Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Constructional Steel Research

Ultimate torsional capacity of steel tube confined reinforced

concrete columns
Xin Nie a, Wei Wang b, Yu-Hang Wang c,d, Jie Yu c,d,⁎, Chao Hou e
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100000, China
b
Sichuan Provincial Architectural Design and Research Institute, Sichuan 610000, China
c
School of Civil Engineering, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China
d
Key Laboratory of New Technology for Construction of Cities in Mountain Area (Chongqing University), Ministry of Education, Chongqing 400045, China
e
School of Civil Engineering, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Based on two quasi-static experiments of steel tube confined reinforced concrete columns (STRC) under pure tor-
Received 20 February 2019 sion load, detailed finite element (FE) simulation and theoretical derivation of the corresponding calculation
Received in revised form 7 May 2019 methods were conducted in this paper. FE models of STRC specimens under pure torsion were established
Accepted 25 May 2019
using the finite element software ABAQUS, the feasibility of which was then validated against the testing results
Available online 10 June 2019
in terms of both ultimate torsional capacity and failure modes. Comprehensive parametric analysis was pre-
Keywords:
sented, including the yield strength of steel tube, the thickness of steel tube, the dimension of cross-section,
Steel tube confined reinforced concrete (STRC) the strength of concrete, the yield strength of longitudinal reinforcement, the ratio of longitudinal reinforcement,
Pure torsion the yield strength and the ratio of stirrup, to investigate the influence on the torsional capacity of STRC columns
FE analysis with important structural factors. It can be found from the parametric analysis results that, the thickness of steel
Calculation method tube, the dimension of cross-section and the ratio of longitudinal reinforcement are the most important param-
Torsional capacity eters for the torsional capacity of STRC. Based on the results parametric analysis, an accurate and simplified cal-
culation method for the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC columns under pure torsion was proposed.
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction adopted by Tomii, who originally intended to replace the stirrup in

It is well known that steel tube confined reinforced concrete (STRC)
columns is a typical structural member which incorporates the benefit
of composite effects between the steel tube and the inner concrete.
One of the key features of the STRC column is that the outer tube is prop-
erly designed to avoid or reduce the direct transfer of the longitudinal
stress onto the tube itself, i.e., the tube is designed primarily as trans-
verse reinforcement. This is commonly achieved by leaving a girth gap
between the upper and lower tube segments, as shown in Fig. 1. In
this way, the possible premature buckling failure of the outer steel
tube under longitudinal compressive stress is effectively prevented, so
that a higher vertical ultimate capacity of the STRC column can be
achieved. The flexural capacity of the STRCs can also be ensured effec-
tively with an appropriate design of longitudinal reinforcements inside
the concrete.
The concept of using a steel tube as primarily transverse reinforce-
ment for reinforced concrete columns was first proposed by Tomii's re-
search group [1–5]. The terminology of “tubed column” was first
⁎ Corresponding author at: School of Civil Engineering, Chongqing University,
Chongqing 400045, China.
E-mail address: yujie1993@cqu.edu.cn (J. Yu).
the frame column with steel tube to improve the ductility. To verify
the feasibility of this approach, Tomii conducted a series of hysteresis
tests on RC and STRC columns. The results showed that the torsional ca-
pacity, the ductility, and the energy dissipation capacity of STRC col-
umns were better than those of RC columns with the same steel ratio.
At the meantime, Sakino and Tomii [6] conducted axial compression
tests on short columns of circular STRC columns and CFST columns. In
1991–2001, Sakino, Aklan and Sunet et al. [7,8] conducted a series of ex-
periments and theoretical studies on STRC columns, which involved
axial compression tests and hysteresis tests. Based on the research re-
sults on CFST and STRC components, Xiao and He [9] proposed the
STRC system in 2003, with the aim to apply the additional confinement
to the parts where the plastic hinge would formed in the structure,
which could also effectively delay the local buckling of steel tube and in-
crease both the energy consumption and the seismic behavior of the
structure. To investigate the mechanical behavior of steel tube confined
concrete beam-columns under constant axial loading and cyclically
flexural loading, a series of tests were conducted by Yao and Han
[10,11] in 2004–2005. It was proved that STRC could still exhibit good
ductility and energy dissipation capacity under high axial compression
ratios. Based on the test and theoretical analysis, the ultimate torsional
capacity and flexural rigidity of STRC columns under combined

