You are on page 1of 11

Materials and Structures

DOI 10.1617/s11527-015-0554-1

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Compressive behavior of concrete confined by CFRP


and transverse spiral reinforcement. Part A: experimental
study
Peng Yin Liang Huang Libo Yan Deju Zhu

Received: 4 August 2014 / Accepted: 2 February 2015


 RILEM 2015

Abstract This study presents the results of an


experimental investigation of 18 short concrete
columns confined by carbon fiber-reinforced polymer
(CFRP) and transverse spiral reinforcement (TSR)
under uniaxial compression. Longitudinal rebars are
not installed in the specimens in order to eliminate their
confinement effect to concrete which affects the
analysis of 3-D compression of concrete. The paper
only consider for FRP and spiral reinforcement confinement in transverse direction. Two key experimental parameters were investigated: the thickness of the
CFRP tube (0.167, 0.334, and 0.501 mm) and the
spacing of the TSR (25 and 50 mm). The failure mode,
axial and transverse stressstrain relationship, confinement effectiveness, Poissons ratio and dilatation
performance of the specimens were discussed. Test
results show that the ultimate strength of concrete has a

P. Yin (&)  L. Huang  D. Zhu


Department of Civil Engineering, Hunan University,
Yuelu Montain, Changsha 410082, China
e-mail: yinpeng0528@gmail.com
L. Huang
e-mail: huangliangstudy@126.com
D. Zhu
e-mail: zdj7802@hotmail.com
L. Yan
Department of Construction & Structural Engineering,
Fraunhofer Wilhelm-Klauditz Institution,
Bienroder Weg 54E, 38108 Brunswick, Germany
e-mail: lyan118@aucklanduni.ac.nz

linear proportional enhancement with an increase in


the FRP layer in each TSR category and a decrease in
the TSR spacing in each FRP layer category. The
ultimate load carrying capacity of the confined concrete depends on the confinement pressure during
failure in terms of ultimate strength and axial strain.
Keywords CFRP  Transverse spiral reinforcement 
Longitudinal rebar  Experimental study

1 Introduction
Fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) composite materials
have been widely used in the field of civil engineering in
the last two decades. Because of their high strength-toweight ratio, good corrosion behavior, and electromagnetic neutrality, FRP have been successfully used to
rehabilitate and upgrade existing reinforced concrete
structures through wrapping of the FRP sheet on
structures surface. Another attractive application of
FRP materials is the fabrication of new concrete
columns in FRP tubes or shells. FRP tubes or shells
offer several advantages, such as their increased transverse confinement, as well as their use as formwork.
To develop these applications, the compressive
stressstrain behavior of FRP-confined concrete has
been studied, and many models have been proposed
and developed for analysis and design [18]. Research
shows that FRP composites have a linear elastic

Materials and Structures

stressstrain response with brittle rupture failure at a


small rupture strain [9]. Current North American
codes and design guidelines provide design equations
for short circular columns, which are strengthened or
retrofitted with FRP-confinement wrapping [10]. All
codes and designed guidelines focus on the compressive strength of FRP wrapped concrete but neglect the
effect of transverse steel reinforcement. In reality,
however, the actual concrete columns are under two
actions of confinement: the action of the FRP and that
of steel reinforcement. Therefore, existing codes and
guidelines cannot provide accurate instructions. The
minimum amount of steel reinforcement must also be
added to the FRP-confined concrete to avoid generating a brittle failure mode. In this regard, researchers
note the need for a concrete confinement model that
considers the interaction between internal steel reinforcement and external FRP sheets [1113].
Some researchers have investigated concrete column
confined by an FRP, spiral or hoop, and longitudinal
reinforcement simultaneously [1417]. In their
experiment, they designed the longitudinal rebar in
specimens. In this paper, it does not deny the importance
of longitudinal rebar in the column. However, this study
aims to investigate the behavior of concrete under the
condition of 3D pressure by FRP and Spiral reinforcement. The experiment is designed to create a pure
transverse confinement circumstance for concrete. Longitudinal reinforcement will influence the analysis, so
analyzing the 3D compression of concrete confined by an
FRP and TSR will be inaccurate. The specimens without
longitudinal rebar in this paper can avoid this issue. The
goal is to make sure the concrete specimens can have a
relative accurate experiment data. The experiment data
can be compared with other researchers model and
proposed a new model with more accuracy.
Therefore, this study investigate the compressive
behavior of concrete by dual confinement provided by
CFRP and TSR, which terms as CFRPTSR-confined
Table 1 Test matrix and
details of the specimens

concrete. Stressstrain behavior, ultimate condition,


and other properties subjected to monotonic axial
compression were investigated. These results were
recorded to verify future studies that develop related
models.

