts are opened and put aside.
 th
The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering
October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

(a) (b) (c) (d)

Figure 1 Method of strengthening the concrete column in this research

In the current study, by modeling of confinement in ANSYS software, stress-strain curves for strengthened
columns are obtained, and then by using MATHEMATICA software, M-P curves are drawn for 400 mm squared
concrete columns with different longitudinal reinforcement ratios and three types of compressive strengths.

2. THE CURRENTLY APPLIED MODELS FOR DEFINING CONCRETE CONFINEMENT

In general, if the lateral pressure fl is performed in a reinforced concrete member such as a column, the
' '
compressive strength of confined concrete (fcc ) is obtained according to Eq. (1); where fc is the
compressive strength of unconfined concrete, and k is coefficient of confinement.

' ' (1)

fcc =fc + k fl

In finite element modeling of a confined concrete member, researchers usually use Drucker-Prager model
(Mirmiran, Barros and Abdesselam). To incorporate the model, concrete compressive strength (fc' ) and k are
taken as functions of two parameters (c and φ ) and are obtained from Eq. 2. Many researches have been done
to determine k. Here, we adopted Eq. (3) to determine k, which is suggested by Saatcioglu et al.

' 2c譪 osφ 1+sinφ

fc = k= (2)
1-sinφ 1-sinφ
-0.17 (3)
k=6.7? fl )

To define the confinement, in the analysis, Drucker-Prager model of ANSYS software is used. First, k is
calculated from Eq. (3), then φ and c coefficients are calculated from Eq. (4), which is obtained by
manipulating Eq. (2).

'
-1 k-1 f (1-sinφ)
φ=sin ( ) c= c (4)
k+1 2cosφ

3. CAPABILITY CONTROL OF DRUCKER-PRAGER MODEL FOR MODELING CONFINEMENT

To assess the capability of Drucker-Prager model for confinement modeling, two samples are analyzed in
 th
The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering
October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

ANSYS software. The samples are exactly the same as the experimental specimens used by Mander. Finally, the
stress –strain curves of the current analysis and the experimental diagrams are compared.

3-1. Cylindrical Sample Under Pure Pressure

The cylindrical sample is a circular column with 500 mm diameter and the height of 1500 mm with 8
longitudinal reinforcement with diameter of 28mm and lateral reinforcement of 12 mm diameter at spaced at 52
mm. The ultimate strength of concrete is 32 MPa and the ultimate strength of steel is 340 MPa. The sample was
under uniaxial pressure and modeled by ANSYS soft. The plasticity behavior of confined concrete was modeled
by Drucker-Prager model and the confinement was exerted by the lateral reinforcement. The c and φ
coefficients are calculated using Eq. (4). The comparison between experimental and FEM results are presented
in Fig (2-a). The following remarks can be calculated from Fig. (2-a):
60 35

55 ANSYS
Experimental
30 EXPERIMENTAL
50 ANSYS

45
25
40

STRESS (MPa)
STRESS (MPa)

35 20

30

25 15

20
10
15

10 5
5

0 0
0 0.003 0.005 0.008 0.01 0.013 0.015 0.018 0.02 0.023 0.025 0.028 0.03 0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.009 0.01
STRAIN STRAIN

(a) (b)

Figure 2- Comparing the results obtained from software and the laboratory test

1- Maximum stress of experimental model coincided with point of the second branch of FEM model; this fact
shows that Drucker-Prager model can point out the peak of stress-strain curves of confined concrete.
2- Drucker-Prager model is not able to predict the descending branch of stress-strain relation.
3-Usually FEM model has a bilinear stress-strain relationship. If this behavior is approximated by a parabola, it
will coincide with the experimental model.

3-2. Cubic Sample under Pure Pressure

This sample is a square column with 400 mm diameter and the length of 1200 mm which was under uniform
displacement in laboratory. The plastic behavior of confined concrete was modeled by Drucker-Prager model
and the confinement was exerted by lateral reinforcement. The c & φ coefficients are calculated using Eq. (4).
The comparison between the experimental and FE results are presented in Fig. (2-b). The figure shows the
capability of the suggested FE modeling procedure in ANSYS to predict ascending branch of stress-strain
behavior of the sample with good accuracy.