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2019.05.034
0143-974X/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
208 X. Nie et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222
Concrete Longitudinal reinforcements
Girth gap
Steel tube
Girth gap
Fig. 1. Schematic view of the load-resisting mechanism for STRC columns.
compression and bending were preliminarily studied as well. Zhou and
Liu et al. [12–17] carried out a comprehensive testing and theoretical re-
search work on STRC columns. The testing program included steel tube
confined concrete columns, STRC columns, steel tube confined steel re-
inforced concrete columns, and steel tube confined high strength con-
crete columns with both circular and square cross-sections. In 2014,
Qi [18] conducted an experimental study to investigate the torsional be-
havior of circular and square STRC columns. Simplified methods for cal-
culating the cross-sectional torsional capacity and the member torsional
capacity were proposed. In 2018, Ji-Hua Zhu et al. [19,20] investigated
the application of fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) sheets which not
only improve the compression capacity but also enhance the corrosion
resistance of reinforcement columns.
The axial force and bending moment are two kinds of common ac-
tions in practice. Additionally, torque action is also frequently seen in
a structural system. Non-negligibly large caused by horizontal force
due to earthquake may occur at columns or slabs. This will happen
not only in large scale unsymmetrical structure but also other cases
with eccentric loading, such as a corner column in a building structure,
a screw bridge pier, a column of an offshore oil platform, a directional
tower of a hardstand, and a center column of a spiral staircase. It is
also known that the structural damage is usually caused by compres-
sion, bending, torsion, shear force and their combinations. Even when
under static loading conditions, the structure may be in a state of com-
bined compression-bending-torsion due to the combination of loads.
With the increase of the structural span and the growing seismic re-
quirement, the effect of torsion on the structure is gradually becoming
prominent. At present, there are some researches on the torsion resis-
tance of reinforced concrete column and CFST column under torsional
load or combined compression-bending-torsion load, however, very
limited research have been done on STRC column. Prakash et al. [21]
conducted experiments on circular reinforced concrete columns under
cyclic bending and shear, cyclic pure torsion, and various levels of com-
bined cyclic bending, shear, and torsion. The test results showed that
the aspect ratio had no obvious influence on the flexural or torsional ca-
pacities. Lee, Yun and Shim [22] studied the behavior of a circular CFST
column under combined torsion and compression theoretically. The
softening of concrete and the spiral effect were taken into consideration
with the restraining effect of the steel tube. The effects of biaxial stress
states due to diagonal cracking were also considered. By incorporating
these factors into the compatibility and equilibrium conditions, a basic
equation to describe the torsional behavior of the entire loading history
of CFST members was derived as well. With the purpose of calculating
the torsional capacity under combined compression and torsion load,
Han, Zhong and Xu et al. [23–28] completed the monotonic loading
tests on a series of CFST columns under complex stress states with for-
mulae proposed for calculation. Based on the experiments and finite el-
ement (FE) analysis of CFST columns under combined bending, shear
Girth gap
Girth gap
and torsion load, Yao [29] established a simplified calculation method
for the torsional capacity of CFST under combined stresses. Nie and
Wang [30–34] completed a series of quasi-static tests on CFST columns
subjected to pure torsion, compression-torsion, bending-torsion, and
compression-bending-torsion cyclic loading. A concrete-filled steel
fiber beam model considering the torsion effects was also derived, and
the torsional capacity calculation method of CFST under compression-
bending-torsion coupling loading was proposed.
As can be seen from the description above, previous research on
STRC columns mainly focused on the mechanical behavior under axial
compression load, combined compression and bending load, or com-
bined bending and shear load. However, investigations on the mechan-
ical behavior of STRC columns under pure torsion load have not been
reported yet. Curved girder bridges and continuous rigid frame bridges
have been widely used in the construction of the increasingly complex
traffic network. The torsion resistance is particularly prominent under
combined compression-bending-torsion load. In order to comprehen-
sively study the mechanical behavior of STRC columns under pure tor-
sion, the FE analysis is carried out in this study, based on which the
formula for calculating the torsional capacity of STRC under pure torsion
is proposed. The research outcome thus provides referencing for the tor-
sional design of STRC columns in practice.
2. Experimental study
2.1. Specimens
Two STRC columns were tested under quasi-static pure torsion load,
and the detailed information of the specimens are shown in Table 1. The
external of the tested specimen was steel tube and the internal of the
tube was filled by reinforcement and concrete. End plates were welded
with the steel tube at both the upper and lower ends through fillet
welding. The circular steel tube was fabricated through welding, while
the square steel tube adopted hot rolling seamless steel tube. In order
to ensure that the end of concrete can fully participate in resisting the
torsion, cross-shaped shear connectors were welded on the steel end
plates. Meanwhile, reserved holes were left on the steel end plates
Table 1
The details information of specimens.
Specimen The dimension of steel Reinforcement Height/mm
tube/mm
Longitudinal Stirrup
C-T 200 × 2.67 8 B12 A8@150 955
S-T 200 × 200 × 3.46 8 B12 A8@150 955
Note: The naming rules of specimens include: the first letter represents the cross-section
form, C represents circular cross-section, S represents square cross-section; the second let-
ter represents pure torsion load.
 X. Nie et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222 209

and the internal longitudinal rebars were welded with these reserved Table 2
holes to secure the anchorage at both ends of the longitudinal rebars. Material properties of steel tubes.

The geometric dimensions of the STRC columns are shown in Fig. 2. Cross section Thickness/mm Yield strength/MPa Ultimate strength/MPa
The steel grade of the circular steel tube and square steel tube were Circular 2.67 425.67 458.33
Q420B and Q345B, respectively. The details of material test results are Square 3.46 332.00 455.00
shown in Table 2. The steel grade of longitudinal rebars were HRB335
with 12 mm in diameter while the stirrup are HPB300 with 8 mm in di-
ameter, as shown in Table 3. C50 concrete was adopted with the cubic confined concrete proposed by Han et al. [37] was used to describe
compression strength of 51.38 MPa. the compressive stress-strain relationship of concrete.

2.2. Test setup 3.2.1. Steel

The steel components in a STRC column included the outer steel
The experimental equipment consisted of a steel base, rigid girder, tube, the longitudinal reinforcement, and the stirrup. The elastic modu-
cross hinge, a force sensor, actuator, and rigid link, as shown in Fig. 3. lus of steel was defined as 2.06 × 105 N/mm2, and the Poisson's ratio was
Both ends of the STRC column were fixed with a steel base and a rigid set as 0.3. The stress-strain relationship was defined as an ideal elastic-
girder. The torque was applied to the specimen through an actuator. plastic model, as shown in Eq. (1) and Fig. 4.
During the experiment, a rigid girder was adopted to fix the central
axis of the column, which could prevent horizontal displacement at

Es ε ε ≤εy
the top of the specimens. In addition, failure of specimens occurred σ¼ ð1Þ
fy εNε y
when the torsional angle was equal to 4°. Therefore, no large bending
moment would be induced that could affect the torsional capacity.
where, σ is the stress of steel (MPa); ε is the strain of steel; εy is the yield
3. Description of the numerical model description strain of steel; fy is the yield strength of steel (MPa).