2 Experimental program
2.1 Test matrix
A total of 18 CFRP-TSR-confined concrete cylinders
with a diameter of 150 mm and a height of 300 mm
were constructed and tested under uniaxial compression. Three plain concrete cylinders with the same
diameter and height were also tested for comparison.
The cylinder specimens were designed on the basis
of the following variables: (1) the number of CFRP
layers, nf , and (2) the spacing of TSR, s. Each variable
is classified into several characters: the number of
CFRP layers is classified into one, two, and three
layers labeled as 1L, 2L, and 3L, respectively; the
spacing of TSR is classified into 25 and 50 mm, which
are labeled as -25 and -50, respectively. For each
combination of testing parameters, three identical
specimens were fabricated and tested, and they were
labeled as N1, N2, and N3, respectively. i.e., 3L-25N2 indicates that the specimen is confined by three
layers of CFRP with a 25 mm spacing of TSR (the
second specimen in this combination of testing
parameters). The plain concrete column is represented
by 0L-N. The CFRP-TSR-confined concrete specimens occupy a 5 mm concrete cover (c). The details of
these specimens are summarized in Table 1.
2.2 Preparation of the specimens
Before the CFRP tubes are fabricated, the PVC tubes
with a diameter of 150 mm were prepared as the

Specimen group

fc0 (MPa)

D (mm)

c (mm)

/h (mm)

s (mm)

qs (%)

nf

t (mm)

1L-50

30.6

150

50

1.416

0.167

1L-25

30.6

150

25

2.682

0.167

2L-50

30.6

150

50

1.416

0.334

2L-25

30.6

150

25

2.682

0.334

3L-50

30.6

150

50

1.416

0.501

3L-25

30.6

150

25

2.682

0.501

Materials and Structures

mould. It is noted that this mould is only valid for


CFRP tubes, not for concrete. The PVC tubes were
covered with a layer of thin plastic films, which enable
the cured CFRP tubes to be easily detached later. The
carbon fiber sheets were cut and trimmed into
appropriate lengths for each layer of wraps, with an
overlap length of 150 mm. Then epoxy resin was
applied. The CFRP sheet was saturated with epoxy
with the use of a brush before the sheet was wrapped
around the PVC tube. Extra CFRP strips with width of
40 mm were placed at the top and bottom ends of each
cylinder to enhance its strength and ensure that failure
occurs in the middle portion of the specimen. Additional epoxy was applied as an overcoat to ensure that
the entire fabric was wet. Excess epoxy and air bubble
were squeezed out of the CFRP sheet. After 3 h, all
FRP tubes were pulled out from the PVC tubes. All
FRP tubes should be dried for at least 7 days. During
this period, the TSR was prepared and placed into the
CFRP tubes, and the concrete was cast into the FRP
tubes. The fabrication procedure is shown in Fig. 1.
2.3 Material properties
2.3.1 Concrete
The concrete mix design is shown in Table 2. Three
plain concrete cylinders were tested to determine the
average maximum strength of the unconfined con0
crete, fco
, and its corresponding strain, e0co . The average
concrete compressive strength at 28 days is 30.6 MPa.

