Challenges, Opportunities and Solutions in Structural Engineering and Construction Ghafoori (ed.

.) 2010 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-0-415-56809-8

Effect of transverse reinforcing on circular columns confined with FRP

G. Ghodrati Amiri
Center of Excellence for Fundamental Studies in Structural Engineering, School of Civil Engineering, Iran University of Science & Technology, Tehran, Iran

A. Jaberi Jahromi & B. Mohebi

School of Civil Engineering, Iran University of Science & Technology, Tehran, Iran

ABSTRACT: In recent years retrofitting of bridges against earthquake is interested and many works have been done for strengthening every part of bridges. One of very important parts of a bridge is piers. Piers in many bridges are main earthquake resisting system. Therefore they play an important rule during earthquakes and failure of them can cause collapse of entire deck and other parts of bridge. Strengthening of bridges piers can be done by several methods. One of the most common methods is retrofitting RC columns with FRP jacketing. Any piers of a bridge can be improved against lack of strength or ductility. Usually RC columns in bridges are circle shaped. In this study it has been tried to investigate effect of amount of transverse reinforcing before retrofitting columns on nonlinear behavior of confined columns with FRP. For performing this research, 4 Finite element models with different amount of transverse reinforcing has been created and results have been presented in this paper. 1 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS capacity of section is not sufficient for resisting against earthquake forces, transferred to the column from deck and other masses of bridge. On the other hand lacking of transverse reinforcing can cause decrease in deformation capacity in plastic hinges of bridges and it will lead to collapse of columns in plastic hinge regions. As mentioned before, for overcoming this deficiency, many engineers use FRP jacketing. FRP jacketing can increase strength of column and deformation capacity of it simultaneously. It has been shown that confinement with fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) improves the behavior of columns submitted to seismic loading (Priestley et al. 1992; Katsumata et al. 1987). FRP fabric wraps consisting of carbon, aramid, or glass fibers bonded by an epoxy resin have been successfully applied for seismic rehabilitation of bridge piers in the U.S. and Japan (Mufti et al. 1992; Kasei 1993). The growing use of FRP composites as confinement elements is attributed to the important mechanical and chemical properties of these materials. Some of these advantages are light weight, high-tensile strength and modulus, corrosion resistance, and durability. These advantages make FRP composites suitable for use in coastal and marine structures like river bridge piers. In additions, their low density is important because it adds less weight to the existing structures, and because the use of heavy equipment for repair with FRP composites is not necessary during rehabilitations. It has been shown that wrapping FRP fabrics around the perimeter of both circular and rectangular concrete columns to create a confinement effect

When reinforced concrete columns are subjected to seismic loading, the large lateral cyclic earthquake force will degrade the concrete and the reinforcing bar very quickly, and the columns will fail prematurely. Investigations of bridge failures during recent earthquakes, such as the 1987 Whittier, 1989 Loma Prieta, 1994 Northridge, and 1995 Kobe show that inadequate lateral reinforcement and insufficient lap length of the starter bars are among the major catastrophic causes of failure (Priestley & Whitter 1988; Buckle 1994; Priestley & Seible 1996; Parvin & Wang 2002). The main resisting system against earthquakes in many bridges is piers. In this kind of bridges all lateral force induced to bridge will be transferred to piers. Therefore any failure in this member results the overall collapse in bridge. In recent years, the use of externally bonded fiber-reinforced polymers (FRP) has been become increasingly popular for civil infrastructure applications, including wrapping of concrete columns. Significant research has been devoted to circular columns retrofitted with FRP and numerous models were proposed (Khaloo et al. 1991; Fardis & Khalili 1981; Miyaushi et al. 1997; Samman et al. 1998; Spoelstra et al. 1999). FRP wrapping of existing circular columns has proven to be an effective retrofitting technique (Seible et al. 1997; Chaallal et al. 2003). Retrofitting bridge columns is done because several reasons. One of these reasons is the lack of transverse reinforcing. In this case the shear