3.1. The simulation of the specimen 3.2.2. Concrete

The 3D solid, shell and wire units were adopted to simulate the con-
crete, the steel tube and the reinforcement repectively, considering that
the thickness of steel tube was much smaller than its diameter and
heightas well as that the length of steel reinforcement was much larger
than its cross-sectional dimensions. In addition, the end steel plates
were not included in the model since its deformation was negligible
during the tests.
3.2. Material property
In the FE model, the properties of steel and concrete materials were
defined according to the results of the material tests. The ideal elastic-
plastic constitutive model was adopted for the steel components (in-
cluding the steel tube and the rebar), and the constitutive model of
The mechanical properties of concrete normally exhibited obvious
discontinuity of material and the existence of micro-cracks. In FE model-
ing, it was difficult to accurately simulate the mechanical properties of
concrete materials, and it was also difficult to simulate the crushing of
concrete. Therefore, the definition of concrete material properties was
particularly important. There were three typical concrete constitutive
models available to used in ABAQUS, including the brittle crack model,
the smeared crack model, and the plastic damage model. Previous
study [35] compared and studied the effects of three constitutive
models on the calculation results. According to the conclusion from
the above reference and the analysis of the experimental results, the
plastic damage model was selected to define the material properties
of concrete in this study.
In the STRC column, the inner concrete would be restrained by the
outer steel tube, resulting in triaxial states for the concrete. In the FE

End plate
Stirrup
Shear connector
Girth gap
(10mm width)
Longitudina
reinforcement
Stirrup
Longitudinal
reinforcement
(b) Square cross section

Stirrup

Girth gap Longitudina

(10mm width) reinforcement
Shear connector

End plate

(a) The plan view of specimen (c) Circular cross section

Fig. 2. Geometric dimensions of STRC columns.

210 X. Nie et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222

Table 3
Material properties of steel bars.

Cross section Diameter/mm Yield strength/MPa Ultimate strength/MPa fy

Longitudinal 12.01 351.00 519.33
Stirrup 7.56 401.10 420.45

qffiffiffiffiffi
0
simulation, the elastic modulus of concrete was set as 4730 f c (N/
mm2) and the Poisson's ratio was defined as 0.2, in accordance with
the American Standard [36].
When the STRC columns are under pure torsion, diagonal spiral
cracks will be generated along the direction of 45°. However, the ap-
0 y
pearance of the crack will be delayed due to the restraining of the
steel tube and the existence of interface adhesion. After concrete
Fig. 4. Perfectly elasto-plastic stress-strain curve of steel.
cracked, the released tensile stress will be resisted by the steel tube.
Due to the existence of the bonding force and confinement at the inter-
face between the steel tube and concrete. The diagonal cracking would with
be restrained, and the compressive stress would be generated in the
concrete between cracks, while the tensile stress along the axial direc-
As  f y
tion would generated in steel tube. ξ¼ ð3Þ
Ac  f ck
For the circular and square steel tubes, the constraining effects were
different. The constraining stress of circular steel tube at the same cross-
section was almost similar. While in a square STRC column, the bending with
rigidity of the middle tube wall of the section was smaller which would
ε σ
result in reduced confinement force on the core concrete. The tension in x¼ ;y ¼ ð4Þ
ε0 σ0
the vertical direction composed strong constraining for core concrete in
the diagional direction (45°). Therefore, the shear strain at the middle
point of the side wall of the steel tube was the largest, which was with
consistent with the material mechanics theory. Therefore, the stress- 2 ! 3
strain curve of concrete under compression adopted the stress-strain re-   24 0:45
4 2
σ 0 ¼ 1 þ −0:054  ξ þ 0:4  ξ  5  f c0 ð5Þ
lationship model suggested by Han [37], which considered the different 0
fc
lateral constraints of the circular and the square steel tubes.
The selected stress-strain relationship of concrete under compres-
sion took the confinement of the steel tube into consideration. For circu- with
lar STRC:   0 
fc 0:2
ε 0 ¼ εcc þ 1400 þ 800  −1  ξ ðμεÞ ð6Þ
24
y ¼ 2x−x28   ðx ≤1Þ
>
< 1 þ q  x0:1ξ −1 ðξ≥1:12Þ with
ð2Þ
with y ¼ x ðxN1Þ
>
: ðξb1:12Þ 0
β  ðx−1Þ2 þ x εcc ¼ 1300 þ 12:5  f c ðμεÞ ð7Þ

Rigid link
Ear plate
Actuator Pin roll Ear plate
Force sensor
Cross hinge Rigid girder
Specimen

Steel base
plate
Pin roll

End plate

(a) Sketch of set-up (b) Sketch of cross hinge

Fig. 3. Test set-up for STRC columns

 X. Nie et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222 211

and concrete (MPa); fc is the axial compressive strength of concrete prism

(MPa); α is related to the maximum aggregate diameter of concrete
0:745
ξ Dmax (α equals to 0.025 for Dmax = 8 mm, 0.03 for Dmax = 16 mm,
q¼ ð8Þ
2þξ 0.058 for Dmax = 32 mm).