2.3.2 Steel reinforcement


The transverse spiral reinforcement was made with the
diameter of 6 mm deformed bars that have an average
yield strength of fyt = 335 MPa. Tension tests were
performed on steel samples. The average yield
strength values were calculated from five tension tests.
2.3.3 Fiber reinforced polymer
To obtain the material mechanical property of the
CFRP, related tensile tests were conducted according to
ASTM specification D3039-M08 (ASTM 2008b). The
tensile coupons were cut from an FRP sheet along the
fiber. Aluminum flat plates were glued to the ends of the
coupons before they were tested to prevent them from
premature failure. The CFRP coupon is shown in Fig. 2.
The strength and modulus were calculated according
to the gross sectional area of the coupons. The ultimate
strain was obtained from the stain gauge stick at the
middle portion of the coupons. The main mechanical
properties obtained from the average values of five
tensile coupon tests were as follows: thickness (one
layer of CFRP) = 0.167 mm; ultimate strength,
ffu = 3,200 MPa; ultimate strain, efu = 0.0150; and
modulus, Efu = 213 GPa.
2.4 Instrumentation and loading
For each CFRPTSR-confined specimen, four strain
gauges with a length of 20 mm in the axial direction

Fig. 1 Fabrication procedure of the CFRP tube: a CFRP sheet, epoxy, and PVC tube; b CFRP tubes on the PVC mold; c CFRP tube;
d CFRP tube with the fixed TSR
Table 2 Concrete mixture proportions
0
(MPa)
fco

e0co

Cement (kg/m3)

Water (kg/m3)

Fine aggregates (kg/m3)

Coarse aggregates (kg/m3)

w=c

30.6

0.002

290

195

1,024

898

0.67

Materials and Structures


Strain gauges

Aluminlum flat bar

56

15

SG1
SG3
SG2

CFRP coupon

56

138

0.167

CFRP coupon

SG3

1.5

SG1 & SG2


Aluminlum flat bar

Fig. 2 Details of the CFRP tension coupon (unit of mm)

SG2
SG1

Overlapping Zone

D=130 mm

SG7 SG8

(a)

s=25 mm

Plain Concrete

h=300 mm

SG2
SG1 SG3
SG4

SG5
SG6

h=300 mm

CFRP Tube

s=50 mm

Strain gauge location

SG4 SG3

D=130 mm

(b)

Fig. 3 Installation of the strain gauges: a Strain gauges on the CFRP tube and unconfined concrete; b Strain gauges on the TSR

and four strain gauges with a length of 10 mm in the


transverse direction were installed at the middle
portion of the specimen. One axial strain gauge and
one transverse gauge were used as one unit. Each unit
was symmetrically installed 90 apart on the surface of
the specimens (see Fig. 3a). For each unconfined
concrete specimen, two axial strain gauges and two
transverse strain gauges, all with a gauge length of
50 mm, were placed at the middle portion of the
specimen to measure the strain gauges in two directions. One axial strain gauge and one transverse gauge
were used as one unit. Each unit was symmetrically
installed 180 apart on the surface of the specimens
(see Fig. 3a). The installation of the TSR strain gauges
is shown in Fig. 3b.
In addition, the average axial strains of the cylinders were also measured with four LVDTs installed at
four edges of the compression board of the testing
machine. Two high-stiff steel plates with a diameter
slightly smaller than that of the specimen were placed
at the top and bottom of the specimens to avoid direct
loading of the CFRP tube when the specimen is
subjected to compressive load, as shown in Fig. 4. All
the specimens were tested in a 5,000 kN testing

Compression Board
LVDT

Steel Plate

LVDT

Strain Gauges

Steel Plate
Compression Board

Fig. 4 Test setup in the axial compression test

machine under displacement control with a constant


rate of 0.01 mm/s. All test data were automatically
recorded with a data acquisition system.

3 Results
3.1 Failure mode
Specimens failed when the tensile fiber ruptured. The
confinement level can affect the damage level of core

