Thin–Walled Structures 148 (2020) 106602

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thin-Walled Structures
journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/tws

Full length article

Performance of concrete-filled stainless steel tubes subjected to tension:

Experimental investigation
Yong Ye a, Wei Li b, *, Zi-Xiong Guo a
a
College of Civil Engineering, Huaqiao University, Xiamen, 361021, PR China
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100084, PR China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Concrete-filled stainless steel tubular (CFSST) structures have attracted increasing attention from researchers and
Concrete-filled stainless steel tubular (CFSST) engineers in the past decade. CFSST members can be adopted as columns in buildings or chord members in
member trusses, which could be subjected to tension under some circumstances. This paper presents an experimental
Tension
investigation on the mechanical behavior of concentrically and eccentrically loaded CFSST tensile members. The
Composite action
parameters considered in the tests included the steel type (stainless steel or carbon steel), load eccentricity (e ¼
Experiment
Ultimate tensile strength 0–75 mm), steel ratio of the cross section (α ¼ 0.075 or 0.112), concrete strength (fcu ¼ 53.4 MPa or 84.7 MPa),
Simplified model and steel-concrete interfacial condition (lubricated or not). The test results show the concrete infill effectively
works with the outer stainless steel tube, leading to tensile strength and stiffness higher than those of the cor­
responding hollow stainless steel tube. All the CFSST tensile members show ductile behavior and the end rotation
of the eccentrically loaded members exceeds 0.1 rad. Finally, the feasibility of existing design method to predict
the tensile strength of CFSST members was also evaluated.

steel-concrete composite member was approximately 10% higher than

1. Introduction
The concrete-filled stainless steel tubular (CFSST) member consists
of a stainless steel tube and the concrete infill. Compared with the
traditional concrete-filled steel tubular (CFST) members using carbon
steel as the tube material, CFSST members possess extra advantages,
including better resistance to rust and corrosion, higher durability, and
easier maintenance [1]. Therefore, CFSST structures have attracted
increasing attention from researchers and engineers in recent years.
CFSST members used in construction projects could be subjected to
tension under some circumstances, such as the lower chord under sag­
ging moment in a truss. Besides, the CFSST component in a lattice pier,
tower, or perimeter column system could also be subjected to tension
during a severe earthquake [2]. For the tubular member with concrete
infilled, the tensile behavior is usually different from the compressive
one [3]. Extensive investigations have been conducted on the mechan­
ical behavior of CFST members subjected to different load conditions,
while much less attention to CFST tensile members had been paid until
recent years [4]. Han et al. (2011) [3] carried out experimental and
numerical investigations on the behavior of CFST members subjected to
axial tension. It found that the ultimate tensile strength of the
that of the corresponding hollow steel tubes. Li et al. (2014) [6,7]
investigated the behavior of concentrically loaded and eccentrically
loaded concrete-filled double-skin steel tubular (CFDST) members. Li
et al. (2015) [8] presented both experimental and numerical studies on
the behavior of eccentrically loaded CFST tensile members. Wang et al.
(2015) [9] investigated the tensile behavior of CFST members externally
strengthened with carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) sheets. Han
et al. (2016) [10] tested concrete-encased CFST members under axial
tension, and a simplified model was proposed to be used to predict the
ultimate tensile strength. Zhou et al. (2016) [11] carried out experi­
mental study on the tensile behavior of square CFST members. Chen
et al. (2017) [12,13] conducted a series of concentric tension and
eccentric tension tests on full-scale CFST members with reinforcing bars
or angles. Xu et al. (2017) [2] developed an analytical model and design
formulae for predicting the strength and stiffness of CFST members
under axial tension. Han et al. (2017) [14] conducted experimental and
numerical analysis to investigate the time-dependent performance of
CFST tensile members subjected to coupled long-term loading and
chloride corrosion. The previous investigations revealed that the tensile
strength of concrete-filled members was higher than their hollow tube
counterparts. As the tensile strength of concrete was low, the direct

