You are on page 1of 11

ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL TECHNICAL PAPER

Title no. 105-S28

Plastic Hinge Length of Reinforced Concrete Columns


by Sungjin Bae and Oguzhan Bayrak

As a column experiences earthquake-induced lateral displacements concrete column. The length of a plastic hinge depends on many
while supporting gravity loads, severe damage is observed in factors. The following is a list of important factors that influence
regions subjected to large moments. These regions are commonly the length of a plastic hinge: 1) level of axial load; 2) moment
referred to as plastic hinges and they experience large inelastic gradient; 3) level of shear stress in the plastic hinge region; 4)
curvatures. The inelastic curvatures in plastic hinges are typically mechanical properties of longitudinal and transverse reinforce-
assumed to be constant over the plastic hinge length, lp , to simplify
the estimation of the tip displacement of a column. Therefore, if the
ment; 5) concrete strength; and 6) level of confinement and its
plastic hinge length is known, the tip displacement of a column can effectiveness in the potential hinge region.
easily be obtained by integrating curvatures, and vice versa. As In the 1950s and 1960s, researchers1-5 studied lp to estimate
part of the research reported in this paper, the effects of axial load the flexural deformation capacity of reinforced concrete
and shear span-depth ratio (L/ h) on lp are evaluated experimen- beams. To estimate the flexural deformation capacity, the
tally. Based on the experimental observations, a new analytical plastic rotation capacity and the lp are used
approach that can be used to estimate lp is presented. Finally, the
research findings are synthesized into a simple expression that can cu ce
be used to estimate lp. p = -------------------
- lp (1)
c
Keywords: axial load; deformation capacity; plastic hinge length.
Park and Paulay11 extended this concept to a cantilever
INTRODUCTION column. They simplified the curvature distribution along the
Numerous researchers1-10 have suggested various length of a column using a plastic hinge (Fig. 1). Using the
expressions that can be used to estimate the plastic hinge length second moment area theorem, they calculated the tip
lp of concrete members. Large differences exist among different displacement of a column (Eq. (2))
expressions, however, and the performance of different expres-
sions in estimating lp has not been evaluated systematically. y L
2
This paper presents test results from four full-scale tip = y + p = ----------
- + ( y )l p ( L 0.5l p ) (2)
concrete columns. In addition, the effect of axial load and 3
shear span-depth ratio (L/h, where L is the height of a canti-
lever column and h is the overall depth of a column) on the By further simplifying Eq. (2), Park and Paulay11 obtained
lp is investigated. A concrete compression strain method to the relationship between curvature and displacement ductilities
estimate lp is proposed. Finally, a simple lp expression is (Eq. (3))
proposed and the influence of the estimated lp on the accuracy
l l
= 1 + 3 ( 1 ) ---p 1 0.5 ---p
of lateral load-drift predictions is studied.
(3)
L L
RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
Research conducted over the past three decades has Equations (2) and (3) have been commonly used to estimate
resulted in various constitutive relationships for concrete and the lp of concrete columns.6-9,12,13 It is interesting to note
reinforcing bars. As a result, the sectional behavior of that the curvature profile along the column is often related to
reinforced concrete columns can be reliably estimated. For a the tip displacement rather than flexural displacement.6-9,12,13
given sectional performance, the member behavior of a
column can be estimated if lp is known. As such, estimating
the length of a plastic hinge establishes a key step in
predicting the lateral load-drift response of a column. In this
context, the work presented herein advances the state of
knowledge: 1) by providing experimental evidence on the
effects of axial load and L/h on lp; 2) by introducing a new
concrete compression strain-based method to estimate lp;
and 3) by synthesizing the research findings into a simple
expression that can be use to estimate lp.

DEFINITION OF PLASTIC HINGE LENGTH Fig. 1Definition of plastic hinge length.11


Plastic hinges form at the maximum moment regions of
reinforced concrete columns. If lp is known, the tip displacement ACI Structural Journal, V. 105, No. 3, May-June 2008.
MS No. S-2006-224.R3 received April 19, 2006, and reviewed under Institute
of a column can be easily obtained by integrating curvatures. publication policies. Copyright 2008, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved,
Therefore, accurate assessment of lp is important in relating including the making of copies unless permission is obtained from the copyright proprietors.
Pertinent discussion including authors closure, if any, will be published in the March-
section-level response to member-level response of a April 2009 ACI Structural Journal if the discussion is received by November 1, 2008.