Materials and Structures

each category. The figure shows that the CFRPTSRconfined concrete bi-linearly behaved, with two linear
regions connected by a transition zone. The axial
stress of the cylinder specimens was obtained by
division of the measured axial load by the crosssection area of the cylinder. The axial and transverse
strains of the cylinder specimens were obtained from
LVDTs and strain gauges, respectively.
Table 3 shows the test data obtained from the
specimens. The maximum axial load is defined as
Pmax , and the relative maximum axial stress and axial
strain of the columns are defined as fcmax and ecmax ,
respectively. The actual FRP rupture strain, efu;a , is
less than the ultimate tensile strain, efu , obtained from
 0
the standard tension coupon test. The value fcmax fco
represents confinement effectiveness. The confinement effectiveness became larger when increasing the
layer of CFRP or decreasing the spacing of TSR.
The recorded CFRP ultimate strain was less than
the rupture strain obtained from the coupon tests. The
possible reasons for this phenomenon are considered
below [1822]. The rupture strain obtained from the
coupon test is the result of a pure tensile experiment.
However, in the axial compression test, the CFRP
tubes may be subjected to axial stress and transverse
stress, a condition that is different from that in the pure
tensile test in coupons. Concrete fragment impales the
interface of the CFRP tube, and this leads to a local
stress concentration as a result of the non-uniform
deformation of cracked concrete. The CFRP tube

concrete, i.e. a higher confinement level caused more


damage. During the testing, debonding or shear failure
of the specimens was not detected. The rupture strain
of the CFRP was lower than the ultimate strain
capacity obtained in the coupon test, and this condition
led to the premature failure of the CFRP. The
appearance of the specimens slightly changed before
the ultimate compression load reached an average of
95 %. When it reached 95 %, the sound of CFRP
tearing was heard. The CFRP tube was completely
torn and produced a very loud sound when the ultimate
compression load was reached. The appearance of the
column after testing is shown in Fig. 5.
3.2 Stressstrain behavior
Figure 6 illustrates the average axial stress versus the
axial and transverse strain of the cylinder specimens in

Fig. 5 Failure modes of the specimens

Fig. 6 Stressstrain
behavior of the specimens

Displacement (mm)
-4.5

-3.0

0.0

1.5

3.0

4.5

3L-25
3L-50
2L-25

140
120

Axial Stress (MPa)

-1.5

3L-25
2471
3L-50
2L-25 2118

2L-50
100
80

6.0
2824

2L-50

1L-25

1L-25

1L-50

1765

1L-50 1412

60

1059
706

40

0L-N
20
0
-0.020

353

-0.015

-0.010

-0.005

Transverse Strain

0.000

0.005

0.010

Axial Strain

0.015

0
0.020

Axial Load (kN)

-6.0
160

Materials and Structures


Table 3 Experimental results of the CFRP-TSR-confined concrete column specimens
Pc2 kN