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: qzyeyong@hqu.edu.cn (Y. Ye), iliwei@tsinghua.edu.cn (W. Li), guozxcy@hqu.edu.cn (Z.-X. Guo).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2020.106602
Received 19 August 2019; Received in revised form 30 November 2019; Accepted 6 January 2020
0263-8231/© 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Y. Ye et al.
Notation
Ac Cross-sectional area of core concrete
As Cross-sectional area of steel tube
D Outer diameter of circular steel tube
E0 Young’s modulus of elasticity
e Load eccentricity
F Tensile load
Fu Ultimate tensile strength
Fu,c Calculated ultimate tensile strength
Fu,e Experimentally measured ultimate tensile strength
fck Characteristic compressive strength of concrete
fcu Cube compressive strength of concrete
fscy Compressive strength of steel-concrete composite member
fy Yield stress of steel
fu Ultimate stress of steel
L Tube length
M Moment
Mu Ultimate flexural strength
Wsc Section modulus
strength contribution of concrete was minor. However, the tensile
strength of the composite tubular member was enhanced because of the
“composite action”, i.e., the interaction between steel tube and concrete,
which changed the stress status of the steel tube.
The tensile behavior of a CFSST member is supposed to be different
from that of a CFST member using mild carbon steel, as the stainless steel
and mild carbon steel possess different strengths and stress-strain re­
lationships from each other. The stress-strain response of stainless steel
shows a “round house” shape without a notable yield plateau like that
for the mild carbon steel [5]. In this circumstance, the composite action
between stainless steel tube and concrete could be different from that in
the member using mild steel tube. To the authors’ knowledge, research
on the mechanical behavior of CFSST members subjected to tension still
remains limited, resulting a lack of corresponding design formulae for
the composite member, which might hinder the further application of
CFSST structures.
Therefore, the research on the tensile behavior of CFSST members is
conducted. The purpose of this research is fourfold: (1) to provide test
data related to the behavior of CFSST members under the load condition
of concentric tension or eccentric tension; (2) to investigate the ultimate
tensile strength of the member and composite actions between the
stainless steel tube and concrete core; (3) to study the influence of
different parameters on the tensile behavior of CFSST tensile members;
and (4) to study the simplified method which can predict the ultimate
strength of CFSST tensile members.
2. Experimental investigation
2.1. Experimental program
2.1.1. General information of specimens
A total of 20 specimens were designed and tested, including 14
CFSST specimens, four hollow stainless steel tubes, and two hollow
carbon-steel tubes. Among these 20 specimens, nine were tested under
concentric tension, and the rest 11 were tested under eccentric tension.
The outer diameter (D) for all steel tubes was 116 mm, and the length of
all specimens was 350 mm including the thickness of two end plates and
the height of stiffeners at both ends, as shown in Fig. 1. The net length of
the tube between the stiffeners at both ends was 230 mm, approximately
two times the outer diameters of all specimens. The test parameters
2
Thin-Walled Structures 148 (2020) 106602
r Outer radius of circular steel tube
t Wall thickness of steel tube
α Steel ratio of cross section, α ¼ As/Ac
γm Coefficient
ε Strain
εs Steel strain
εs,l Longitudinal strain
εs,t Transverse strain
ε Average strain
η Elongation at break
θ End rotation of specimen
θy End rotation corresponding to yield moment
μ Poisson’s ratio of steel
ξ Confinement factor, ξ¼(As⋅fy)/(Ac⋅fck) for conventional
carbon-steel CFST members, or ξ¼(As⋅σ0.2)/(Ac⋅fck) for
CFSST members
σ Mises von-Mises stress
σ 0.2 0.2% proof stress of stainless steel
Δ Elongation of specimen
Δy Elongation corresponding to yield tensile strength
included:
● Load eccentricity (e ¼ 0 mm, 25 mm, 50 mm, and 75 mm, corre­
sponding to e/r of 0, 0.43, 0.86, and 1.29, respectively, where r is the
outer radius of steel tube);
● Steel ratio of cross section (α ¼ As/Ac ¼ 0.075 or 0.112, where As and
Ac are the cross-sectional area of the steel tube and core concrete,
respectively);
● Concrete compressive strength (fcu ¼ 53.4 MPa or 84.7 MPa); and
● Steel-concrete interfacial condition (lubricated or not).
Detailed information of test specimens is listed in Table 1, where t is
the wall thickness of the tube; fy is the yield stress of mild carbon steel;
and σ0.2 is the 0.2% proof stress of stainless steel. The specimen labels in
Table 1 are designated based on the following rules: (1) “C_-_” and “S_-_”
stand for the hollow carbon-steel tube and stainless steel tube, respec­
tively; the number ahead of the hyphen stands for the wall thickness of
the tube (in the unit of mm), and the number after the hyphen identifies
the different specimen in the same test group. (2) “S_c_-_” stands for the
concentrically loaded CFSST specimens; and the three numbers from left
to right represent the wall thickness of the tube (in the unit of mm),
concrete strength (in the unit of MPa), and different specimen in the
same test group, respectively. (3) “S_c_e_-_” stands for the eccentrically
loaded CFSST specimens; and the four numbers from left to right
represent the wall thickness of the tube (in the unit of mm), concrete
strength (in the unit of MPa), load eccentricity (in the unit of mm), and
different specimen in the same test group, respectively. Two identical
specimens were fabricated and tested for most conditions.
Both stainless steel tubes and carbon-steel tubes were manufactured
by rolling a flat plate into a cylindrical shell and welding the corre­
sponding longitudinal seam by a full-penetration groove weld. Two
different wall thicknesses (t) of the steel tubes were adopted, namely,
2.07 mm and 3.00 mm, corresponding to a steel ratio (α) of 0.075 and
0.112. Two end plates with 20-mm thickness were welded at both ends
of each steel tube. Six stiffeners with a thickness of 8 mm and a height of
40 mm were evenly welded between the steel tube and end plate to
enhance the stiffness of the tube end. For each CFSST specimen, an 80-
mm-diameter hole was cut through one end plate for the concrete
casting. After the welding of end plates and stiffeners, the concrete was
poured into the tube and vibrated to ensure the compactness. For the
Y. Ye et al. Thin-Walled Structures 148 (2020) 106602

Fig. 1. Schematic view of specimens (unit: mm).

Table 1
Test parameters and main experimental results.
No. Specimen type Specimen t (mm) α fy or σ0.2 fcu e (mm) Fu (kN) Mu Bond
label (MPa) (MPa) (kN⋅m) condition

1 CFSST and hollow tubes under concentric C2-1 2.07 0.075 289.1 Null 0 190.3 Null Null
2 tension C2-2 2.07 0.075 289.1 Null 0 201.3 Null Null
3 S2-1 2.07 0.075 312.5 Null 0 198.5 Null Null
4 S2-2 2.07 0.075 312.5 Null 0 203.0 Null Null
5 S2c50-1 2.07 0.075 312.5 53.4 0 192.3 Null Bonded
6 S2c50-2 2.07 0.075 312.5 53.4 0 229.2 Null Bonded
7 S2c50-ub 2.07 0.075 312.5 53.4 0 215.4 Null Unbonded
8 S2c80-1 2.07 0.075 312.5 84.7 0 212.3 Null Bonded
9 S2c80-2 2.07 0.075 312.5 84.7 0 231.0 Null Bonded
10 CFSST and hollow tubes under eccentric S2e50-1 2.07 0.075 312.5 Null 50 116.9 5.8 Null
11 tension S2c50e25-1 2.07 0.075 312.5 53.4 25 167.7 4.2 Bonded
12 S2c50e25-2 2.07 0.075 312.5 53.4 25 159.3 4.0 Bonded
13 S2c50e50-1 2.07 0.075 312.5 53.4 50 154.8 7.7 Bonded
14 S2c50e50-2 2.07 0.075 312.5 53.4 50 117.6 5.9 Bonded
15 S2c50e75-1 2.07 0.075 312.5 53.4 75 111.7 8.4 Bonded
16 S2c50e75-2 2.07 0.075 312.5 53.4 75 104.6 7.8 Bonded
17 S3e50-1 3.00 0.112 306.7 Null 50 191.3 9.6 Null
18 S3c50e25-1 3.00 0.112 306.7 53.4 25 217.7 5.4 Bonded
19 S3c50e50-1 3.00 0.112 306.7 53.4 50 196.4 9.8 Bonded
20 S3c50e75-1 3.00 0.112 306.7 53.4 75 154.6 11.6 Bonded