 ½0:25þðξ−0:5Þ7  8
02 < 0:025 Dmax ¼ 8 mm
β ¼ 2:36  10−5  f c  3:51  10−4 ð9Þ
α ¼ 0:03 Dmax ¼ 16 mm ð19Þ
:
0:058 Dmax ¼ 32 mm
where, ξ is the confinement effect coefficient; As, Ac is the cross-
sectional area of the steel tube and the core concrete (mm2); fck is the
characteristic value of the concrete compressive strength (MPa); fc′ is
3.3. The interface relationship
the concrete cylinder strength (MPa).
For square STRC:
“Embedded Region” was adopted to describe the relationship be-
2 tween the reinforcement and the concrete, while “Surface-to-Surface
y ¼ 2x−x ðx≤1Þ
x ð10Þ Contact” was used to simulate the interface between the steel tube
and y ¼ ðxN1Þ
β  ðx−1Þη þ x and the inner concrete.

In which. 3.3.1. The interface between the reinforcement and the concrete
In the FE modeling, the interface relationship between the reinforce-
ε σ ment and the concrete was generally defined in two ways, i.e., the
x¼ ;y ¼ ð11Þ
ε0 σ0 “Rebar” and the “Embed Unit”. “Rebar” was a rod unit based on the
one-dimensional strain theory which could be defined individually or
with in batches within a single plane. The behavior between the concrete
2 !0:45 3 and the “Rebar” could be considered independent of each other when
  24
σ 0 ¼ 41 þ −0:0135  ξ þ 0:1  ξ 
2 5  fc
0
ð12Þ using the above method.
0
fc Since in the testing, the surface of the rebar was ribbed so that cohe-
sive force would be generated between the rebar and the concrete
with when the concrete was hardened. The “Embed Unit” was adopted in
this study which could thus accurately simulate such relationship be-
  0 
fc 0:2 tween the rebar and the concrete. The reinforcing cage was selected as
ε0 ¼ εcc þ 1330 þ 760  −1  ξ ðμεÞ ð13Þ
24 the “Embed Region” and the concrete was selected as the “Host Region”.

with 3.3.2. The interface between the steel tube and the concrete
In ABAQUS, “Surface-to-Surface Contact” was a special kind of dis-
0
εcc ¼ 1300 þ 12:5  f c ðμεÞ ð14Þ continuous constraint that allows the force to be transferred from one
part of the contact pair to another. Since the constraints were active
with only when the two contact elements were in contact while there was
no constraint when the two contact units were separated, the constraint
η ¼ 1:6 þ 1:5=x ð15Þ
was considered discontinuous.
with In this model, the contact between the steel tube and the concrete
was defined using the above mentioned “Surface-to-Surface Contact”.
8
0:1
> 0 The interaction between the contact surfaces consisted of two parts:
>
> fc
>
> pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ðξ≤3:0Þ the normal behavior and tangential behavior.
< 1:35 1 þ ξ
β¼
0 0:1 ð16Þ “Penalty” friction law was adopted to define the tangential behavior
>
> fc
>
> q ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ðξN3:0Þ between the interfaces, with the friction coefficient set as 0.55 [37].
>
: 2
1:35 1 þ ξ  ðξ−2Þ
τcrit ¼ μp ð20Þ
where fc′ is the cylinder strength of concrete (MPa).
The tensile strength of concrete was far less than its compressive where, μ is the friction coefficient, p is the contact pressure between the
strength. Moreover, once the concrete cracked under tension, it would interfaces (MPa).
lose its tensile strength shortly. In plastic-damage model of concrete, a
number of approaches were available to define the concrete tensile 3.4. Boundary condition
properties, including the definition of the tensile stress-strain curve,
the yield stress-displacement curve, and the fracture energy. Fracture In the test, steel end plates were adopted at both ends of the STRC
energy method was adopted in the current study. According to previous column, the steel tube and rebar were welded together and thus
studies [35], the maximum tensile stress of concrete ft was calculated by strongly restrained by the steel end plates. In addition, cross shear
Eq. (17). The fracture energy GFi was calculated according to the recom- members were welded on the steel endplate, which could ensure the
mendation of European code CEB-FIP MC90 [38]. full participation of the inner concrete in resisting the torsion. Therefore,
according to the actual situation of the STRC specimens in the validation
0:55 tests, the steel tube, the longitudinal reinforcement and the concrete of
f t ¼ 0:375f cu;k ð17Þ
STRC column were fixed at the bottom end in the FE model.
and Since the steel end plate components were simulated in the model, a
reference point was set up at the top center of the STRC, which was then
0:7 coupled with the top surface of STRC when applying torsion load. The
GFi ¼ α ð0:1 f c Þ ð18Þ
coupling type was selected as the Movement Coupling/Kinematic
where, fcu,k is the standard value of cubic compressive strength of which coupled all degrees of freedom on the top surface of STRC. Pure
212 X. Nie et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222
torsion load was directly applied in the form of torsion angle on this ref-
erence point, as shown in Fig. 5.
3.5. Torsion angle Meshing
In the FE model for the STRC specimens shown in Fig. 6, the three-
dimensional eight-node reduced integration elements (C3D8R) were
used to simulate the concrete; the four-node shrinkage reducing inte-
gral shell elements (S4R) were employed to represent the steel tube,
Simpson integral was used in the direction of the shell thickness with
5 integral points were set up; the two-node three dimensional truss el-
ements (T3D2) were employed to represent the embedded reinforce-
ment. In order to assign coincided unit nodes on the contact surface of
the steel tube and concrete, the meshes of steel tube and concrete
were set as the same size.
4. Validation of the FE modeling
Compared with the test results, the above established FE model can
accurately simulate the failure modes and the torsional capacity of STRC
column under pure torsion, detailed comparisons are shown in Figs. 7, 8
and 9.
4.1. Failure modes
It can be seen from Figs. 7 and 8 that the concrete near the gap of the
upper part of the steel tube cracked and crushed gradually, with the de-
formation mainly concentrated at the corresponding locations. In the
simulation results of the pure torsion tests, high-stress levels, large
strain, and deformation of the steel tube and concrete were obtained
Fig. 5. Boundary conditions of the analyzed STRC columns
near the gap of the upper part of the STRC column. Overall, the predicted
failure modes of the FE analysis were similar to the test results.
4.2. Ultimate torsional capacity
Comparisons between the load-deflection curves from the FE simu-
lation and those measured during the testing are shown in Fig. 9. During
the loading process, both ends of concrete cracked obviously which
greatly affected the stiffness of STRC. The FE model cannot fully capture
the torsion state and the failure of concrete after crushing. Therefore, it
can be noted that the torsional rigidity of STRC columns under pure tor-
sion obtained by the FE simulation was significantly different from the
test results. However, the difference in terms of the torsional load capac-
ity between the simulation and the experimental value was reasonably
small, as shown in Table 4.
5. Parameter analysis
The influencing parameters on the ultimate torsional capacity of
STRC columns under pure torsion were analyzed using the FE simula-
tion. With reference to the torsional variable angle space truss model
of reinforced concrete members and the formula for calculating the ul-
timate torsional capacity of pure torsional reinforced concrete members
in “Code for Design of Concrete Structures” [39], the formula for calculat-
ing the ultimate torsional capacity of the STRC column could be ob-
tained when the relevant coefficients in the formula were determined
by means of parameter fitting.
The parameters evaluated in this study included the yield strength of
steel tube fy, the thickness of steel tube t, the dimension of section D, the
strength of concrete fcu,k, the yield strength of longitudinal reinforce-
ment fyl, the diameter of longitudinal reinforcement dl (ratio of longitu-
dinal reinforcement), the yield strength fyv and the diameter of stirrup
dsv (ratio of stirrup). In the parametric analysis, the initial parameters
of the reference circular cross-sectional STRC column model are set as
follows: yield strength and the thickness of steel are 425 MPa and
2.67 mm, respectively; the diameter of longitudinal reinforcement is
12 mm (the corresponding reinforcement ratio is 2.9%); the compres-
sive strength of concrete cube is 51.38 MPa; the yield strength of stirrup
is 350 MPa and the diameter of stirrups is 8 mm, i.e., (the corresponding
volumetric percentage of stirrups is 0.9%). The initial parameters of the
reference STRC column model with square section are as follows: yield
strength and the thickness of steel are 332 MPa and 3.44 mm respec-
tively; the diameter of longitudinal reinforcement is 12 mm (the corre-
sponding reinforcement ratio is 2.9%); the compressive strength
standard values of concrete cube is 51.38 MPa; the yield strength of stir-
rup is 350 MPa and the diameter of stirrups is 8 mm (the corresponding
volumetric percentage of stirrups is 0.9%). The above parameters are
varied separately while the others remain unchanged so that their ef-
fects on the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC column under pure tor-
sion can be obtained.
In the simulation results, some of the load-deformation curves do
not have a clear descending branch. It is noticed that the increased am-
plitude of torsional capacity of specimens is small when the torsional
tangent stiffness of the torque-angle curve is less than 0.1 kN·m/°.
Therefore, the torque corresponds to the torsional tangent stiffness of
0.1kN·m/° is defined as the torsional capacity.
5.1. The yield strength of steel tube
The yield strength of steel tube in the FE model was set as 235, 345,
390 and 420 MPa respectively. The simulation results can be seen in Fig.
10. Under pure torsion, the variation rules on the torsional behavior of
the analyzed STRC columns with regards to the increase of the yield
strength of steel tube are obtained. An increasing trend of the ultimate
torsional capacity of STRC column can be found in Fig. 10. The ultimate
torsional capacity increases slightly when the yield strength of steel
 X. Nie et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222 213