229

improves ductility and strength (Katsumata & Kimura 1990; Picher et al. 1996). Other FRP confinement techniques have been shown to improve the behavior of normal and high-strength concrete (Harmon et al. 1995). Retrofitting of concrete columns by lateral confinement with FRP wires has also resulted in an increase in strength and ductility under uniaxial compression (Nanni et al. 1994; Houssam & Toutanji 1999). Amount of lacking of transverse reinforcing is different in different case studies. In this research 4 samples with different amount of transverse reinforcing have been retrofitted by FRP jacketing method. The kind and thickness of FRP in all specimens are similar and the only difference between them is the amount of transverse reinforcing. In next part of this paper the properties of FRP is presented. After that specification of samples and analyze method have been explained. Finally the comparison between results has been done. 2 2.1 DESCRIPTION OF MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF MATERIALS Mechanical properties of concrete

2.2

Mechanical properties of steel bars

It is unavoidable to use of steel bars because the concrete is weak in tension. Strength and deformation properties of steel bars usually obtain from strainstress curves. Hot rolled steel bars often have a specific yield point and at the time of rupture show significant strain; for this reason sometimes called mild steels. For steel modeling, usually apply three plasticity models (Ansys Standard Users Manual): 2.2.1 Steel with isotropic hardening This model is very simple and often used when loads are monotonic. In the mentioned model, Bauschinger effect is neglected and yield area is changed isotropically. 2.2.2 Steel with kinematic hardening This state is a little more complicated than the isotropic model considers the Bauschinger effect and consisting of bilinear hardening model. In this case, only the center of yield area is transformed in space and not changed isotropically. 2.2.3 Steel with combined hardening This model is the most exact of the steel models and is combination of two previous models. This means that yield area is changed isotropically and transformed in space. It results to improve the loadings cycles in addition to consideration of Bauschinger effect. For determination of this behavior is needed much parameters and their calibrations are difficult. Because steel is the secondary material (Concrete is the primary material), then kinematic hardening model is used to consideration of cyclic loads and it is not complicated such as compound model. 2.3 Mechanical properties of FRP

Essentially concrete is an inelastic material thus behaves elastic in many respects. Compression strength is only one specification of concrete materials. For explanation of concrete behavior, the strain-stress curve could be useful. This curve explains that in low stresses, concrete behaves elastic. This curve is inclined horizontally in higher stresses and strain reaches to 0.002 in ultimate stress. After ultimate stress, the curve generally is descending to rupture point. As much as concrete strength would be low, the ductility property is higher. The concrete used in the present study for all the specimens is 25 MPa and the module of elasticity is the same with value of 210 MPa. Thickness of concrete cover is 2.5 cm in models. Stress strain curve that have been used for confined concrete in finite elements model is mander curve which is shown in Figure 1 (Mander et al. 1988).
250 200 150 100 50 0 0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008

Mander

Figure 1.

Stress-strain curve for confined concrete.

Usually a composite material is defined as a physical combination of two or some different materials in macroscopic scale. These materials keep their mechanical and chemical properties and form a specific boundary with each other. These materials have better specification than their components. Fiber Reinforced Plastic (FRP) products were first used to reinforce concrete structure in the mid 1950s. Thoday, these FRP products take the form of bars, cables, 2-D and 3-D grids, sheet materials, plates, etc. FRP products may achieve the same or better reinforcement objective of commonly used metallic products such as steel reinforcing bars, prestressing tendons, and bonded plates. Application and product development efforts in FRP composites are widespread to address the many opportunities for reinforcing concrete members (ACI 1996). Some mechanical properties of FRP is shown in Table 1. All the details about FRP material that used in the present modeling have been shown in Table 2.

230

Table 1.

Specifications of carbon, glass and aramid fibers. Modulus of elasticity Strength (GPa) (MPa) 215235 215235 115130 500700 70 8590 7080 115130 35004800 35006000 35004000 21002400 Ultimate tensile strain % 1.42 1.52.3 2.53.5 0.20.4

Table 3.

Geometric details of models. 300 cm 70 cm 205 cm

Material Carbon High strength Ultra high Strength High modulus Ultra high modulus Glass E S Aramid Low modulus High modulus

Height of columns Diameter Concrete cover thickness

19003000 34.5 35004100 4.55.5 35004100 4.35 35004000 2.53.5

Table 2.

FRP material details. 120 GPa 1.5 GPa 3 GPa 40 GPa 0.5 mm 0.012

Modulus of elasticity in fibers direction Tensile strength in fiber direction Modulus of elasticity in vertical fibers direction Tensile strength in vertical fiber direction Thickness Ultimate strain

Figure 2.