3
Y. Ye et al. Thin-Walled Structures 148 (2020) 106602

Table 2 Two different concrete mixtures were designed in the test. The mix
Mechanical properties of the steel. proportions and cube compressive strength of the concrete are listed in
No. Steel type t fy or σ0.2 fu η E0 μ Table 3, and the measured average values of fcu were 53.4 MPa and 84.7
(mm) (MPa) (MPa) (GPa) MPa during the tensile tests.
1 Carbon 2.30 289.1 360.1 0.212 202.3 0.289
steel 2.1.3. Test setup and instrumentation
2 Stainless 2.07 312.5 678.6 0.669 178.1 0.290 A 500-kN-capacity hydraulic actuator was employed for the loading
3 steel 3.00 306.7 690.7 0.492 173.1 0.288 test. A schematic view of the test setup is shown in Fig. 3, where two
strong hinged supports are attached at both ends of each specimen. The
specimen S2c50-ub, the inner surface of the stainless steel tube was allowable rotation capacity of the hinged support was designed to be
lubricated with grease lubricant before concrete placement. Besides, no greater than 0.2 rad. The specimen was fastened to the hinged supports
stud was used between the end plate and core concrete. with high-strength bolts. Besides, the load eccentricity was achieved by
using different holes in the hinged supports.
2.1.2. Material properties
Type 321 austenitic stainless steel according to ASTM 959-09 [15] Table 3
was used in stainless steel tubes herein. The material properties of the Mix proportions and compressive strength of the concrete.
stainless steel and carbon steel were determined by carrying out a series
Concrete Cement Water Sand Coarse Water fcu
of coupon tests. The main measured results of the material tests are type (kg/m3) (kg/ (kg/ aggregate reducing (MPa)
listed in Table 2, where fu is the tensile strength of steel, η is the elon­ m3) m3) (kg/m3) agent (kg/
gation at break, E0 is Young’s modulus of elasticity, μ is Poisson’ ratio of m3)
steel. A comparison between the stress-strain responses of stainless steel C50 350 195 695 1235 Null 53.4
and carbon steel is shown in Fig. 2. C80 540 152 534 1255 5.4 84.7

Fig. 2. Experimentally obtained stress-strain relationships of the stainless steel and carbon steel.

Fig. 3. Test setup and instrumentation.