Fig. 6. Meshing of the FEM models

Fig. 7. Comparison of the failure modes between the test and FE results (steel tubes).
214 X. Nie et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222

Fig. 8. Comparison of the failure modes between the test and FE results (concrete).

tube reaches over 390 MPa. The torque-angle curve of STRC columns
with circular cross-section shows a significant descent trend, while
the descent trend of the torque-rotation curves are not obvious.
5.2. The thickness of steel tube
The thickness of the steel tube is also a main factor affecting the ul-
timate torsional capacity of the STRC column under pure torsion. With
the remaining parameters fixed, two strength levels of circular steel
tubes were selected, i.e., 235 and 425 MPa respectively, while it was
235 and 332 MPa for square steel tubes. At the meantime, the steel
tube thickness was defined as 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 mm under each strength
level. Fig. 11 demonstrates that the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC
increases significantly, with the increase of steel tube thickness, while
the increasing of square section STRC column is larger. The angle corre-
sponding to the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC column with circular
section decreases gradually, and the descending stage of the torque-
angle curve becomes more obvious. The angle corresponding to the
ultimate torsional capacity of STRC column with square section is grad-
ually increased, and the torque-angle curve descending stage becomes
gentle.
It can be seen from the parametric analysis that the strength and
thickness of steel tube have a considerable influence on the torsional ca-
pacity of STRC. It can be found that the torsional capacity of the steel
tube is significantly improved after calculating a reference concrete
column with the same diameter as STRC by using the torsional capacity
calculation formula in Building code requirements for structural concrete
and commentary [36] and Code for Design of Concrete Structures [39]
(Table 5).
Although the steel tubes do not bear the external load directly, the
main compressive stress of concrete is transferred along 45° under the
pure torsion load. The steel tube and reinforcement at the crack jointly

30 30

25 25
Torque(kN·m)

Torque(kN·m)