Three-dimensional modeling with its mesh.

DESCRIPTION OF SPECIMENS

All the models have similar geometrics properties. All models were circular with diameter of 70 cm and height of 300 cm. These properties have been shown in Table 3. Thicknesses of CFRP in all models are similar (0.5 mm).

wrinkling of the element in compression in one or both orthogonal directions (Mirmiran et al. 2000). ANSYS (Ansys Structural Nonlinearities Manual), used in this study, has a parametric design language that is useful for parametric input and automatic mesh generation. The following steps were taken in the modeling: 1. Geometric input consists of core diameter, specimen height, and number of elements. 2. Concrete, FRP, and reinforcement bars properties include compressive strength, tensile strength, yield stress, Poissons ratio and modules of elasticity.

FINITE ELEMENT MODELING 5 LOADING AND ANALYZE METHOD

Concrete has been modeled by an 8-noded SOLID65 element, which consist of a single solid material and up to three smeared reinforcing materials in three different orientations. The solid material, i.e., plain concrete, is treated as an initially isotropic homogeneous material with different tensile and compressive strengths. It is also capable of cracking in tension and crushing in compression. Cracking can occur in any of the three orthogonal directions. The element can also accommodate plastic deformations and creep. The jacket is modeled by 4-noded linear elastic membrane SHELL41 element, which is a three dimensional shell element with membrane stiffness and three translational degrees of freedom per node. However, it does not have any bending stiffness, nor any rotational degree of freedom. The element can accommodate variable thickness, orthotropic behavior, stress stiffening, large deflection, and cloth option, the last of which is a nonlinear feature that constitutes

After making four 3-D finite element models of RC columns, confined with FRP, by ANSYS, axial load statically submitted to the top of the columns, then lateral load as cyclic load submitted to the model with displacement control. As mentioned before all the characteristics of four models are the same, except transverse reinforcement ratio, as it has shown in Table 4.

VALIDATION BY EXPERIMENTAL MODEL

The validity of the proposed analytical model is checked through extensive comparisons between analytical and experimental results of RC columns confined with FRP under compression load. The experimental

231

RESULT AND COMPARISONS

A comparison between four finite element models has been done. Force-Lateral Displacement curves have been shown in Figure 5. Also hysteresis curves derived from finite element nonlinear analysis have been shown in Figures 69. As it shown in Figure 5

Figure 3.

Cyclic load.

Table 4.

Transverse reinforcing of models. Transverse reinforcement ratio 0 0.004 0.006 0.008

Model name Model I Model II Model III Model IV

Figure 5.

Comparison between results.

Table 5. Models I II III IV

Maximum lateral displacement in models. Maximum lateral displacement 30 mm 47 mm 48 mm 68 mm

Figure 6.

Hysteresis curve for model I.

Figure 4. Comparison between finite element model and Samaans model.

data used herein were derived from Samaan et al. test (1998). For this aim, Samaans model, exactly modeled in finite element software (ANSYS).comparison between analytical and experimental model have been shown in Figure 4. As it is shown, there is a good relation between them.

Figure 7.

Hysteresis curve for model II.