4
Y. Ye et al.
Fig. 4. Deformation characteristics of the tested specimens.
Six strain gauges were attached to the outer surface of the steel tube
on the mid-height section. The strain gauges were mounted either
perpendicular to or in the lengthwise direction of the steel tube, as
shown in Fig. 3. Four displacement transducers (DT1, DT2, DT3 and
DT4) were placed evenly at the four corners of each specimen to mea­
sure the elongation and the curvature of the specimen.
The load-controlled mechanism with a load interval of 1/10 of the
estimated ultimate tensile strength of specimen was used before an
obvious stiffness decrease in the load-deformation curve was observed.
After that, the load was applied continuously with a loading rate of 0.01
mm/s. The failure of the specimen was determined as follows: (1) the
fracture of weld in the steel tube occurred, or; (2) the average axial
tensile strain of the specimen (εa ¼ Δ/L, where Δ is the axial elongation
of specimen, and L is the tube length) attained approximately 50,000 με
(corresponded Δ � 15.4 mm), which was already large enough and not
allowed in practical structures. The loading was terminated when one of
the situations was reached. Afterward, the load applied to the specimen
was released and the corresponding load versus deformation response
was also recorded.
All displacement transducers, strain gauges as well as the load cell in
the actuator were linked to one data acquisition system. The readings of
displacement, strain and load were collected simultaneously by the data
acquisition system every 3 s throughout the whole loading and
unloading processes.
5
Thin-Walled Structures 148 (2020) 106602
2.2. Experimental results and discussion
2.2.1. Deformation characteristics
During the loading test, all specimens, both concentrically and
eccentrically loaded, behaved in a ductile manner. Fig. 4 shows photos
of specimens after tests. The uniform elongation of steel tube occurred
for concentrically loaded specimens, while the elongation as well as
overall bending deformation was found in eccentrically loaded ones. In
order to characterize the crack pattern of the core concrete, part of the
steel tube was saw-cut and removed after tests. Fig. 5 and Fig. 6 show
concrete cracks for concentrically and eccentrically loaded specimens,
respectively, where the maximum crack width and the crack interval
were marked near the corresponding concrete cracks.
For the specimens subjected to concentric tension, similar overall
behavior was demonstrated in all specimens, as shown in Fig. 4(a). If the
deformation characteristic of the steel tube was studied carefully, it was
observed that the pinching effect of the hollow steel tube (S2-1 and C2-
1) was more remarkable than that of the CFSST specimens, see Fig. 7(a).
This is due to the lateral support from the concrete core, which reduced
the radial deformation of the outer steel tube. After the unloading was
finished, all steel tubes exhibited residual axial elongation but no frac­
ture was observed. The crack pattern of the core concrete in concentri­
cally loaded specimens is shown in Fig. 5, where the upper number in
each photo stands for the crack width (in the unit of mm), and the lower
number stands for the distance between two adjacent cracks (in the unit
of mm). It was found that parallel cracks were observed in the core
concrete, and the steel-concrete interfacial condition showed an obvious
Y. Ye et al.
Fig. 5. Crack width and interval for core concrete in concentrically loaded
CFSST members (unit: mm).
effect on the crack pattern. The average width of the main crack was 0.3
mm with an average crack interval of approximately 13.9 mm for the
specimen whose tube was not lubricated (S2c50-1). While the average
width of the main crack was 1.2 mm with an average crack interval of
approximately 26.4 mm for the specimen with lubricated tube (S2c50-
ub). It is clear that the lubricated specimen had an average crack width
and interval obviously greater than the unlubricated specimen. This is
attributed to the fact that, the interfacial bond between the stainless
steel tube and core concrete in the lubricated specimen is much smaller
than that in the specimen without lubrication, resulting in a larger
bonded length required to generate a crack in the core concrete. Besides,
it can be found from Fig. 5(a) and (c) that, the concrete strength has
minor influence on the crack pattern of core concrete in the CFSST
members under concentric tension.
While for the specimens subjected to eccentric tension, obvious
bending deformation was observed during and after the loading test, as
shown in Fig. 4(b). The ultimate rotation of all specimens before the
initiation of unloading was larger than 0.1 rad. The local buckling
occurred near the middle of the compressive zone for the hollow
stainless steel tubes (S2e50-1 and S3e50-1), while such a phenomenon
6
Thin-Walled Structures 148 (2020) 106602
was not observed in the stainless steel tubes of CFSST members. Fig. 7(b)
illustrates the typical deformation characteristics of hollow and infilled
stainless steel tube subjected to eccentric tension. This behavior
confirmed the contribution of core concrete on laterally supporting the
outer stainless steel tube and delaying or even preventing the local
buckling occurring in the compressive region. The crack pattern of the
core concrete in eccentrically loaded specimens is shown in Fig. 6, where
the numbers in each photo stand for the crack width at the tensile region
(in the unit of mm). Parallel cracks were observed in the core concrete
and the maximum crack width varied from 0.1 mm to 1.6 mm for most
specimens. It can be found from Fig. 6 that as the load eccentricity (e)
increases, the depth of the uncracked section in the core concrete in­
creases accordingly.
2.2.2. Axial load versus axial elongation responses
The measured tensile load (F) versus average axial strain (ε) re­
lationships for the concentrically and eccentrically loaded specimens are
shown in Figs. 8 and 9, where ε ¼ Δ/L, Δ is the elongation of specimen
and is taken as the mean value of the readings obtained from the four
displacement transducers. It can be seen from Fig. 8 that, the tensile load
increases continuously from beginning to termination of loading for all
concentrically loaded specimens. The loading section of the F-ε curve is
generally composed of two ascending branches, and the slope of the
second branch is much smaller than that of the first one. By comparing
Fig. 8(a) and (b), it can be noted that the slope of the second branch for
the stainless steel tubes (S2-1/2) is obviously greater than that for the
carbon-steel tube (C2-1/2), and this is due to the more remarkable
strain-hardening behavior of the stainless steel than that of the carbon
steel. The average initial stiffness of the concentrically loaded specimens
C2-1/2, S2-1/2, S2c50-1/2, S2c50-ub, and S2c80-1/2 was 578.2 kN/
mm, 502.3 kN/mm, 535.0 kN/mm, 505.7 kN/m, and 544.9 kN/mm,
respectively. The carbon steel adopted in the present tests had a higher
Young’s modulus of elasticity (E0) than the stainless steel, so the initial
stiffness of the stainless steel tubes (S2-1/2) was greater than that of the
carbon-steel tubes (C2-1/2). When the hollow stainless steel tube was
infilled with concrete, they could work together to resist the external
load, and the corresponding composite member had a greater initial
stiffness than the hollow tubular one. As for the lubricated CFSST
member, the outer stainless steel tube worked alone at the beginning, so
the initial stiffness was not improved compared to that of the hollow
stainless steel tube. Besides, the concrete strength had minor influence
on the initial stiffness of the CFSST tensile specimens. After the elon­
gation of the specimen reached the termination limit (Δ � 15 mm), the
specimen was unloaded, and the unloading stiffness was relatively
smaller than the corresponding initial loading stiffness as the plastic
deformation occurred.
The load eccentricity (e) is a key parameter that affects the F-ε re­
sponses of CFSST tensile members. It can be seen from Fig. 9 that, both
the tensile strength and stiffness of specimens decreases as e increases.
For the eccentrically loaded hollow stainless steel tube (S2e50-1), the
initial loading stiffness was lower than that of the corresponding CFSST
specimens (S2c50e50-1/2). However, the hardening stiffness of the
hollow stainless steel tube was nearly the same as that of the composite
members. This is possibly attributed to the fact that, the cracked core
concrete offers lateral support to the outer steel tube, but could not
contribute to the stiffness of the whole member. Generally, the obser­
vations from Figs. 8 and 9 indicate that, the CFSST members possess
favorable deformation capacity when subjected to either concentric or
eccentric tension.
2.2.3. Moment versus rotation responses
The measured moment (M) versus rotation (θ) relationships for the
eccentrically loaded specimens are shown in Fig. 10, where M ¼ F⋅e, and
θ is taken as the average value of 2(Δ2-Δ1)/(h1þh2) and 2(Δ4-Δ3)/
(h3þh4), where Δ1, Δ2, Δ3, and Δ4 are the displacements measured by
displacement transducers DT1, DT2, DT3, and DT4, respectively, as
Y. Ye et al. Thin-Walled Structures 148 (2020) 106602

Fig. 6. Crack width and interval for core concrete in eccentrically loaded CFSST members (unit: mm).