4- M-P INTERACTION CURVES

As mentioned before, the aim of this research was to draw the M-P curves for columns which are strengthened
with angle. The specimen which is investigated in this part is a square column with a cross section of 400
mm × 400 mm with 15 mm × 15 mm chamfer in corners. To strengthen the specimens, 80 × 80 × 80 angle profiles
are used. To account for the chamfers, the confining pressure is exerted on 65 mm of the corners, varying from 1
to 5 MPa on different models. If the lateral pressure which is exerted to the angle is fl , the effective lateral
pressure on column side, fle , is calculated from Eq. (5). In this part, it is assumed that the column is loaded
up to one-half of its ultimate capacity before strengthening. As mentioned before, drucker-prager model is used
 th
The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering
October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

for modeling the behavior of confined concrete; so for calculating c and φ coefficients Eqs. (2), (3) and (4) are
used.

2? 5
f =f ? = 0.325f (5)
le l 400 l

The FE analysis of the column is done through displacement control. The strain corresponding to the confined
concrete compressive strength, ε 0c , is calculated from Eq. (6), suggested by Razvi and Saatcioglu; where ε 0c in
Eq. (6a) is the strain in unconfined concrete corresponding to the compressive strength. Then, the compressive
strength of confined concrete, f''cc , is obtained from the calculated stress-strain curve of core concrete, being
corresponded to ε 0c . The calculated ε 0c and f'cc are shown inn Table 1 based on the three compressive
strengths of concrete as f''c =21, 25 and 30 MPa.

ε 0c =ε 0 (1+5k1 ) (6a)

k fle
k1 = ' (6b)
fc

Table 1- Amount of f cc' and ε 0 c obtained from nonlinear analysis

f cc' ε 0c f c' f cc' ε 0c f c' f cc' ε 0c f c' fl
36.8 0.0029 31.0 0.0027 27.0 0.0029 1

38.3 0.0035 33.1 0.0034 28.3 0.0036 2

39.6 0.004 30 35.8 0.0040 25 30.6 0.0043 21 3

40.8 0.0045 36.0 0.0045 32.0 0.005 4

43.7 0.005 38.0 0.0051 33.65 0.0056 5

It was observed earlier that the FE modeling procedure used in this study leads to a bilinear stress-strain
relationship for the confined concrete. The stress-strain curve is approximated with a parabola, using the famous
Hognestad 's parabola as expressed in Eq. (7).

' 2ε ε 2
fc =fcc [ -( ) ] (7)
ε 0c ε 0c

Using the obtained stress-strain relationship for confined concrete, a program was written in MATHEMATICA
software to obtain the couple bending mements and axial loads, M and P, at failure of confined column. The
M-P diagrams are illustrated in Figs. 3 through 5. The diagrams can be used as design charts for strengthening
purposes.

5- CONCLUSION

As concluding remark, this study showed that design charts can be drawn for strengthened square-section
concrete columns with confining pressure of steel angle profiles at the corners. Available FE-based software like
ANSYS can be used for this purpose. The nonlinear FE analysis procedure is to be based on suitable models for
plasticity of concrete; where, Drucker-Prager model can be incorporated in the analysis to account for plasticity.
 th
The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering
October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

40 50
fl=0MPa fl=1MPa
35 45
fy=400MPa fy=400MPa
40
30
35
25
30

20 25

P /b h
P /b h

15 20

15
10 %1 %1
%3 %3
10
%2 %4 %2 %4
5
5

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
2
M/bh M/bh2

50 60
fl=3MPa
45 fl=2MPa
fy=400MPa
40 fy=400MPa 50
P /b h

35
40
30 %1 %2
%4
25 30
P /b h

%3
20
20
15
%1 %2 %3
10 %4
10
5

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2 M/bh2
M/bh

60 60
fl=4MPa fl=5MPa
fy=400MPa fy=400MPa
50 50

40 40

30 30
P /b h
P /b h

20 20
%4 %2 %3 %4
%1 %2 %3 %1

10 10

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
2 ' M/bh2
Figure
M/bh 3- M-P curves for column with f =21MPa C
 th
The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering
October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

45 50

40 fl=0MPa 45 fl=1MPa
fy=400MPa fy=400MPa
35 40

30 35

25 30

P /b h
25
P /b h

20

20
15

%2 %3 %4 15 %1 %2 %3
10 %1 %4
10
5
5
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0
2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
M/bh
2
M/bh