ec1

ec2

ecmax

efu;a

0
fcmax /fco

ecmax =e0co

efu;a =efu

530

1,237

0.0009

0.0071

0.0131

0.0140

2.661

6.550

0.933

535

1,240

0.0010

0.0070

0.0130

0.0139

2.826

6.500

0.927

75.491

533

1,230

0.0009

0.0072

0.0132

0.0140

2.467

6.600

0.933

1,664

94.166

707

1,414

0.0012

0.0073

0.0132

0.0109

3.077

6.600

0.727

1,570

88.846

700

1,420

0.0011

0.0075

0.0132

0.0105

2.903

6.600

0.700

1L-25-N3

1,758

99.485

710

1,411

0.0012

0.0074

0.0133

0.0110

3.251

6.650

0.733

2L-50-N1

2,078

117.594

795

1,502

0.0013

0.0051

0.0139

0.0085

3.843

6.950

0.567

2L-50-N2

1,881

106.446

788

1,510

0.0014

0.0050

0.0140

0.0088

3.479

7.000

0.587

2L-50-N3

1,977

111.879

801

1,500

0.0013

0.0052

0.0137

0.0082

3.656

6.850

0.547

2L-25-N1

2,302

130.270

884

1,908

0.0015

0.0082

0.0141

0.0069

4.257

7.050

0.460

2L-25-N2

2,100

118.839

880

1,902

0.0016

0.0081

0.0140

0.0066

3.884

7.000

0.440

2L-25-N3

2,205

124.781

877

1,910

0.0015

0.0080

0.0142

0.0065

4.078

7.100

0.433

3L-50-N1

2,370

134.119

1,060

2,032

0.0021

0.0085

0.0159

0.0061

4.383

7.950

0.407

3L-50-N2
3L-50-N3

2,475
2,268

140.060
128.346

1,050
1,058

2,035
2,030

0.0020
0.0023

0.0088
0.0084

0.0160
0.0161

0.0060
0.0062

4.577
4.194

8.000
8.050

0.400
0.413

3L-25-N1

2,491

140.966

1,237

2,121

0.0026

0.0078

0.0162

0.0050

4.607

8.100

0.333

3L-25-N2

2,698

152.680

1,230

2,118

0.0028

0.0075

0.0163

0.0051

4.990

8.150

0.340

3L-25-N3

2,586

146.342

1,233

2,128

0.0027

0.0071

0.0162

0.0053

4.782

8.100

0.353

1L-50-N1

1,439

81.433

1L-50-N2

1,528

86.470

1L-50-N3

1,334

1L-25-N1
1L-25-N2

fcmax (MPa)

Pc1 kN

considers curvature, whereas the CFRP coupon does


not.
The stressstrain curve can be approximately
divided into three regions, as shown in Fig. 7. In the
initial part of the loading (the axial stress level is lower
0
than that of unconfined concrete, fco
, corresponding
0
with the unconfined concrete stain, eco ), all the CFPR
TSR-confined concrete cylinders share a similar
stressstain behavior as that of the unconfined concrete column specimens, which are shown as a linear
region. Therefore, the confinement provided by the
CFRP and TSR is not activated. In this stage, the
specimens reach the first linear peak load, which is
defined as Pc1 . The corresponding stress and strain are
defined as fc1 and ec1 , respectively.
Beyond this stage, the curves enter the second
nonlinear transition region; the passive confinement
pressure significantly increases as a result of the large
transverse expansion of the concrete because considerable micro-cracks propagate in concrete. As microcracks develop, the CFRP tubes and TSR significantly
confine the concrete core. Decreasing the spacing of
the TSR from 50 to 25 mm with the same amount of
FRP layers extends this nonlinear transition region.
The more TSR is confined, the fewer are the micro-

Stage

Stage

Stage

Pcmax

fcmax

Pc2

fc2

Pc1

fc1

c1

c2

Axial Stress

Pcmax kN

Axial Load

Specimen

cmax
Strain

Fig. 7 Typical stressstrain relationship of the specimens

cracks that occur inside the concrete when it reaches


the ultimate unconfined concrete strength. This condition leads to small transverse deformation. As a
result, the linear stage of the first region is prolonged,
and its transition zone is extended.
The third region exhibits an approximately linear
curve, which is mainly dominated by the CFRP and
TSR. In this region, the CFRP and TSR are fully
activated to confine the concrete core, and this leads to
the considerable compressive strength and ductility of
concrete when the concrete core is subjected to triaxial

Materials and Structures


Volume Expansion

Volume Reduction

160

3L-25
3L-50

140

2L-25
120

Axial Stress

compression. In this region, the axial load begins with


a load defined as Pc2 , and the corresponding stress and
strain are defined as fc2 and ec2 , respectively. The curve
continues to be represented by an ascending line until
the maximum axial stress is reached; this stress also
corresponds with the maximum axial and transverse
strain. At this point, the CFRP tube ruptures with a
very loud sound similar to an explosion.

2L-50

100
80

1L-25
1L-50

60
40

3.3 Poissons ratio

20

The Poissons ratio of the specimens at different


confinement levels is shown in Fig. 8. When the axial
stress of the specimen is lower than the ultimate
strength of unconfined concrete (30.6 MPa), the
Poissons ratio of all types of specimens approximately equals 0.2, which represents the typical initial
Poissons ratio of unconfined concrete. In this region,
the confinement effect provided by the CFRP and TSR
is not activate to affect the specimen. The transverse
expansion of the concrete core is negligible because
the micro crack inside the core concrete occupies a
very small space, so a constant value of the initial
Poissons ratio is reached.
When the axial stress of the specimen exceeds the
ultimate strength of unconfined concrete, the Poissons ratio of the specimen shows a linear increase. In
this region, the micro cracks inside the concrete core
gradually expand. The CFRP sheet outside the column
and the TSR inside the column begin to provide the
transverse confinement. The level of transverse confinement determines the slope of the curve in the
second region. When the column is subjected to weak
confinement with insufficient transverse stiffness, the
1.2
1.1