Fig. 7. Schematic of deformation of hollow stainless steel tube and CFSST members under tension.

shown in Fig. 3; h1 and h2 are the distance between DT1 and DT2; h3 and the F-Δ relationships. The M-θ curves for both the CFSST members and
h4 are the distance between DT3 and DT4. hollow stainless steel tubes were characterized by an initial elastic stage
The characteristics of the M-θ relationships were similar to those of followed by an inelastic response with an obviously decreased stiffness.

7
Y. Ye et al.
Fig. 8. Axial load (F) versus average axial strain (ε) curves for specimens under concentric tension.
Before the termination of loading test, the end rotation of all the
eccentrically loaded specimens exceeded 0.1 rad. The ultimate flexural
strength (Mu) as well as the initial bending stiffness of the specimen
decreased with the increase of the load eccentricity (e). Besides, the
bending stiffness of the CFSST members was slightly higher than that of
the hollow stainless steel tubes. The ultimate flexural strength (Mu) of
the specimens was defined as the moment corresponding to the ultimate
tensile strength (Fu), and the experimental values of Mu are listed in
Table 1.
2.2.4. Strain analysis
The axial tensile load (F) versus steel strain (ε) relationships for the
specimens are depicted in Figs. 11 and 12, where εs,l and εs,t denote the
longitudinal and transverse strains in the steel tubes, respectively. The
values of tensile strain are taken as positive and the compressive ones
negative in Figs. 11 and 12. For the concentrically loaded specimens
(Fig. 11), the steel strain, either longitudinal or transverse, was taken as
the average reading of the four strain gauges. It can be seen that, the
strain development in the longitudinal direction (εs,l) for the hollow
stainless steel tube was similar to that for the composite members. Due
to the lateral support from the core concrete, the radial pinching of the
outer steel tube was effectively depressed, so the transverse strain (εs,t)
of the composite members was significantly smaller than that of the
hollow stainless steel tube under the same external load. The develop­
ment of longitudinal strain (εs,l) for the hollow carbon-steel tube was not
significant when the tensile load (F) approximately attained 200 kN,
while εs,l for the hollow stainless steel tube kept on increasing.
8
Thin-Walled Structures 148 (2020) 106602
For the eccentrically loaded specimens (Fig. 12), the longitudinal
strain was no longer uniform as the tensile load (F) increased. Both the
tensile and compressive zones were developed due to the load eccen­
tricity. By comparing either Fig. 12(a) and (c) or Fig. 12(e) and (g), it can
be seen that the longitudinal strain in the compressive section (measured
by strain gauge S1) and the transverse strain in the tensile section
(measured by strain gauge N2) for the composite member [Fig. 12(c)
and Fig. (g)] are significantly smaller than those for the hollow stainless
steel tube [Fig. 12(a) and Fig. (c)]. The core concrete directly contrib­
uted to the bearing of external load in the compressive section, and also
provided lateral support to the outer steel tube. The contribution from
core concrete led to a reduction of longitudinal strain in the compressive
section of steel tube, and effectively avoided or delayed the local
buckling occurring in the steel tube. For the composite tensile members,
the strains in the compressive section (measure by strain gauges S1 and
S2) developed faster as the load eccentricity (e) increased.
The typical relationships between the tensile load (F) versus |εs,t/εs,l|
(absolute value of the ratio between transverse and longitudinal strains
in the stainless steel tube) are shown in Fig. 13. At the initial stage of
loading, the value of |εs,t/εs,l| was close to the Poisson’s ratio of the
corresponding steel (μs). As the tensile load (F) increased, the value of
|εs,t/εs,l| for the composite member decreased rapidly, attributed to the
supporting effect of the core concrete in restraining the development of
transverse strain (εs,t). Before the termination of loading, the value of |εs,
t/εs,l| for the hollow stainless steel tubes was more than 0.45, while it
was less than 0.1 for the CFSST tensile members.
The above observation demonstrates the core concrete in CFSST
Y. Ye et al.
Fig. 9. Axial load (F) versus average axial strain (ε) curves for specimens under eccentric tension.
tensile members works well with the outer stainless steel tube. This
composite action contributes to the larger initial stiffness and load-
bearing capacity than the hollow stainless steel tubes.
2.2.5. Characteristic behavior and ultimate tensile strength
It can be noted from Figs. 8–10 that, the tensile load (F)-elongation
(Δ) and moment (M)-rotation (θ) responses of CFSST members have a
similar developing trend. The typical F-Δ or M-θ relationship for CFSST
tensile members is shown in Fig. 14, and can be generally divided into
four stages as follows:
9
Thin-Walled Structures 148 (2020) 106602
● Stage 1 (from Point O to Point A). In this stage, the tensile load in­
creases almost linearly with the development of elongation. For the
specimens (without lubrication) subjected to concentric tension, the
applied load is carried by both the steel tube and the core concrete.
Once the cracking of core concrete occurs, the steel tube resists the
tensile load alone. For the specimens under eccentric tension, both
tensile and compressive stresses may occur in the steel tube. Point A
is the start point from where the specimen behavior shows an
obvious change, and the stiffness experiences decrease remarkably.
Y. Ye et al.
Fig. 10. Moment (M) versus rotation angle (θ) curves for specimens under eccentric tension.
● Stage 2 (from Point A to Point B). After Point A, the specimen
behavior enters an elasto-plastic stage. The plastic strain develops in
the stainless steel tube, and the core concrete provides lateral sup­
port to the outer tube. The CFSST member exhibits obvious elonga­
tion or bending deformation in this stage. The average longitudinal
strain of the stainless steel tube reaches 5000 με at Point B.
● Stage 3 (from Point B to Point C). With the increase of tensile load or
moment, the stainless steel tube shows a “pinching” phenomenon in
the mid-height region, while the support provided by the core con­
crete restrains the increase of tube transverse strain. In this stage, the
10
Thin-Walled Structures 148 (2020) 106602
load keeps increasing with a much smaller rate than that in Stage 1.
The overall elongation or bending deformation of the CFSST tensile
member increases continuously.
● Stage 4 (from Point C to Point D). The CFSST tensile member is
unloaded in this stage. The elastic deformation is gradually recov­
ered. Meanwhile, residual overall elongation or bending deformation