290 ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008


ACI member Sungjin Bae is a Structural Engineer at Bechtel Corporation, Frederick, Corley5
MD. He received his BS and MS from Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea, and his PhD To expand Mattocks3 work, Corley5 tested 40 simply
from the University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX. He is a Member of ACI Committee 209,
Creep and Shrinkage of Concrete, and Joint ACI-ASCE Committee 441, Reinforced
supported concrete beams subjected to single point loads.
Concrete Columns. His research interests include the behavior of concrete columns The confinement and size effects were the primary variables
subjected to combined axial load and flexure, testing of large-scale reinforced investigated. In addition, the effects of moment gradient and
concrete columns, and performance-based design of concrete columns.
amount of tension reinforcement were studied. Corley5
ACI member Oguzhan Bayrak is an Associate Professor of civil, architectural, and reported that the length of the plastic hinge region was
environmental engineering at the University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, and a primarily a function of the geometry of a concrete beam and
Fellow of the Clyde E. Lee Endowed Professorship. He is Chair of Joint ACI-ASCE
Committee 441, Reinforced Concrete Columns; a member of ACI Committees 341, that the size of a beam did not have a significant influence on
Earthquake-Resistant Concrete Bridges; E803, Faculty Network Coordinating the rotational capacity. Based on the scatter in the measured
Committee; and Joint ACI-ASCE Committee 445, Shear and Torsion. values of the plastic hinges, he concluded that the effect
of (q q)/qb in Eq. (6) could be ignored. Corley5 suggested
In such a case, the lp in Eq. (2) and (3) can include the effects the use of a simple expression for calculating lp
of bar slip and shear displacements.
d z
l p = --- + 0.2 ------- (7)
TECHNICAL LITERATURE: PLASTIC HINGE LENGTH 2 d
Baker1
To investigate the moment-curvature relationship of where both d and z are in inches.
beams and columns, 94 beam/column tests were conducted
by six laboratories under the auspices of CEB in the 1960s. Mattock4
The main test variables included concrete strength, yield Mattock4 simplified Eq. (6) in 1967. He stated that even
strength or amount of tension reinforcement, amount of though there was considerable scatter, the trend in the
compression reinforcement, single or double concentrated observed lp could be represented reasonably well by the
loads, and axial load. Based on the test results, Baker1 following simple expression
proposed the following equation to calculate the lp
d
0.25 l p = --- + 0.05z (8)
l p = k 1 k 2 k 3 ---
z 2
d (4)
d
Park et al.6
where z is the distance between the critical section and the Park et al.6 tested four full-scale concrete columns with
point of contraflexure and d is effective depth of a beam. square sections of 22 x 22 in.2 (550 x 550 mm2) and an L/h
of 2. The axial loads applied to the column specimens were
Baker1 reported that the lp ranged from 0.4d to 2.4d for in the range of 0.2fc Ag to 0.6fc Ag. Park et al.6 estimated the
practical values of z/d. The z/d ratio is a similar parameter lp of the test specimens using Eq. (2). They concluded that
to L/h and was used to represent the effect of moment gradient. the experimentally obtained lp were comparatively insensitive to
Baker and Amarakone2 simplified Eq. (4) to obtain the the axial load level and had an average value of 0.42h, where
following h is the overall depth of the column. They suggested using a
simple lp of 0.4h for concrete columns.
Using a similar approach, Priestley and Park7 proposed the
l p = 0.8k 1 k 3 --- c
z
(5)
d following equation for the calculation of lp in reinforced
concrete columns
where c is the neutral axis depth at collapse.
lp = 0.08L + 6db (9)
3
Mattock
The suggested lp (Eq. (9)) has two components. Priestley
Mattock3 conducted 37 beam tests and investigated the and Park7 stated that the first term mainly accounted for
effect of various parameters on the behavior of reinforced column bending, while the second accounted for bar slip due
concrete beams. The parameters studied by Mattock3 were to the elongation of longitudinal bars beyond the theoretical
concrete strength ( fc = 4000 to 6000 psi [28 to 41 MPa]), base (tensile strain penetration into the joint or foundation).
effective depth of beam (d = 10 to 20 in. [254 to 508 mm]), Paulay and Priestley8 revised Eq. (9) to account for
moment gradient (z/d = 2.75 to 11), amount (l = 1 to 3%), different grades of flexural reinforcement. The revised
and yield strength ( fy = 47 to 60 ksi [324 to 414 MPa]) of expression is given in Eq. (10)
tension reinforcement. Based on the test results, Mattock3
concluded that the spread of plasticity along a beam length
increased as z/d increased, and as the net tension reinforcement l p = 0.08L + 0.15d b f y (f y in ksi)
(10)
(q q)/qb decreased. Mattock3 proposed the following l p = 0.08L + 0.022d b f y (f y in MPa)
empirical relationship to calculate lp.
Paulay and Priestley8 reported that Eq. (10) resulted in
d - lp 0.5h for typical columns.
l p = --- 1 + 1.14 --z- 1 1 ------------- ---------
d q q
q b 16.2
(6)
2 d
Sakai and Sheikh14
Based on an extensive review of the literature, Sakai and
where both d and z are in inches. Sheikh14 reported that the lp increased as the aspect ratio (L/h or

ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008 291


L/D), which is nearly equivalent to the L/h, increased. expressions proposed by Baker1 and Baker and Amarakone.2
Bilinear curves illustrating the relationship between the lp This is because the behavior of concrete beams was the
and the aspect ratio were reported as trend lines by the major focus in investigating the lp in early research.1-5 In the
authors. They concluded that the lp was affected by the more recent research,6-9 the behavior of concrete columns
amount of transverse reinforcement, axial load level, and has been the focus of lp investigations.
aspect ratio. In addition, although the effect of axial load on the lp of
concrete columns has been reported by several researchers,
Sheikh and Khoury9 the reported results can be considered contradictory. As
Sheikh and Khoury,9 Sheikh et al.,12 and Bayrak and discussed previously, Park et al.6 and Mendis10 concluded
Sheikh13 reported that the measured lp were approximately that the lp were insensitive to axial load levels based on their
equal to 1.0h in their column tests. It is important to note test results. In contrast, Atalay and Penzien15 reported that
that most of their column tests were conducted under high the spread of plasticity or the length of the damaged region
axial loads. increased as the axial load level increased. Tanaka and
Park16 reported that the lp increased from 0.46h to 0.75h as
Mendis10 the applied axial load level increased from 0.1fc Ag to
Mendis10 conducted tests on 13 simply supported concrete 0.3fc Ag. The test results of Thomson and Wallace17 and
beams subjected to single point loads and examined their lp. Lgeron and Paultre18 indicated that the increase of lp with
He reported that the lp increased as the L/h or the longitu- the axial loads could also be observed for high-strength
dinal reinforcement ratio increased, but decreased as the concrete columns. Therefore, an investigation into the lp of
amount of lateral reinforcement increased. Based on four reinforced concrete columns is needed to: 1) reconcile differ-
column tests where the axial load levels were low (P/fc Ag = ences encountered in the previous research; and 2) develop
0.06 to 0.20), Mendis concluded that the lp was not sensitive an expression that can be used to estimate lp more accurately
to the level of axial load. for various axial load levels.
As discussed previously, Eq. (2) and (3) have been
PREVIOUS RESEARCH INTO PLASTIC HINGE commonly used to estimate the lp of concrete columns.6-9,12,13
LENGTH: DISCUSSION Using these equations, the lp can be estimated from measured
Various expressions, recommended for use in lp estimations, tip displacements and curvatures. Tip displacements of a
were briefly discussed in the previous section. A comparison concrete column include flexural, bar slip, and shear
of the previously reported lp expressions is provided in Fig. 2. displacement components. Therefore, the lp estimated using
This figure clearly illustrates that large variations exist Eq. (2) and (3) includes the effect of bar slip and shear
among the suggested lp. displacements. As shear deformations can be ignored for
It is interesting to note that most of the lp expressions do columns with moderate L/h, the lp measured in this manner
not consider axial load as a parameter, except for the will be influenced mainly by flexural and bar slip displace-
ments. The influence of various displacement components
other than flexural displacements can be observed in Eq. (9)
and (10), which were proposed by Priestley and Park7 and
Paulay and Priestley.8 These equations have two separate
terms that take into account the effect of flexural and bar-slip
displacements. By relating the curvature distribution along
the column shown in Fig. 1 to the tip displacement rather
than flexural deformations, the lp in Eq. (2) and (3) includes
the effects of bar slip and shear displacements. Conversely,
the displacements calculated through the use of the lp expression
derived in this manner implicitly account for displacement
components other than the flexural displacements.
As flexural displacements are directly related to curvatures,
it is more appropriate to relate the lp to the flexural displacement
component only. Bar slip and shear displacements have to be
Fig. 2Comparison of plastic hinge length expressions. estimated independently. Subsequently, the tip displacement
can be estimated by summing these displacement compo-
nents. Following this logic, a new lp expression is proposed
in this study.

PLASTIC HINGE LENGTHS: COLUMN TESTS


To investigate the effect of L/h and axial load (P/Po), four
full-scale concrete columns were tested under moderate to
high axial load levels and reversed cyclic displacement
excursions. Figure 3 illustrates the test setup used in this
research. The test frame, shown in Fig. 3, can be used to
apply and maintain an axial load up to 2000 kips (8900 kN)
and reversed cyclic moments as large as 4000 ftkips
(5400 kNm). White arrows in Fig. 3 illustrate the axial force
applied by the hydraulic ram and the loads applied by two
Fig. 3Test setup. actuators that were used to impart reversed cyclic base

292 ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008


Fig. 4Strain distribution.

Table 1Details of test specimens


Longitudinal steel Transverse steel
b x h, f c , fyl, fyh,
Specimen in. x in. (mm x mm) ksi (MPa) Size l , % ksi (MPa) Size sh, in. (mm) s,* % ksi (MPa) Ash/Ash,ACI P/Po
S24-2UT 24 x 24 (610 x 610) 63 (43.4) No. 7-1 (22M-1) 1.25 73 (50.3) No. 4-1 (13M-1) 3-3/4 (95) 2.04 62 (42.7) 1.09 0.5
S17-3UT 17.25 x 17.25 (440 x 440) 6.3 (43.4) No. 5 (16M) 1.25 72 (49.6) No. 3-1 (10M-1) 3-3/8 (86) 1.76 72 (49.6) 1.12 0.5
24-4UT 24 x 24 (610 x 610) 5.3 (36.5) No. 7-2 (22M-2) 1.25 58 (40.0) No. 3-2 (10M-2) 6 (152) 0.72 66 (45.5) 0.44 0.2
S24-5UT 24 x 24 (610 x 610) 6.0 (41.4) No. 7-2 (22M-2) 1.25 58 (40.0) No. 4-2 (13M-2) 6 (152) 1.30 63 (43.4) 0.74 0.2
*
s = volumetric ratio of transverse reinforcement to concrete core.