232

REFERENCES
ACI Committee 440R. 1996. State of the Art Report on Fiber Reinforcement for Concrete Structures. American Concrete Institute, Detroit. ANSYS Standard Users Manual Help,Ver.11 and ANSYS Structural Nonlinearities Manual. Ahmad, S.H., Khaloo, A.R. and Irshaid, A. Behavior of concrete spirally confined by Fiberglass Filaments. Magazine of Concrete Research, V. 43, No.156, 1991, pp. 143148. Buckle IG (Ed). The Northridge, California earthquake of January 17, 1994: performance of highway bridge. Tech. Rep. NCEER-94-0008, Nat. Ctr. for earthquake Engrg. Res., state University of New York at Buffalo, NY, 1994. Chaallal, O., Shahawy, M. and Hassan, M. Confinement Model for Axially Loaded Short Rectangular Columns Strengthened With Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Wrapping, ACI Structural Journal, MarchApril 2003. Fardis, M.N. and Khalili, H.H. Concrete Encased in Fiberglass-Reinforced Plastic, ACI Journal, Proceedings V. 78, No. 6, Nov/Dec. 1981, pp. 440446. Harmon, T., Slattery, K. and Ramakrishnan, S. The Effect of Confinement for Concrete Structures, Proceedings of the second International RILEM symposium, 1995, pp. 584592. Houssam A, Toutanji: Stress-Strain Characteristics of Concrete Columns Externally Confined with Advanced Fiber Composite Sheets.ACI Material Journal, 1999, pp. 397404. Kasei, M. Carbon Fiber Reinforced Earthquake-Resistant Retrofitting, Mitsubishi Kasei Crop., Japan 1993. Katsumata, H. and Kimura, K. Applications of Retrofit Method with Carbon Fiber for Existing Reinforced Concrete Structures, 22nd joint UJNR Panel Meeting, U.S.Japan Workshop, Gaithersburg, MD, 1990, pp. 128. Katsumata, H., Kobatale, Y. and Takeda, T. A Study on the Strengthening with Carbon Fiber for EarthquakeResistance Capacity of Existing Reinforced Concrete Columns, Proceedings of the seminar on Repair and Retrofit of Structures, U.S.-Japan Panel on wired and Seismic Effects, UJNR 1987, pp. 18161823. Mander, J.B., Priestley, M.J.N. and Park, R. 1988: Theoretical Stress-Strain model for confined concrete, Journal of structural engineering, V. 114, No. 8, pp. 18041826. Mirmiran A., Zagers K. and Yuan, W. Nonlinear finite element modeling of concrete confined by fiber composites. Elsevier 2000, pp. 7996 Mufti, A.A., Eriki, M.A. and Jaeger, L.C. Advanced Composite Materials in Bridge and Structures in Japan, Canadian Society of Civil Engineering, Montreal, Canada, 1992. Nanni, A. Norris, M.S. and Bradford, N.M. Lateral Confinement of Concrete Using FRP Reinforcement, Fiber Reinforced Plastic Reinforcement for Concrete Structures, SP-138, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich., 1994, pp. 193209. Parvin azadeh, Wang Wei. Concrete columns confined by fiber composite wraps under combined axial and cyclic lateral loads, 2002. Picher, F. Rochette, P. and Labossiere, P. Confinement of Concrete Cylinders with CFRP, Fiber Composites in Infrastructure, Proceedings, First International Conference on Composites in Infrastructure, 1996, pp. 829841.

Figure 8.

Hysteresis curve for model III.

Figure 9.

Hysteresis curve for model IV.

in range 0.004 and 0.006 in transverse reinforcement, there is no difference. After the ratio of 0.006 there is a significant increase in the strength and maximum displacement of specimen. Hysteresis loops of models II and III have the same shape, but in model IV, there exist a good hysteresis model with more energy dissipation.

CONCLUSIONS

As it shown in figures, the amount of transverse reinforcing of FRP retrofitted column has no significant effect in columns behavior, if amount of transverse reinforcing be in a regular range (e.g. 0.0040.006). If amount of transverse reinforcing be more than usual, it has a good effect on columns behavior. In fact, if transverse reinforcing of a column be sufficient, FRP retrofitting has no significant effect on columns behavior.

233

Priestly, M.J.N., Seible, F. and Fyfe. E. Column Seismic Retrofit Using Fiber Glass/Epoxy Jackets, Proceedings of the first International Conference on Advanced Composite Material in Bridge and Structures, Sherbrooke, Canada, 1992, pp. 287298 Priestley MJN., Seible F., Calvi GM. Seismic design and retrofit of bridges. New York: Wiley; 1996. Priestley MJN. Whittier narrows, California earthquake of October 1, 1987-damage to the I-5/I-605 separator. Earthquake Spectra J 1988; 4(2): 389405.

Samaan, M., Mirmiran, A. and Shahawy, M. 1998: Model of concrete confined by fiber composites., J. of Stru. Eng., ASCE, V. 124, No. 9, pp. 10251031, September 1998. Seible, F., Priestly, N., Hegemier, G.A. and Innamorato, D.: Seismic Retrofit of RC Columns with Continuous Carbon Fiber Jackets, Journal of Composites for Constructon, V. 1, No. 2, 1997, pp. 5262. Spoelstra, M.R., and Monti, G. FRP-Confined Concrete Model, Journal of composite for construction, V. 3, No. 3, August 1999, pp. 884888.

234