1L-50

1.0
0.9

1L-25

Poisson Ratio

0.8
0.7

2L-50

0.6

2L-25

0.5
0.4

3L-50

0.3

3L-25

0.2
0.1
0.0 5

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Axial Stress (MPa)

Fig. 8 Influence of the confinement level on the Poissons ratio

0
-0.020

-0.015

-0.010

-0.005

0.000

0.005

0.010

Volumertric Strain

Fig. 9 Axial stressvolumetric strain of the specimens

transverse strain rapidly increases, so the Poissons


ratio rapidly increases too. As the column is subjected
to strong confinement with sufficient transverse stiffness, the transverse strain slowly increases, so is the
Poissons ratio.
When the axial stress continues to increase, the
Poissons ratio finally stabilized to its maximal value
until the specimen fails. The expansion of micro
cracks inside the core concrete is subjected to a high
level of confinement. The loading capacity of the
specimen, as well as the tensile strain of the CFRP and
TSR, also increases until the CFRP ruptures.
3.4 Dilatation performance
In a triaxial state of stress, the dilatation (also called
volumetric strain ev ) is defined as follows:
ev ec 2er
where ec is the axial strain and er is the transverse
strain. Figure 9 shows the curve of the axial stress
versus the volumetric strain for all types of specimens.
Initially, volume change is in the form of reduction
and is nearly linear until the ultimate unconfined
concrete stress is reached. After this point, the
specimens reverse the direction of volume change in
such a way that the volume expands, a phenomenon
called dilatancy. With the increase in axial stress, the
specimens with one and two layers of FRP continue to
conduct volume expansion, whereas the specimens
with three layers of FRP reverse the direction of
volume change again to a reduction manner. As the
confinement increases (increase in FRP layers or

Materials and Structures

decrease in TSR spacing), the dilation zone shrinks, so


an effective confinement response is achieved.

flf

4 Analysis

where d is the diameter of the entire concrete cross


section, Efu is the Youngs modulus of the FRP, t is the
thickness of the FRP, and efu;a is the actual tensile
strain of the FRP.

4.1 Interactive function of the CFRP and TSR


The dual confinement mechanism of the CFRP and TSR
is shown in Fig. 10. In the initial part of loading (axial
strain is smaller than 0.002), the tensile strain provided
by TSR, es , is similar to that developed by CFRP, ef .
However, when the axial strain level approaches or
larger than the unconfined concrete strain (0.002), the
relationship between the FRP transverse strain and
TSR transverse strain can be divided into two
categories. One category is for Column 1L-50, 1L25, 2L-50. These column indicate that the FRP
transverse strain is larger than the TSR transverse
strain after 0.002 in axial strain. Another category is
for Column 2L-25, 3L-25, 3L-50. These column
indicate that the FRP transverse strain is smaller than
the TSR transverse strain after 0.002 in axial strain. In
can be found that with the increasement of FRP layer,
the TSR transverse strain would increase. Before
CFRP rupture, the TSR reaches its yield strain, and
this result indicates that the specimens are subjected to
the maximum confining pressure provided by the TSR
and CFRP tube at the CFRP rupture state.
4.2 Influence of ultimate confinement pressure
The confinement pressure provided by the CFRP and
TSR determines the ultimate capacity of the confined
concrete in terms of compressive strength and axial
strain. The strength of concrete generated at failure
linearly increases with the confinement ratio, as indicated in Fig. 11a. Parameter ac is defined as the ratio
between the ultimate confinement pressure (flu ) and
0
the compressive strength of unconfined concrete (fco
).
ac

flu
0
fco

where flu flf fls ; flf is the ultimate confinement


pressure provided by FRP, and fls is the ultimate
confinement pressure provided by transverse steel
reinforcement. The calculation of flf and fls is as
follows:

2Efu efu;a t
d

fls

2ke Es el As
el \esy
sds

fls

2ke fsy As
el [ esy
sds

where Es is the Youngs modulus of the spiral


reinforcement, els is the actual tensile strain of the
spiral reinforcement,esy is the yield strain of steel, As is
the cross-sectional area of the spiral reinforcement, ds
is the diameter of the spiral between bar centers, and ke
is the confinement effectiveness coefficient. The
0 2
12ds s
previous ke is defined as ke 1q
0 . In this study,
s

the specimens do not contain longitudinal rebar


(q0s 0. Therefore, ke should be revised as

2
0
ke 1  2ds s , where s0 is the clear vertical spacing
between spiral reinforcement.
For strain capacity, when the confinement ratio
reaches a high value, the curve stabilizes to a platform,
as indicated in Fig. 11b.
It is noted that the regression analysis is limited to
the range of confinement ratios used in experimental
tests, and it should not be extended to zero confinement ratio, hence to the unconfined point.