Po = 0.85fc Ac + fyl As.

rotations. The shear forces at hinges are shown with black (438.15 in.) square section (L/h = 7). Figure 4 shows that the
arrows. Table 1 shows the details of the specimens tested in severely damaged regions of Specimens S24-2UT and
this research program and the magnitude of the axial load S17-3UT are longer than those of Specimens S24-4UT and
that was applied to each specimen during testing. A S24-5UT. The tie strains measured along the column specimens
detailed discussion of this experimental research can be at the 20th loading cycle in Fig. 4 also illustrate that
found elsewhere19 and is considered to be beyond the scope Specimens S24-2UT and S17-3UT experienced inelastic tie
of this paper. strains over a longer length than Specimens S24-4UT and
The damage observed within the plastic hinge region of S24-5UT. Many ties in Specimens S24-2UT and S17-3UT
each test specimen and the corresponding tie strains along experienced larger inelastic strains after the 20th loading
the columns are shown in Fig. 4. Specimens S24-2UT and cycle than the measurement limits of strain gauges. Therefore, it
S24-3UT were tested under an axial load level of 0.5Po, can be concluded that, for the specimens tested in this study,
while Specimens S24-4UT and S24-5UT were tested under lp increased as the level of axial load increased.
a lower axial load level of 0.2Po. Specimens S24-2UT, Figure 5 illustrates the sectional and member performances of
S24-4UT, and S24-5UT had 24 in. (609.6 mm) square Specimens S24-2UT and S24-4UT. Specimen S24-2UT and
sections (L/h = 5), whereas Specimen S17-3UT had a 17.25 in. S24-4UT have the same section size (h = 24 in. [610 mm]) and

ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008 293


L/h = 5. These specimens were tested under different axial load gravity loads, plastic hinges form within the core concrete.
levels (P/Po = 0.5 for Specimen S24-2UT and P/Po = 0.2 for The magnitude of damage in concrete members is closely
Specimen S24-4UT). Figure 5(a) illustrates that the sectional related to the intensity of concrete compressive strains
performance of Specimen S24-4UT is somewhat better than measured at critical sections. Under increasing curvatures,
that of Specimen S24-2UT with respect to deformation concrete strains on the compression side of the member
capacity. The opposite trend can be observed from the member increase. As the concrete compressive strains increase and
performances, however, as shown in Fig. 5(b). The reversal in reach a critical value, the cover concrete spalls off. Subse-
the trends is attributed to the difference observed in the lp of quently, yielding of longitudinal bars on the compression
Specimens S24-2UT and S24-4UT. side occurs. This is followed by crushing of the core
concrete. With accumulation of damage under increasing
PLASTIC HINGE LENGTH: CONCRETE compressive strains, plastic hinges form. Experimental
COMPRESSION STRAIN METHOD observations6,19 indicate that the plastic hinges start to form
Estimating the length of a plastic hinge that forms in a after the maximum moment capacity is reached. Therefore,
reinforced concrete column through the use of a sophisti- the magnitude of concrete compressive strains experienced
cated computer program is complicated. Because of this by the core concrete when the maximum moment capacity is
difficulty, the estimation of lp has typically been based on reached at the critical section of a column can give a good
experimental data. A plastic hinge is defined as the zone indication on the formation of a plastic hinge. To estimate the
where severe damage of concrete sections occurs. By length of a plastic hinge that may form at the base of a reinforced
observing that large cracks typically occur at curvatures concrete column, the following procedure is proposed:
greater than the yield curvature, some researchers20,21 1. The moment-curvature response of a typical column
attempted to relate the yield moment to the lp. This approach section within the potential plastic hinge region is obtained
is practical when the curvature increases with moment (that from a sectional analysis (Fig. 6(a)). In the sectional analysis,
is, in the ascending branch of the response), but the application core concrete is modeled as confined concrete, while cover
of this approach to members that experience post-peak concrete is modeled as unconfined concrete. Bar buckling
strength degradation is questionable. behavior in compression reinforcement is not considered
In this section, a concrete compression strain method that because the ascending branch of the moment-curvature
can be used to estimate the lp of concrete columns is introduced. relationship is of concern. Reinforcing bar buckling is not
Following the description of this concrete compression strain experienced within the ascending branch of the response;
method, the key factors that influence the length of plastic 2. Neglecting the second order effects, the bending moment
hinges are identified by conducting sensitivity analyses. diagram is drawn along the column height (Fig. 7(c)). The
Based on the results of the sensitivity analyses, a simple moment value at the center of the potential plastic hinge
expression that can be used to estimate the length of the (~0.5h away from the base) is assumed to be equal to the
plastic hinges is proposed. Finally, the influence of the lp maximum moment capacity of the section obtained from the
estimations on the lateral load-displacement response sectional analysis in Step 1. This assumption would imply that
predictions is discussed. the sections between the center of the plastic hinge and the
base of the column have a larger flexural capacity than
Compressive strain profile of core concrete predicted using the sectional analysis. The shift in the location
As reinforced concrete columns are subjected to earth- of the critical section (Fig. 7(d)) is due to the confinement
quake-induced lateral displacements while supporting provided by the concrete stub to the neighboring sections. This
effect, commonly referred to as the stub confinement effect,
has been observed in previous experimental research6,9,13,18,22;
3. Using the bending moment diagram from Step 2 and the
sectional analysis results (Fig. 6(b)) from Step 1, the
compressive strain experienced by the outer fiber of core
concrete can be determined for a sufficient number of
sections along the length of a column. If these compressive
strains are plotted along the length of a column, the compressive
concrete strain profile along the length of a column can be
obtained (Fig. 7(d));
4. The compressive strains at the outer fiber of the core
Fig. 5Comparison of Specimens S24-2UT and S24-4UT. concrete are equal to the reinforcing bar strains. In effect, the
compressive strain profile obtained in Step 3 represents the
variation of compressive longitudinal bar strain along the
length of a column. By examining the compressive strain
profile, such as the one shown in Fig. 7(d), the length of the
region in which longitudinal bars are yielding in compression
can be estimated. The identification of this length establishes a
key step in estimating the lp of a column; and
5. As indicated in Step 2, the critical section shifts away
from the face of the stub due to additional confinement
effects provided by the stub. Because of the additional
confinement provided by the stub to adjacent sections,
sections within a distance of approximately 0.25h from the
Fig. 6Sectional analysis for Specimen S24-2UT. stub remain nearly undamaged. Therefore, to estimate the