is observed at the end of unloading.
It can be seen from Figs. 8 and 9 that, the tensile load-average axial
strain (elongation) responses for all the specimens increase from
Y. Ye et al.
Fig. 11. Axial tensile load (F) versus steel strain (εs) relationships for concen­
trically loaded specimens.
beginning to the termination of loading. Thus, it is necessary to define a
moment, at which the specimen attains its ultimate tensile strength (Fu).
In some previous research on the tensile behavior of CFST members, the
ultimate tensile strength was defined as the tensile load when the
average axial tensile strain of the specimen (ε) reached 5000 με [3]. In
Eurocode 8 [16], the ultimate strength or moment is defined as the load
or moment when the deformation of member reaches 3Δy or 3θy, where
Δy is the elongation corresponding to the yield tensile strength, and θy is
the end rotation corresponding to yield moment. Since the stainless steel
does not have an obvious yield stress like the mild carbon steel. Thus, the
ultimate tensile strength of CFSST members is defined as the load when
the longitudinal tensile strain of the stainless steel tube reaches 5000 με.
The purposes of such definition are as follows: (1) when the average
longitudinal strain attains 5000 με, the stainless steel tube has already
been in the plastic stage, indicating a full utilization of its material ca­
pacity; and (2) the ultimate tensile strength of CFSST members can be
comparable with that of CFST tensile members.
Thus defined measured ultimate tensile strengths (Fu) for all speci­
mens are listed in Table 1. Fig. 15 gives a comparison of Fu for the
concentrically loaded specimens. It can be noted that, the presence of
core concrete enhances the ultimate tensile strength of hollow stainless
steel tubes, and the increase ranges from 5.0% (S2c50-1/2) to 10.4%
(S2c80-1/2) for the concentrically loaded CFSST tensile members. This
enhancement of the tensile strength derives from the change of stress
status of the steel tube. The hollow tube element is subjected to unidi­
rectional tension, while the tube element with infilled concrete is under
bi-directional tension. Fig. 16 shows the stress status of different tube
elements, where σl, σ t and p represent the longitudinal stress, transverse
stress and normal stress of the tube, respectively. Moreover, the value of
Fu for the lubricated specimen (S2c50-ub, Fu ¼ 215.4 kN) is similar to
that of the corresponding unlubricated specimens (S2c50-1/2, Fu ¼
210.8 kN). It shows the effect of steel-concrete interface condition is
limited on the tensile strength, as the contribution of concrete is mainly
restraining the deformation of the outer tube.
The comparison of ultimate tensile strength (Fu) for the eccentrically
loaded specimens is shown in Fig. 17. As the load eccentrically (e) in­
creases from zero to 75 mm (e/r ¼ 1.29), the value of Fu decreases almost
linearly for both two sets of specimens. On the other hand, the core
concrete in the eccentrically loaded CFSST tensile members also en­
hances the tensile strength of the hollow stainless steel tubes, as shown
in Table 1.
11
Thin-Walled Structures 148 (2020) 106602
3. Discussion and calculation on ultimate tensile strength
3.1. Discussion on composite effect
The composite actions in a steel-concrete composite member usually
refer to the interfacial interactions, including the bond-slip response and
the change of stress status between contacted components [17]. Fig. 18
shows a schematic view of the patterns of concrete cracks in CFSST
members and plain concrete cylinders. When the plain concrete cylinder
is subjected to concentric tension, a major fracture near the mid-height
can be expected. However, for the CFSST tensile members, several
parallel cracks occur and distribute evenly on the surface of the concrete
cylinder. This is attributed to the fact that once the concrete crack forms
inside the tube, the load originally carried by the concrete will be
transferred to the tube for the composite action. Meanwhile, the opening
of the concrete crack could be restrained by the steel-concrete interfacial
stress. For the plain concrete cylinder subjected to eccentric tension, the
fracture failure near the mid-height would occur once the ultimate
tensile strength is reached. While for the eccentrically loaded CFSST
tensile members, several cracks initiate from the tensile region and
develop towards the compressive side. With the widening and extension
of cracks, the load carried by the concrete decreases while that carried
by the tube increases. The development of concrete cracks could also be
restrained by the steel-concrete interaction. As a result, the crack pattern
for the core concrete in CFSST tensile members is similar to that of
balanced-reinforced concrete members subjected to bending.
It has been demonstrated by previous research [3] that, the increase
of ultimate tensile strength for the CFST members compared to the
corresponding hollow carbon-steel tubes derives from the change of
steel-stress status. The yield locus for mild carbon-steel tube under
biaxial tension obeys the following equation when neglects the radial
stress:
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ðσ1 σ t Þ2 þ σ 21 þ σ2t
σ Mises ¼ (1)
2
in which, σ l and σ t are longitudinal and transverse stresses of the steel
tube, respectively, σMises is the von-Mises stress of mild carbon steel.
As for the hollow steel tubes, the von-Mises stress (σ Mises) equals to
the longitudinal stress (σ l) due to the transverse stress (σ t) remains zero
during the loading process. While for the composite members, the sup­
porting effect provided by the core concrete results in a positive value of
the transverse stress (σ t), leading to the steel tube in a biaxial tensile-
stress state. As a result, the longitudinal stress (σ l) could grow larger
than the yield stress (fy), leading to the ultimate tensile strength of the
tube larger than fy⋅As. As for CFSST members, the reason for the increase
in ultimate tensile strength (Fu) is like that in mild carbon-steel tubes,
though the stainless steel does not have obvious yield stress.
3.2. Relevant design equations
So far, there have been equations to predict the ultimate tensile
strength of CFST members. The Chinese standard DBJ/T13-51-2010
[18] suggests equations for calculating the tensile load (F)-bending
moment (M) interaction curve for the steel-concrete composite mem­
bers. A linear relationship is used for the F-M interaction curve, which is
expressed as follows:
F M
þ �1 (2)
Fu Mu
F � Fu (3)
where F and M are the tensile load and moment, respectively; Fu and Mu
are the ultimate tensile and flexural strengths, respectively.
For the ultimate tensile strength (Fu) of a CFST member, most design
Y. Ye et al. Thin-Walled Structures 148 (2020) 106602