60 60

fl=2MPa fl=3MPa
50 fy=400MPa 50 fy=400MPa

40 40
P /b h
P /b h

30 30

20 20
%1 %2 %3 %4
%1 %2 %3 %4

10 10

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
M/bh2 M/bh 2

60 60
fl=4MPa fl=5MPa
50 fy=400MPa fy=400Mpa
50

40 40
P /b h

P /b h

30 30

20 20
%1 %2 %3 %4 %2 %3 %4
%1

10 10

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
M/bh2 M/bh2

Figure 4- M-P curves for column with f C' =25 MPa

 th
The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering
October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

45 60
fl=0MPa
40 fl=0MPa
fy=400MPa 50 fy=400MPa
35

30 40

25

P /b h
30
P /b h

20

20
15
%1 %2 %3 %4

10 %1 %2 %3 %4
10

5
0
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
2
M/bh
M/bh2

60 60

fl=2MPa fl=3MPa
50 fy=400MPa 50 fy=400MPa

40 40
P /b h

30
P /b h

30

20 20
%1 %2 %3 %4
%1 %2 %3 %4

10 10

0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

M/bh2 M/bh2

60 70

fl=4MPa fl=5MPa
50 60
fy=400MPa fy=400MPa
50
40

40
P /b h
P /b h

30
30
20
20
%1 %2 %3 %4 %1 %2 %3 %4
10
10

0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2
M/bh
M/bh2

Figure 5- M-P curves for column with f C' =30 MPa

 th
The 14 World Conference on Earthquake Engineering
October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

6. REFERENCES

Richart, F. E., Brandtzaeg, A., and Brown R. L., The Failure of Plain and Spirally Reinforced Concrete in Compression,
Bulletin 190, University of Illinois Engineering Experimental Station.
Ahmad, S. M., and Shah, S. P., Stress-Strain Curves of Concrete Confined by Spiral Reinforcement, American Concrete
Institute Journal, Vol. 79, No. 6, 484-490.
Mander. J. B., Priestley, M. J. N., and Fellow, R. P. (1988).Theoretical Stress-Strain Model for Confined Concrete,
Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 114, No. 8, 1804-1826.
Kent, D.C., and Park, R. (1971), Flexural Members with Confined Concrete,” Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE,
Vol. 97, No. 7, 1969-1990.
Sheikh, S. A., and Uzumeri, S. M., Strength and Ductility of Tied Concrete Columns, Journal of the Structural Engineering,
ASCE, Vol. 106, No. 5, 1980, 1079-1102.
Saatcioglu, M., and Razvi, S. R., ‘‘Strength and Ductility of Confined Concrete,” Journal of Structural Engineering,
ASCE, Vol. 118, No. 6, June 1992, pp. 1590-1607.
Xiao, Y., and Wu, H. (2000), Compressive Behavior of Concrete Confined by Carbon Fiber Composites Jackets, Journal
of Material in Civil Engineering, Vol. 12, No. 2, 139-146.
Toutanji, H. A. (1999).Stress-Strain Characteristics of Concrete Columns Externally Confined with Advanced Fiber
Composite Sheets, ACI Material Journal, Vol. 96, No. 3, 397-404.
Saafi, M., Toutanji, H. A., and Li, Z. (1999). Behavior of Concrete Columns Confined with Fiber Reinforced Polymer
Tubes, ACI Materials Journal, 500-509.
Samaan, M., Mirmiran, A., and Shahawy, M. (1998).Model of Concrete Confined by Fiber Composites, Journal of
Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 124, No. 9, 1025-1031.
Mimiran, A., Zagers, K., and Yuan, W.(2000). Nonlinear Finite Element Modeling of Concrete Confined by Fiber
Composites,” Finite Element in Analysis and Design, 35, 79-96.
Barros, M. H. F. B.(2001). Elasto-Plastic Modeling of Confined Concrete Elements Following MC90 Equation,
Engineering Structures, Vol. 23, 311-318.
Abdesselam, A., Numerical Analysis of Confined Concrete,” Secon/d International Conference of Civil Engineering.
Chen, W. F. (2003), Plasticity in Reinforced Concrete, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York.