294 ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008


Fig. 7Estimation of plastic hinge length (Specimen S24-2UT).

length of the plastic hinge region, where columns are


expected to dissipate large amounts of inelastic energy by
undergoing large inelastic deformations, 0.25h is subtracted
from the overall length in which compressive reinforcing bar
strains greater than the yield strain are calculated.
The curvature profile depicted in Fig. 7(e) also shows a
similar trend in the compressive strain profile shown in
Fig. 7(d). Hence, the use of curvature distribution along the
height of a column can be considered as an alternative for
identifying the zone in which inelastic curvatures are localized.
While this curvature profile has been used by some
researchers,20,21 the use of the compressive strain profile
facilitates a clearer observation of the effect of axial loads on
the lp. In addition, because the damage in concrete is more
closely related to the magnitude of the concrete strains than
the curvatures, compressive strains were used in the method
described previously.
In this approach, it is assumed that plastic hinges start to
form when the maximum moment capacity is reached and, Fig. 8Comparison of predicted plastic hinge lengths.
therefore, important information on the plastic hinge formation
can be obtained by analyzing the compressive strain profile effect of axial load level (P/Po), L/h, and the amount of
when the maximum moment is reached. It is important to longitudinal reinforcement (l = As /Ag) are investigated.
note that the lp predicted in this manner can be used to
estimate flexural deformations only because sectional Axial load level
analysis is used as the basis of calculations. To calculate To study the effect of axial load on the lp, a square
the tip deformation of columns, deformations due to bar slip column (24 x 24 x 120 in.3 [610 x 610 x 3048 mm3]) is
and shear deformations need to be calculated separately and studied. The percentage of longitudinal reinforcement is kept
added to the flexural deformations. constant at 1% (l = 0.01) and the ratio of the center-to-center
The lengths of the potential plastic hinge regions of distance of extreme reinforcement layers to the overall column
Specimens S24-2UT through S24-5UT are estimated by depth () is assumed to be 0.8. A concrete strength of 6000 psi
using the analysis procedure described previously. By using (41.4 MPa) is used. The yield and ultimate strength of
the compressive strain profiles along heights of the test reinforcing bars are assumed to be 60 and 90 ksi (414 and
specimens, the lp were estimated and the results of these 621 MPa), respectively. The curvature and compressive
analyses are shown in Fig. 8. This figure illustrates that the concrete strain profiles along the length of the columns are
proposed method provides good estimations for the lp of the investigated for various axial load levels. Figure 9 illustrates
column specimens tested in this study. a summary of the results of the analyses. As can be observed
in this figure, the curvature profiles do not effectively show
PARAMETRIC STUDY ON PLASTIC HINGE LENGTH the effect of axial load level. Unlike moment-curvature
It was shown that the proposed concrete compression relationships, the curvature profiles in Fig. 9(a) show curvature
strain method provided good estimations for the lp of the profiles along the column height. In moment-curvature
columns tested in this study. Using the proposed method, the relationships, the effect of axial load influences the strength
influence of various parameters on the lp is studied. The and stiffness. As these curvature profiles provide only

ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008 295


Fig. 9Effect of axial load on curvature and compressive Fig. 11Relationship between plastic hinge length and
strain profiles. shear span-depth ratio.