Fig. 12. Axial tensile load (F) versus steel strain (εs) relationships for eccentrically loaded specimens.

12
Y. Ye et al. Thin-Walled Structures 148 (2020) 106602

Fig. 16. Stress status of hollow stainless steel tubes and infilled tubes.

Fig. 13. Axial tensile load (F) versus strain ratio (|εs,t/εs,l|) relationships for
concentrically loaded specimens.

Fig. 17. Comparison of ultimate tensile strength (Fu) for eccentrically

loaded specimens.

Fig. 14. Typical tensile load-elongation or moment-rotation relationship for
CFSST tensile member.
codes ignore the contribution of the core concrete and consider the
tensile strength of the outer steel tube only. Han et al. [3] conducted
experimental and numerical investigations on the tensile strength of
carbon-steel CFST member subjected to tension, and found that the
existence of core concrete could effectively enhance the ultimate tensile
strength of hollow steel tube by up to 10%. Furthermore, an equation for
predicting the ultimate tensile strength of CFST members was proposed
by Han et al. [3] as follows:
Fu ¼ ð1:1 0:4αÞ ⋅ fy ⋅As (4)

For the flexural strength (Mu) of CFST members with a circular cross
section, Han [19] proposed an equation as follows:
Mu ¼ γm ⋅Wsc ⋅fscy (5)

where γ m is a coefficient, γm ¼ 1.1 þ 0.48ln(ξþ0.1), ξ is the confinement

factor, ξ¼(As⋅fy)/(Ac⋅fck); Wsc is the section modulus, Wsc ¼ π⋅D3/32, D is
the outer diameter of steel tube; and fscy is the comprehensive strength,
fscy¼(1.14 þ 1.02ξ)⋅fck, fck is the characteristic compressive strength of
concrete.

3.3. Verification and discussion

The feasibility of employing the above design formulas to predict the

tensile strength (Fu) of CFSST members was evaluated. While using the
above equations to calculate the strength of CFSST tensile members, the
Fig. 15. Comparison of ultimate tensile strength (Fu) for concentrically yield stress (fy) of the carbon steel was replaced by the 0.2% proof stress
loaded specimens. (σ0.2) of the stainless steel. A comparison between the predicted

13
Y. Ye et al.
Fig. 18. Schematic view of concrete crack patterns.
Fig. 19. Comparison between measured and predicted results.
strengths and experimentally measured ones is shown in Fig. 19. Table 4
lists detailed values. For the concentrically loaded specimens, the cur­
rent design code overestimates the ultimate tensile strength of CFSST
members, and the ratios of predicted strength (Fu,c) to the experimental
value (Fu,e) is 1.152, and the corresponding coefficient of variation
(COV) is 0.087. This could be mainly due to the difference of mechanical
behavior between stainless steel and carbon steel. For the CFSST tensile
member, the strength development is more significant when the defor­
mation is large as the stainless steel has stronger hardening effect. Eq.
(4) has overestimation as the strength might not be fully developed
when the average elongation reaches 5000 με. For the eccentrically
loaded CFSST members, the current calculation method gives a con­
servative prediction of the tensile strength when the moment is given.
Furthermore, the difference between the predicted and measured ulti­
mate tensile strength increases with the increase of the load eccentricity.
This is possibly due to the fact that the predicted flexural strength of
CFSST member by Eq. (5) is conservative, leading to an imprecise pre­
diction of the strength. For the eccentrically loaded specimens, the
average and COV of Fu,c/Fu,e are 0.832 and 0.117, respectively. The
current design formulas for carbon-steel CFST members provides
14
Thin-Walled Structures 148 (2020) 106602
conservative predictions on the tensile strength of CFSST members. It is
suggested that further research should be carried out to improve the
design formulas.
4. Conclusions
A series of experiments were conducted in this research to investi­
gate the mechanical behavior of CFSST members subjected to concentric
tension and eccentric tension. Within the range of test parameters
studied herein, the following conclusions could be drawn:
(1) The CFSST members subjected to either concentric tension (up to
ε ¼ 50,000 με) or eccentric tension (up to θ ¼ 0.1 rad) behaved in
a ductile manner. The tensile load kept on increasing from the
beginning to the end of loading, and no obvious yield plateau was
observed.
(2) The core concrete in the CFSST tensile member worked well with
the outer stainless steel tube. The composite effect between tube
and concrete enhanced the ultimate tensile strength of stainless
steel tube by 5–10%.
Y. Ye et al. Thin-Walled Structures 148 (2020) 106602