20 20
Experiment
15 15 Simulation
10 Experiment 10
Simulation
5 C-T 5
S-T
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Angle (°) Angle (°)
( a ) C i r c u l a r s e c t io n ( b) S qu a r e s e c ti o n

Fig. 9. Comparison between the FE and testing results in terms of the torque-angle relationship
 X. Nie et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222
Table 4
Comparison of ultimate torsional capacity of circular and square specimens.
Specimens Experimental results (kN·m) Simulation results (kN·m)
Circular 28.41 28.87
Square 26.08 26.47
bear the oblique tensile stress. At the ends of the steel tube, only the re-
inforcement and concrete resist the torque. During the process of trans-
verse deformation of concrete caused by the principal compression
stress, the tube region at the end of the steel tube tends to bulge out-
ward and reaches the ultimate stress. It can be seen from the stress dis-
tribution diagram that the yield region of the end steel tube decreases
with the increase of the thickness or the strength of the steel tube, as
shown in Fig. 12. Therefore, the yield strength and thickness of the
end steel tube have an obvious influence on its torsional capacity.
5.3. The size of the cross section
The cross-sectional diameter of circular section STRC column and the
cross-sectional width of square section STRC column were defined as
150, 200 and 300 mm respectively. It could be seen from Fig. 13 that
the sectional size has significant effects on the torsional performance
of STRC columns. With the increase of sectional size, the ultimate tor-
sional capacity of STRC column increases significantly, and the angle
corresponding to the ultimate torsional capacity decreases gradually.
5.4. The strength of concrete
As stated above, the constitutive model of concrete under compres-
sion proposed by Han [37] which was related to the strength and the
configuration of the steel tube was adopted in the FE modeling. Based
on this constitutive model, the compressive stress-strain curves of
C30, C40, C50 and C60 concrete were obtained. The yield strength of cir-
cular steel tubular STRC was set as 235 and 425 MPa, respectively, while
that of square one was set as 332 and 420 MPa respectively. The simu-
lation results in Fig. 14 indicate that the ultimate torsional capacity of
STRC columns with circular section increases slightly, while no obvious
change is found in terms of the torque-angle curves. Compared with cir-
cular STRC columns, the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC columns
with square section is higher. The effects of concrete strength on the ul-
timate torsional capacity of the STRC column under pure torsion are
similar to that under different strengthes of steel tube.
30
C-T
25
Torque(kN·m)
20 fy=420MPa
fy=390MPa
15
fy=345MPa
10
fy=235MPa
5 5
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Angle (°)
(a) Circular section
Fig. 10. The influence of steel tube yield strength on the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC columns under pure torsion
215
5.5. The yield strength of longitudinal reinforcement
Error Tests have shown that the plain concrete member under torsional
1.62%
load will be damaged immediately once cracks appear. If appropriate
1.5% anti-torsional longitudinal reinforcements and stirrups are provided,
not only the ultimate torsional capacity will be significantly increased,
but the ductility of the components will also be improved. In this
study, the STRC column is designed with longitudinal reinforcements
and stirrups, so its infill is similar to that of the normal reinforced con-
crete. The variable angle space truss model is generally accepted in the
theory of torsional reinforced concrete. The basic idea is that the con-
crete exits the load-resisting when the cracks in the concrete are fully
developed and the stress of reinforcement is close to the yield strength.
Therefore, the solid section of the torsional reinforced concrete member
can be replaced by a hollow box section which consists of the concrete
shell with spiral crack, longitudinal reinforcements, and stirrups. The
yield strength of longitudinal reinforcements in STRC columns under
pure torsion was defined as 300, 400 and 500 MPa. With the increase
of the yield strength of longitudinal reinforcement, the ultimate tor-
sional capacity of STRC column is increased, and the increase for
circular STRC columns is greater than that for square ones. The angle
corresponding to the ultimate torsional capacity of circular STRC col-
umn increases, as shown in Fig. 15.
5.6. The diameter of the longitudinal reinforcement
In order to further reveal the influence of longitudinal reinforcement
on the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC member under pure torsion,
the diameter of longitudinal reinforcement was set as 10, 12, 14, 16
and 18 mm in the FE modeling, respectively. When under pure torsion,
the variation rules on the behavior of STRC column with regards to the
increasing of longitudinal reinforcement diameter are obtained in Fig.
16. It can be seen that the ultimate torsional capacity of circular STRC
columns increases obviously. The ultimate torsional capacity of square
STRC columns also increases significantly, but the increasing rate is
smaller than that of the circular ones. The torque-angle curves of circu-
lar STRC columns show significant descending stages, while those of
square STRC columns show a gentle descent stage. The angle corre-
sponding to the ultimate torsional capacity of circular STRC columns in-
creases gradually.
5.7. The yield strength of stirrup
In the variable angle space truss model of reinforced concrete mem-
bers, the stirrup would participate in the resisting of torsion load.
30
S-T
25
Torque(kN·m)
20
fy=420MPa
15 fy=390MPa
10 fy=345MPa
fy=235MPa
12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Angle (°)
(b) Square section
216 X. Nie et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222

35 35
30 C-T 30 C-T

25 25

Torque(kN·m)

Torque(kN·m)
20 20
t=5mm
15 t=5mm 15 t=4mm
t=4mm t=3mm
10 10
t=3mm t=2mm
5 fy=235MPa t=2mm 5 fy=425MPa t=1mm
t=1mm
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Angle (°) Angle (°)
(a) Circular section

35 35
30 S-T 30 S-T t=5mm
t=5mm
t=4mm
25 t=4mm 25
Torque(kN·m)

Torque(kN·m)
t=3mm
20 t=3mm 20
15 t=2mm 15 t=2mm

10 t=1mm 10 t=1mm

5 fy=235MPa 5 fy=332MPa
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Angle (°) Angle (°)
(b) Square section

Fig. 11. The influence of steel tube thickness on the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC columns under pure torsion.