Chapter 21 of the ACI Building Code23 requires closely-


spaced transverse reinforcement be provided over a length
(lo) from a joint face where flexural yielding is likely to
occur as a result of large inelastic lateral displacement of
columns. The required length (lo) of the ACI Code is the
largest of the overall depth of a column, 1/6 of the clear
height of a column, or 18 in. (457 mm). Figure 10 shows that
the estimated lp approaches 0.8h at an axial load of 0.52Po
(= Pn,max = 0.8Po = 0.65 0.8Po), which is the
maximum axial load permitted in the ACI Building Code.23
It is important to note that in the process of estimating the lp,
a distance of 0.25h from the face of the stub is subtracted, as
discussed in the procedure of concrete compression strain
Fig. 10Relationship between plastic hinge length and method. Therefore, the total length from a joint face has to
axial load. be considered as the sum of the lp and a distance of 0.25h
from the joint face. Accordingly, the total length from a joint
curvatures but not corresponding moments, however, the face is 1.05h at an axial load of 0.52Po, which is close to the
effect of axial load is not reflected in these curvature profiles. ACI required length (lo) of 1.0h. An examination of Fig. 1,
In contrast, the compressive strain profiles clearly illustrate however, shows that the length of the region where large
the influence of axial load. inelastic curvatures develop will be longer than the equivalent
For each case studied in Fig. 9, the length of the plastic plastic hinge region. Therefore, the required length of
hinge is estimated using the procedure described previously. closely-spaced transverse reinforcement needs to be larger
In other words, the spread of reinforcing bar yielding in than the estimated plastic hinge region of 1.0h from the joint
compression is examined to establish the length of the plastic face. In summary, the potential lp specified by ACI 318-0523
hinges. Figure 10 summarizes the results of this analysis, is likely to be unsatisfactory for columns supporting high
shown in Fig. 9(b). As can be seen in this figure, the length axial loads.
of the plastic hinge is nearly constant for low axial loads
(P 0.2Po). For low axial loads, the lp is approximately
Shear span-depth ratio (L/h)
equal to 0.25h. Starting at an axial load of approximately
0.2Po, the lp increases with increasing axial loads. It is Researchers1-5,7,8,10 recognized that the length of a plastic
interesting to note that Mendis10 reported that the lp hinge is influenced by the L/h. To investigate the influence
measured in the columns tested in his research were not of the L/h on the lp, a series of analyses were conducted. At this
sensitive to the axial load level. Considering the fact that all stage of the parametric study, a 24 x 24 in.2 (610 x 610 mm2)
of the columns studied by Mendis10 were tested under low square column with varying L/h is considered. The longitudinal
axial load levels (P 0.2Po) and bearing in mind the findings reinforcement is kept constant (l = 0.01) and a value of 0.8
of this parametric study (summarized in Fig. 10), the conclusion is used. The results of the analyses are summarized in Fig. 11.
reported by Mendis10 can be better appreciated. As can be observed in the figure, the lp increases with
The lp estimate of 0.25h (Fig. 10) can be compared with increasing L/h for a given axial load level. For low axial
0.4h recommended by Park et al.6 and 0.5h recommended by loads ( 0.2Po), however, the increases observed in lp with
Paulay and Priestley.8 The differences observed in the lp increasing L/h are insignificant.
estimates can be attributed to the displacement components For a given L/h, the lp increases with increasing axial
used to estimate the lp. Only flexural displacements are loads. The increases in lp observed at small L/h (2 < L/h < 3)
considered in the proposed analysis, as the strains experienced are less pronounced than those observed at a large L/h. It is
by compression bars are obtained from the moment-curvature interesting to note that Park et al.6 tested a series of columns
relationships. On the other hand, the tip displacements are with an L/h of 2.2. Based on the test results, they concluded
used in estimating the lp by Park et al.6 and Paulay and that the lp was not affected by the axial loads and recommended
Priestley.8 As discussed previously, tip displacements a lp of 0.4h. Figure 11 clearly illustrates that for an L/h of 2.2,
include bar slip and shear deformation components in addition the effect of axial load on the lp is relatively small in comparison
to the flexural deformations. with the effects seen at high L/h.

296 ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008


Amount of longitudinal reinforcement (l = As /Ag) various displacement components and summing them
Mattock3 reported that the lp increased with a decrease in together. Those displacement components considered in
the net tension reinforcement ((As As )/Ab, where As is the calculating the tip displacement of a column are: 1) flexural
area of tension reinforcement, As is the area of compression displacements; 2) fixed-end rotations resulting from the slip
reinforcement, and Ab is the area of balanced reinforcement). of longitudinal bars out of joints; and 3) shear displacements.
The effect of net tension reinforcement was further studied The additional displacements due to secondary moments
by Corley.5 In contrast, recently, Mendis10 reported that the generated by the P- effect are also included.
lp increased with an increasing amount of tension reinforcement.
It is important to note that these conclusions3,5,10 were primarily The lp estimated by using Eq. (11) are used in calculating
based on the results from tests conducted on reinforced flexural displacements to approximate the descending part of
concrete beams. the lateral load response of concrete columns. A detailed
Due to the lack of consensus among various researchers, description of Eq. (11) can be found elsewhere.19
the amount of longitudinal reinforcement has been ignored
in most previous proposals for estimating the lp. To study the
effect of longitudinal reinforcement on lp, a 24 x 24 in.2
(610 x 610 mm2) square column with a column height of
120 in. (3048 mm), a L/h of 5, and a value of 0.8 is studied.
The results of the parametric study conducted on a 24 x 24 in.2
(610 x 610 mm2) square column are summarized in Fig. 12
and 13. As can be observed in Fig. 12(a), the post-cracking
stiffness and strength of the column sections increase with
increasing reinforcement ratios.
The curvatures and reinforcing bar strains on the compression
side are evaluated at maximum lateral load capacity and
plotted along the height of the column (Fig. 12(c) and (d)).
An examination of the curvature and compressive strain
profiles along the height of the column indicates that with
increasing longitudinal reinforcement ratio (l), the length of
the plastic hinge increases. Figure 13 also indicates this trend
for various axial load levels. For all of the axial load levels,
lp increases with increasing ll values.

PLASTIC HINGE LENGTH: NEW EXPRESSION


The previous discussion using the proposed concrete
compression strain method shows that axial load, L/h, and
the amount of longitudinal reinforcement are main parameters
for estimating the length of a plastic hinge. Based on this
observation, a linear relationship between these parameters
(P/Po, L/h, and As/Ag) is assumed in developing the lp expression
for simplicity. Least squares analyses were conducted to
identify a coefficient for each parameter using the UW/PEER Fig. 12Moment and curvature curves with various amount
column database. Key features of the column database used of longitudinal reinforcement (P = 0.3Po).
for this purpose can be found elsewhere.19 A new lp expression
of Eq. (11) is proposed from a series of least squares analyses

l A
---p = 0.3 ----- + 3 -----s 0.1 --- + 0.25 0.25
P L
(11)
h Po A g h

In the process developing the proposed lp expression, a


computer program is used to estimate the response of column
specimens. The drift capacities of columns are estimated and
compared with experimentally measured drift capacities.
The computational algorithm used in this computer program
is illustrated in Fig. 14. As seen in Fig. 14, the tip
displacements of columns are calculated by estimating Fig. 13Effect of amount of longitudinal reinforcement.