Table 4 Wei Li: Methodology, Writing - review & editing, Supervision. Zi-Xiong
Comparison of ultimate tensile strength between experimental and predicted Guo: Project administration.
values.
Specimen Loading Fu,e Fu,c Fu,c/ Average Standard Acknowledgments
label type (kN) (kN) Fu,e (Fu,c/Fu, deviation
e) This research is part of the National Natural Science Foundation of
S2c50-1 Concentric 192.3 247.6 1.288 1.152 0.087 China (Grant No. 51808234). The authors would like to thank Mr. Hao
S2c50-2 tension 229.2 247.6 1.080 Guo for his assistance in the experimental work.
S2c80-1 212.3 247.6 1.166
S2c80-2 231.0 247.6 1.072
S2c50e25- Eccentric 167.7 150.5 0.897 0.832 0.117 Appendix A. Supplementary data
1 tension
S2c50e25- 159.3 150.5 0.945 Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
2 org/10.1016/j.tws.2020.106602.
S2c50e50- 154.8 108.2 0.699
1
S2c50e50- 117.6 108.2 0.920 References
2
S2c50e75- 111.7 84.4 0.756 [1] L.H. Han, C.Y. Xu, Z. Tao, Performance of concrete filled stainless steel tubular
1 (CFSST) columns and joints: summary of recent research, J. Constr. Steel Res. 152
S2c50e75- 104.6 84.4 0.807 (2019) 117–131.
2 [2] L.Y. Xu, M.X. Tao, M. Zhou, Analytical model and design formulae of circular
CFSTs under axial tension, J. Constr. Steel Res. 133 (2017) 214–230.
S3c50e25- 217.7 207.9 0.955
[3] L.H. Han, S.H. He, F.Y. Liao, Performance and calculations of concrete filled steel
1
tubes (CFST) under axial tension, J. Constr. Steel Res. 67 (11) (2011) 1699–1709.
S3c50e50- 196.4 148.9 0.758
[4] L.H. Han, Concrete Filled Steel Tubular Structures: Theory and Practice, third ed.,
2 Science Press, Beijing, 2016 (in Chinese).
S3c50e75- 154.6 115.9 0.750 [5] Y. Ye, L.H. Han, T. Sheehan, Z.X. Guo, Concrete-filled bimetallic tubes under axial
1 compression: experimental investigation, Thin-Walled Struct. 108 (2016) 321–332.
[6] W. Li, L.H. Han, T.M. Chan, Tensile behaviour of concrete-filled double-skin steel
tubular members, J. Constr. Steel Res. 99 (2014) 35–46.
(3) The steel-concrete interfacial condition had minor effect on the [7] W. Li, L.H. Han, T.M. Chan, Numerical investigation on the performance of
concrete-filled double-skin steel tubular member sunder tension, Thin-Walled
load-deformation relationship and ultimate tensile strength of
Struct. 79 (2014) 108–118.
CFSST tensile members. The concrete strength also had minor [8] W. Li, L.H. Han, T.M. Chan, Performance of concrete-filled steel tubes subjected to
effect on the load-carrying capacity of CFFST tensile members. eccentric tension, J. Struct. Eng.-ASCE 141 (12) (2015), 04015049.
[9] Z.B. Wang, Q. Yu, Z. Tao, Behaviour of CFRP externally-reinforced circular CFST
(4) The ultimate tensile strength of CFSST members decreased with
members under combined tension and bending, J. Constr. Steel Res. 106 (2015)
the increase of load eccentricity, and increased with the increase 122–137.
of the cross-sectional steel ratio. The composite members had [10] L.H. Han, Z.B. Wang, W. Xu, Z. Tao, Behavior of concrete-encased CFST members
higher initial loading stiffness compared with that of the corre­ under axial tension, J. Struct. Eng.-ASCE 142 (2) (2016), 04015149.
[11] M. Zhou, J.S. Fan, M.X. Tao, J.G. Nie, Experimental study on the tensile behavior of
sponding hollow stainless steel tubes. square concrete-filled steel tubes, J. Constr. Steel Res. 121 (2016) 202–215.
(5) By replacing the yield stress of carbon steel (fy) with 0.2% proof [12] J. Chen, J. Wang, W. Li, Experimental behaviour of reinforced concrete-filled steel
stress of stainless steel (σ0.2), the current design codes for carbon- tubes under eccentric tension, J. Constr. Steel Res. 136 (2017) 91–100.
[13] J. Chen, J. Wang, W.L. Jin, Concrete-filled steel tubes with reinforcing bars or
steel CFST tensile members failed to precisely predict the tensile angles under axial tension, J. Constr. Steel Res. 133 (2017) 374–382.
strengths of CFSST members subjected to tension. Thus, further [14] L.H. Han, Y.X. Hua, C. Hou, Q.L. Wang, Circular concrete-filled steel tubes
research is needed to improve the prediction model for the tensile subjected to coupled tension and chloride corrosion, J. Struct. Eng.-ASCE 143 (10)
(2017), 04017134.
strength of CFSST members. [15] ASTM A959-09, Standard Guide for Specifying Harmonized Standard Grade
Compositions for Wrought Stainless Steels, ASTM International, West
It should be mentioned that, this paper only dealt with CFSST tensile Conshohocken (PA), 2009.
[16] Eurocode 8, Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance-Part 3: Assessment and
members with limited types of stainless steel. As a result, further
Retrofitting of Buildings, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels,
investigation is still needed to characterize the mechanical behavior of Belgium, 2005.
CFSST tensile members with different types of stainless steel, especially [17] L.H. Han, W. Li, R. Bjorhovde, Developments and advanced applications of
concrete-filled steel tubular (CFST) structures: members, J. Constr. Steel Res. 100
with the aid of finite element method to perform parametric analysis.
(2014) 211–228.
[18] Housing and urban-rural development department of Fujian Province, DBJ/T13-
Declaration of competing interest 51-2010, Fuzhou, China, in: Technical Specifications for Concrete-Filled Steel
Tubular Structures (Revised Version), 2010 (in Chinese).
[19] L.H. Han, Flexural behaviour of concrete-filled steel tubes, J. Constr. Steel Res. 60
None. (2) (2004) 313–337.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Yong Ye: Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing - original draft.

15