5 Conclusion
This paper presents an experimental study on the
compressive behavior of concrete cylinder column
confined by both CFRP and TSR. The effects of main
variables, such as the CFRP tube layer and TSR
volumetric ratio, were investigated. The main conclusions are as follows:

Experimental results show that increasing the layer


of the CFRP tube or the TSR volumetric ratio
enhances the ultimate strength of concrete and its
corresponding ultimate strain. Test results indicate
that when the layer of FRP in each different
spacing of TSR group is increased, the ultimate

Materials and Structures


Axial Strain

Axial Strain

0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.020
0.000

0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.020
0.000

-0.002

-0.002

TSR yield strain

TSR yield strain

-0.004

Transverse Strain

Transverse Strain

-0.004
-0.006
-0.008

TSR

-0.010
-0.012

-0.006

TSR

-0.008
-0.010

CFRP
-0.012

Actual CFRP rupture strain


-0.014

Actual CFRP rupture strain

CFRP

-0.014

CFRP coupon rupture strain

-0.016

Column 1L-25

Axial Strain

Axial Strain

0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.020
0.000

0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.020
0.000

-0.002

-0.002

TSR yield strain

-0.006

TSR

-0.008
-0.010

TSR yield strain

-0.004

CFRP
Actual CFRP rupture strain

-0.012

Transverse Strain

Transverse Strain

-0.004

-0.014

-0.006

CFRP
-0.008
-0.010

TSR

Actual CFRP rupture strain

-0.012
-0.014

CFRP coupon rupture strain

-0.016

-0.016

Column 2L-50

CFRP coupon rupture strain

Column 2L-25
Axial Strain

Axial Strain
0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.020
0.000

0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.020
0.000

-0.002

-0.002

TSR yield strain

-0.006

CFRP

-0.008

Actual CFRP rupture strain

-0.010
-0.012

TSR

-0.014
-0.016

TSR yield strain

-0.004

Transverse Strain

-0.004

Transverse Strain

CFRP coupon rupture strain

-0.016

Column 1L-50

CFRP
-0.006
-0.008

Actual CFRP rupture strain

-0.010
-0.012

TSR

-0.014

CFRP coupon rupture strain

-0.016

CFRP coupon rupture strain

Column 3L-25

Column 3L-50

Fig. 10 Interaction function of the CFRP and TSR

strength of concrete demonstrates a linear proportional enhancement.


The volume changes in the specimens are controlled
by the confinement level. The dilatation zone decreases

when the confinement level increases, and this condition leads to an effective confinement response.
The Poissons ratio remains at 0.2 before the
compression stress reaches the unconfined

Materials and Structures


450

350
300
250

740

(a)

1L-50
1L-25
2L-50
2L-25
3L-50
3L-25

720

Increase of Strength (%)

Increase of Strength (%)

400

200
150
100

0
0.0

680
660
640
620
600
580
560
540

y = 1931.3x - 374.62

50

700

(b)

1L-50
1L-25
2L-50
2L-25
3L-50
3L-25

y = -152929x3 + 159146x2 - 53320x + 6361.9

520
0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Confinement Ratio c

500
0.25

0.30

0.35

Confinement Ratio

0.40

0.45

Fig. 11 a Typical relationship between strength gain and confinement ratio; b Typical relationship between strain gain and
confinement ratio

concrete strength. Then, it undergoes a proportional increase and eventually stabilizes at a


constant value until the CFRP tube ruptures.
The ultimate capacity of the confined concrete
depends on the confinement pressure during failure
in terms of ultimate strength and axial strain.