Table 2Predicted plastic hinge lengths


Specimen Baker1 Corley5 Mattock4 Park et al.6 Paulay and Priestley8 Sheikh and Khoury9 Measured Eq. (11)
S24-2UT 0.60h 0.49h 0.70h 0.40h 0.80h 1.00h 0.66h 0.69h
S17-3UT 0.65h 0.52h 0.80h 0.40h 0.96h 1.00h 0.91h 0.86h
S24-4UT 0.62h 0.49h 0.70h 0.40h 0.72h 1.00h 0.49h 0.25h
S24-5UT 0.56h 0.49h 0.70h 0.40h 0.72h 1.00h 0.47h 0.25h

ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008 297


PLASTIC HINGLE LENGTH:
ESTIMATIONS AND EXPERIMENTS
To examine the accuracy of Eq. (11), the lp of four full-
scale concrete column specimens are estimated using
various expressions and compared with the measured lp, as
shown in Table 2. This table illustrates that the use of Eq. (11)
results in good estimates for all test specimens. For specimens
tested under low axial loads (Specimens S24-4UT and
S24-5UT), Eq. (11) gives somewhat smaller lp than the
measured values. This is due to the fact that only flexural
displacements are considered in deriving Eq. (11). The
comparison of damaged specimens after tests (Fig. 8) shows
that the estimated lp by Eq. (11) are similar to sizes of
severely damaged regions.
For further evaluation, responses of test specimens are
estimated by using a computer program, which is described
in Fig. 14. The sectional and member responses of the test
specimens are used as bases of comparison. The lp estimated
by various expressions including Eq. (11) are used in
generating the member responses. The measured lp are also
used for this purpose. It is important to note that only the
flexural displacements and the magnified displacements
due to the P- effect are used to get member responses
when lp expressions other than the proposed are used (as
these lp expressions include the effect of other displacement
components and these displacements should not be
accounted for twice).
The estimated moment-curvature and lateral load-drift
plots of Specimens S24-2UT and S17-3UT (tested under
Fig. 14Flowchart of computer program. high axial loads) are illustrated in Fig. 15. As can be seen in

Fig. 15Experimental and predicted response (P = 0.5Po).

298 ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008


Fig. 16Experimental and predicted response (P = 0.2Po).

Fig. 15, the use of the lp expression proposed by Park et al.6 1. In light of the experimental data on four full-scale
(lp = 0.4h) results in considerable underestimation of the drift concrete column tests, ACI 318-0523 provisions for the
capacity. In contrast, the expressions proposed by Paulay length of the potential plastic hinge regions were found to be
and Priestley8 (lp = 0.8h) and Sheikh and Khoury9 (lp = 1.0h) slightly unconservative for columns supporting high axial
result in satisfactory predictions. The same trends can be loads. Although the experimental evidence is not exhaustive,
observed for Specimen S17-3UT, as shown in Fig. 15. it may be prudent to increase the length of the region in
Results of the analyses conducted on Specimens S24-4UT which closely-spaced ties are used from 1.0h to 1.5h from
and S24-5UT are included in Fig. 16. These specimens were the joint face until further experimental evidence is gathered;
tested under low axial load levels. Figure 16 shows that the 2. The level of axial load influenced the length of the
use of the lp expression proposed by Park et al.6 (lp = 0.4h) plastic hinges that formed in the full-scale column specimens
results in a reasonably good estimation for the drift capacity. tested in this research. Specimens tested under high axial
The expressions proposed by Paulay and Priestley8 (lp = loads developed longer plastic hinges than those tested under
0.72h) and Sheikh and Khoury9 (lp = 1.0h), however, result low axial loads; and
in overestimated predictions of the drift capacity. Therefore, 3. The following equation, developed in this research, can
it can be concluded that the use of some lp expressions work be used to estimate the length of the plastic hinges forming
for high axial loads, whereas they fail to provide satisfactory in columns supporting a wide range of axial loads.
estimates for low axial loads and vice versa. The use of Eq. (11),
however, results in satisfactory predictions both for high and l A
---p = 0.3 ----- + 3 -----s 0.1 --- + 0.25 0.25
low axial load levels. In performance-based design, prediction P L
h P o A g h
of the deformation capacity of reinforced concrete columns
is important. An analysis of Fig. 15 and 16 clearly shows the
influence of the lp estimations on the drift capacity predictions. NOTATION
This analysis indicates the value of an expression that can Ab = area of balanced reinforcement
provide reasonable estimations for lp forming in columns Ag = gross area of concrete section
supporting high or low axial loads. As = area of tension reinforcement
As = area of compression reinforcement
b = width of compression face of member
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS c = distance from extreme compression fiber to neutral axis
Based on the experimental and analytical research into the d = effective depth of beam
seismic behavior of concrete columns reported in this study, db = diameter of longitudinal reinforcement
the following conclusions can be drawn: fc = compressive strength of concrete

ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008 299


fy = yield stress of reinforcement 11. Park, R., and Paulay, T., Reinforced Concrete Structures, John Wiley
h = overall depth of column and Sons, New York, 1975, 769 pp.
k1 = 0.7 for mild steel 12. Sheikh, S. A.; Shah, D. V.; and Khoury, S. S., Confinement of High-
= 0.9 for cold worked steel
Strength Concrete Columns, ACI Structural Journal, V. 91, No. 1,
k2 = 1 + 0.5(P/Pu)
k3 = 0.9 (0.3/23.5)( fc 11.7) ( fc in MPa) Jan.-Feb. 1994, pp. 100-111.
L = distance from critical section to point of contraflexure 13. Bayrak, O., and Sheikh, S. A., Confinement Reinforcement Design
lp = plastic hinge length Considerations for Ductile HSC Columns, Journal of Structural Engineering,
P = applied axial force ASCE, V. 124, No. 9, Sept. 1998, pp. 999-1010.
Po = 0.85fc (Ag As) + fy As 14. Sakai, K., and Sheikh, S. A., What Do We Know about Confinement in
= nominal axial load capacity as per ACI 318-0523
Reinforced Concrete Columns? (A Critical Review of Previous Work and
q = tension reinforcement index (= As/bd fy /fc )
q = compressive reinforcement index (= As /bd fy/fc ) Code Provisions), ACI Structural Journal, V. 86, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 1989,
qb = balanced tension reinforcement index (= Ab/bd fy/fc ) pp. 192-207.
z = distance of critical section to point of contraflexure 15. Atalay, M. B., and Penzien, J., The Seismic Behavior of Critical
p = plastic displacement Regions of Reinforced Concrete Components as Influenced by Moment,
y = yield displacement Shear and Axial Force, Report No. EERC 75-19, University of California
ce = elastic concrete compressive strain at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, Dec. 1975, 226 pp.
cu = maximum concrete compressive strain
16. Tanaka, H., and Rark, R., Effect of Lateral Confining Reinforcement on
= curvature (Eq. (2))
y = yield curvature the Ductile Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Columns, Research Report
p = plastic rotation 90-2, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury,
l = As/Ag Christchurch, New Zealand, June 1990, 458 pp.
= longitudinal reinforcement ratio 17. Thomson, J. H., and Wallace, J. W., Lateral Load Behavior of
Reinforced Concrete Columns Constructed using High-Strength Materials,
REFERENCES ACI Structural Journal, V. 91, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1994, pp. 605-615.
1. Baker, A. L. L., Ultimate Load Theory Applied to the Design of 18. Lgeron, F., and Paultre, P., Behavior of High-Strength Concrete
Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete Frames, Concrete Publications Ltd., Columns under Cyclic Flexure and Constant Axial Load, ACI Structural
London, UK, 1956, 91 pp.
Journal, V. 97, No. 4, July-Aug. 2000, pp. 591-601.
2. Baker, A. L. L., and Amarakone, A. M. N., Inelastic Hyperstatic
Frame Analysis, Flexural Mechanics of Reinforced Concrete, SP-12, 19. Bae, S., Seismic Performance of Full-Scale Reinforced Concrete
American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1964, pp. 85-142. Columns, Department of Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering,
3. Mattock, A. H., Rotational Capacity of Hinging Regions in Reinforced the University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, Dec. 2005, 312 pp.
Concrete Beams, Flexural Mechanics of Reinforced Concrete, SP-12, 20. Chan, W. W. L., The Ultimate Strength and Deformation of Hinges
American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1964, pp. 143-181. in Reinforced Concrete Frameworks, Magazine of Concrete Research, V. 7,
4. Mattock, A. H., discussion of Rotational Capacity of Hinging No. 21, 1955, pp. 121-132.
Regions in Reinforced Concrete Beams, Journal of the Structural Division,
ASCE, V. 93, No. ST2, Apr. 1967, pp. 519-522. 21. Joint ACI-ASCE Committee 428, Progress Report on Code Clauses
5. Corley, W. G., Rotational Capacity of Reinforced Concrete Beams, for Limit Design, ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 65, No. 9, Sept. 1968,
Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, V. 92, No. ST5, Oct. 1966, pp. 713-715.
pp. 121-146. 22. Soesianawati, M. T.; Park, R.; and Priestley, M. J. N., Limited
6. Park, R.; Priestley, M. J. N.; and Gill, W. D., Ductility of Square- Ductility Design of Reinforced Concrete Columns, Research Report
Confined Concrete Columns, Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, V. 108, 86-10, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury,
No. ST4, 1982, pp. 929-950.
Christchurch, New Zealand, Mar. 1986, 208 pp.
7. Priestley, M. J. N., and Park, R., Strength and Ductility of Concrete
Bridge Columns Under Seismic Loading, ACI Structural Journal, V. 84, 23. ACI Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Structural
No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 1987, pp. 61-76. Concrete (ACI 318-05) and Commentary (318R-05), American Concrete
8. Paulay, T., and Priestley, M. J. N., Seismic Design of Reinforced Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2005, 430 pp.
Concrete and Masonry Buildings, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1992, 24. Alsiwat, J. M., and Saatcioglu, M., Reinforcement Anchorage Slip
767 pp. under Monotonic Loading, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE,
9. Sheikh, S. A., and Khoury, S. S., Confined Concrete Columns with
V. 118, No. 9, Sept. 1992, pp. 2421-2438.
Stubs, ACI Structural Journal, V. 90, No. 4, July-Aug. 1993, pp. 414-431.
10. Mendis, P., Plastic Hinge Lengths of Normal and High-Strength 25. Lehman, D. E., and Moehle, J. P., Seismic Performance of Well-
Concrete in Flexure, Advances in Structural Engineering, V. 4, No. 4, Oct. Confined Concrete Bridge Columns, PEER Report 1998-01, College of
2001, pp. 189-195. Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA, Dec. 2000, 286 pp.

300 ACI Structural Journal/May-June 2008

You might also like