Therefore, in order to study the influence of stirrup on the ultimate tor- concrete resist load independently during the elastic stage, while the
sional capacity of STRC column under pure torsion, the yield strength of confinement effects initiate and grow with the increase of concrete vol-
stirrup was set as 300, 350 and 400 MPa. It can be seen from Fig. 17 that ume. The cracked concrete could still resist torsional moment due to the
the torque-angle curves of STRC columns have no obvious change, while confinement provided by the outer steel tube. The steel tube resist the
the ultimate torsional capacities increase slightly. It can be concluded tensile stress between the cracks, while the steel tube and concrete
that the yield strength of stirrup has little influence on the ultimate tor- jointly resist the helical oblique pressure. For the STRC column, the
sional capacity of the STRC column under pure torsion. steel tubes do not resist external load directly. The concrete, reinforce-
ment and steel tube resist the torque together. The torque transforms
5.8. The diameter of stirrup (the volumetric percentage of stirrups) from top of the column to concrete and reinforcement first, and then
to the steel tube through the bond effects. Since the torque at the gap
The diameter of stirrup was defined as 6, 8, 10 and 12 mm in the FE of steel tube of the specimen is only resisted by concrete and reinforce-
simulation, respectively. The corresponding volumetric percentage of ment, the failure position of the specimen occurs at the gap of the steel
stirrup of STRC columns were 0.5%, 0.9%, 1.4% and 2.1%, respectively. tube of the specimen.
Fig. 18 reveals that the changes on the torque-angle curves of STRC col- There have been matured theoretical research on the torsion resis-
umns are not obvious, and the changes on the ultimate torsional capac- tance of reinforced concrete members previously. The variable angle
ities are mild as well. Therefore, the yield strength of stirrup has little space truss model proposed by Lampert and Thurlimann [40] in 1968
influence on the ultimate torsional capacity of the STRC column under has been widely adopted. “Code for Design of Concrete Structures” [39]
pure torsion. was based on the analysis of variable angle space truss model as well
as the statistical analysis of the testing data, with the formula proposed
6. Calculation of the ultimate torsional capacity for the ultimate torsional capacity of reinforced concrete members con-
sidering the reliability requirements. For the STRC column, although the
For the conventional RC column, the effect of reinforcement on the steel tube cannot be involved in resisting torsion directly, it can exert
torsion resistance before cracking is limited. After the cracking of con-
crete, diagional compression transimission path is formed in the con- Table 5
crete. The concrete, longitudinal reinforcement and stirrup compose a Influence of steel tube on the torsional capacity of STRC column under pure torsion.
space truss, which produces the circumferential shear stress flow to re- Specimen TuT TuA (TuT − TuC (TuT −
sist the external torque while the role of the core concrete is ignored. As (kN·m) (kN·m) TuA)/TuA (kN·m) TuC)/TuC
for the CFST column, experimental observation of torsion in CFST col- C-T 28.08 4.59 511.8% 5.32 427.8%
umns was reported by Han and Zhong [41], where four CFST specimens S-T 24.98 5.04 395.6% 7.24 245.0%
with circular sections under pure torsion were presented. Additionally, Note: TuT is experimental results (kN·m), TuA is calculated according to Building code re-
in 2007, Han et al. [42] also investigated the influence of important pa- quirements for structural concrete and commentary [36] (kN·m), TuC is calculated according
rameters on the ultimate torsional strength of CFST. The steel tube and to Code for Design of Concrete Structures [39] (kN·m).
 X. Nie et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222 217

Fig. 12. Stress cloud diagram of the finite element under different conditions. (a) fy = 425 MPa, t = 2.67 mm (b) fy = 425 MPa, t = 5 mm (c) fy = 235 MPa, t = 2.67 mm. (d) fy = 332 MPa,
t = 3.46 mm (e) fy = 332 MPa, t = 5 mm (f) fy = 235 MPa, t = 3.46 mm.

restraint on the inner concrete to improve the concrete strength. There- and
fore, the calculation formula for the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC
column is derived according to that for reinforced concrete members in f yl Astl s
[39], while the contribution of the steel tube is considered as the im- ζ¼ ð22Þ
f yv Ast1 ucor
provement on the torsional performance of the concrete.

6.1. Variable angle space truss model for a reinforced concrete member un-
der torsion
According to the variable angle space truss model, the formula for
calculating the ultimate torsional capacity of the reinforced concrete
members can be expressed as follows:
pffiffiffi f yv Ast1 Acor
Tu ¼ 2 ζ ð21Þ
s strut are adopted. The inclination is based on the ratio of the
where, fyv is the yield strength of stirrup (MPa); Ast1 is the cross-
sectional area of single stirrup (mm2); Acor is the cross-sectional area
within the inner surface of the stirrup (mm2); s is the stirrup spacing
(mm); fyl is the tensile strength of the longitudinal reinforcement
(MPa); Astl is the sum of the cross-sectional area of the longitudinal re-
inforcement (mm2); ucor is the circumference of the core section within
the inner surface of the stirrup (mm).
In this model, assumptions that the concrete is only subjected to
pressure and the concrete shell with spiral cracks form compression
218 X. Nie et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222

70 70
S-T
60 C-T 60
D=300mm D=300mm
50 50

Torque(kN·m)

Torque(kN·m)
40 40
30 D=200mm 30
D=200mm
20 20
10 D=150mm 10 D=150mm

0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Angle (°) Angle (°)
(a) Circular section (b) Square section