Acknowledgments This research was funded by the Natural


Science of China (project codes: 51078132) and China 973 Plan
(Project codes: SQ2011CB076458). The experimental work were
supported by the Structure Laboratory of Hunan University. The
authors also acknowledge the technical instruction and assistance
of Professor Yan Xiao and Professor Giorgio Monti.

References
1. Harries KA, Carey S (2003) Shape and gap effects on the
behavior of variably confined concrete. Cem Concr Res
3(6):881890
2. Lam L, Teng JG (2003) Design-oriented stressstrain model for
FRP-confined concrete. Constr Build Mater 17(67):471489
3. Lignola GP, Nardone F, Prota A, Manfredi G (2012) Analytical model for the effective strain in FRP-wrapped circular
RC columns. ELSEVIER Compos Part B 43(8):32083218
4. Saafi M, Toutanji HA, Li Z (1999) Behavior of concrete
columns confined with fiber reinforced polymer tubes. ACI
Mater J 96(4):500509
5. Samaan M, Mirmiran A, Shahawy M (1998) Model of concrete
confined by fiber composites. J Struct Eng 124(9):10251031
6. Ozbakkaloglu T, Lim JC, Vincent T (2013) FRP-confined
concrete in circular sections: Review and assessment of
stressstrain models. Eng Struct 49:10681088
7. Toutanji HA (1999) Stressstrain characteristics of concrete
columns externally confined with advanced fiber composite
sheets. ACI Mater J 93(6):397404

8. Xiao Y, Wu H (2000) Compressive behavior of concrete


confined by carbon fiber composite jackets. J Mater Civ Eng
12(2):139146
9. Dai JG, Bai YL, Teng JG (2011) Behavior and modeling of
concrete confined with FRP composite of large deformability. J Compos Constr 15(6):963973
10. American Concrete Institude (ACI) (2008a) Guide for the
design and construction of external bonded FRP systems for
strengthing concrete structure. ACI 440.2R-08. Farmington
Hills, Mich
11. Carey SA, Harries KA (2005) Axial behavior and modeling
of confined small-, medium-, and large-scale circular sections with carbon fiber-reinforced polymer jackets. ACI
Struct J 102(4):596604
12. Eid R, Roy N, Paultre P (2009) Normal-and high-strength
concrete circular elements wrapped with FRP composites.
J Compos Constr 13(2):113124
13. Matthys S, Toutanji H, Audenaert K, Taerwe L (2005) Axial
load behavior of large-scale columns confined with fiberreinforced polymer composites. ACI Struct J 102(2):258267
14. Eid R, Paultre P (2008) Analytical model for FRP-confined
circular reinforced-concrete columns. J Compos Constr
12(5):541552
15. Lignola GP, Prota A, Manfredi G (2014) Simplified modeling of rectangular concrete cross-sections confined by
external FRP wrapping. Polymers 6(4):11871206
16. Pellegrino C, Modena C (2010) Analytical model for FRP
confinement of concrete columns with and without internal
steel reinforcement. J Compos Constr 14(6):693705
17. Pessiki S, Pieroni A (1997) Axial load behavior of largescale spirally-reinforced high-strength concrete columns.
ACI Struct J 94(3):304313
18. De Lorenzis L, Tepfers R (2001) Comparative study of
models on confinement of concrete cylinders with fiber reinforced polymer composites. ASCE J Compos Constr
5(4):237245
19. Karbhari VM, Gao Y (1997) Composite jacketed concrete
under uniaxial compression-verification of simple design
equations. J Mater Civ Eng 9(4):185193

Materials and Structures


20. Luca AD, Matta F, Nanni A (2011) Behavior of full-scale
glass fiber-reinforced polymer reinforced concrete columns
under axial load. ACI Struct J 107(5):589596
21. Matthys S, Taerwe L, Audenaert K (1999) Test on axially
loaded concrete columns confined by fiber reinforced
polymers sheet wrapping. In Proceedings of FRPRCS-4,
Baltimore, pp 217218

22. Zinno A, Lignola GP, Prota A, Manfredi G, Cosenza E


(2010) Influence of free edge stress concentration on effectiveness of FRP confinement. ELSEVIER Compos Part
B 41(7):523532