Fig. 13. The influence of section size on the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC columns under pure torsion

reinforcement strength of the longitudinal reinforcement and the in the truss model will be redistributed and the inclination of the com-
stirrup. pression strut will change accordingly.
On the basis of the experimental work, appropriate longitudinal re-
sffiffiffi
inforcements and stirrups should be used so that they can reach the
1
tanα ¼ ð23Þ yielding stage for efficient utilization of materials, and the α in the var-
ζ
iable angle space truss model is restricted as follows to control the crack
width of the torsion member under service load,
when ζ = 1, the inclination of concrete compression strut is 45°, when ζ
≠ 1, the inclination of concrete compression strut is still 45° before the
yielding of the longitudinal reinforcements and the stirrups. However, 3 5
≤ tanα ≤ ð24Þ
after one of the longitudinal reinforcements or stirrup yields, the stress 5 3

30
30
C-T C-T
25
25
Torque(kN·m)

Torque(kN·m)

20 C60 : fcu,k=60MPa
20 C60 : fcu,k=60MPa
C50 : fcu,k=50MPa
15 C50 : fcu,k=50MPa
C40 : fcu,k=40MPa 15 C40 : fcu,k=40MPa
10 C30 : fcu,k=30MPa
10 C30 : fcu,k=30MPa

5 fy=235MPa 5 fy=425MPa
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Angle (°) Angle (°)

(a) Circular section

30
S-T 30
S-T
25
25
Torque(kN·m)

Torque(kN·m)

20 C60 : fcu,k=60MPa 20 C60 : fcu,k=60MPa

C50 : fcu,k=50MPa C50 : fcu,k=50MPa
15
C40 : fcu,k=40MPa 15
C40 : fcu,k=40MPa
10 C30 : fcu,k=30MPa 10 C30 : fcu,k=30MPa

5 5 fy=420MPa
fy=332MPa
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Angle (°) Angle (°)

(b) Square section

Fig. 14. The influence of concrete strength on the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC columns under pure torsion
 X. Nie et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222 219

35 30
30 C-T S-T
25
25

Torque(kN·m)

Torque(kN·m)
20 fyl = 500MPa
20 fyl = 500MPa
15 fyl = 400MPa
15 fyl = 400MPa
fyl = 300MPa
fyl = 300MPa 10
10
5 5

0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Angle (°) Angle (°)
(a) Circular section (b) Square section

Fig. 15. The influence of longitudinal reinforcement strength on the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC columns under pure torsion

and
0:36≤ζ ≤2:778
It can be seen in the above calculation formula that under the vari-
able angle space truss model theory, the ultimate torsional capacity of
the reinforced concrete member depends on the parameters of the
steel skeleton, and the calculation formula is thus limited by the inclina-
tion of the compressive strut.
variable angle space truss model. However, the coefficient of reinforce-
ment is reduced when compared with the calculation formula of the
ð25Þ theoretical model, because the contribution of concrete and steel to
the ultimate torsional capacity is considered separately. Based on a
large number of testing statistics and reliability indexes, the coefficients
of concrete and steel are set as 0.35 and 1.2 respectively.
6.3. Derivation of the calculation formula for the ultimate torsional capacity
of STRC

6.2. Design formula for the reinforced concrete member in “Code for Design
of Concrete Structures” [39]
The formula for calculating the ultimate torsional capacity of rein-
forced concrete members under pure torsion in “Code for Design of Con-
crete Structures” [39] is shown in Eq. (26).
pffiffiffi f yv Ast1 Acor
T u ¼ 0:35 f t W t þ 1:2 ζ ð26Þ
s
where, ζ is the ratio of reinforcement strength between the longitudinal
reinforcement and the stirrup, the calculation formula of which can be
seen in Eq. (22); ft is the tensile strength of concrete (MPa); Wt is the
cross-sectional torsional resistance moment (mm3).
In Eq. (26), the ultimate torsional capacity of reinforced concrete is
divided into two parts: the first term on the right of the equation is
the contribution of the concrete, the second term is the contribution
of the reinforcement which is calculated according to the theory of
On the basis of the calculation formula of the ultimate torsional ca-
pacity of reinforced concrete members in “Code for Design of Concrete
Structures” [39], the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC can also be di-
vided into concrete and steel parts. As stated above, the contribution
of the outer steel tube can be reflected by its lateral restraining effects
on the inner concrete. At the meantime, the stress characteristics of stir-
rup have effects on the inclination of compression strut as well. There-
fore, both terms are multiplied by the magnification coefficients which
are related to the parameters of the steel tube. The calculation formula
can be expressed as Eq. (27):
f yv Ast1 Acor
Tu ¼ A  f tWt þ B  ð27Þ
s
where both A and B are calculation parameters related to the steel tube.
For concrete confined by the steel tube, the constraint stress fr on
concrete by the steel tube has been proposed in Zhou et al. [17]. The ef-
fects of steel tube on concrete are related to the restraining force, which

30
35
C-T S-T
30 25
Torque(kN·m)

Torque(kN·m)

25 20 dl 18mm
20 dl 18mm dl 16mm
15
dl 16mm dl 14mm
15
dl 14mm 10 dl 12mm
10 dl 12mm dl 10mm
5 5
dl 10mm
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Angle (°) Angle (°)
(a) Circular section (b) Square section

Fig. 16. The influence of longitudinal reinforcement ratio on the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC columns under pure torsion
220 X. Nie et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222

30 C-T 30
S-T
25 25

Torque(kN·m)

Torque(kN·m)
20 20

15 15
fyv = 300MPa fyv = 300MPa
10 10
fyv = 350MPa fyv = 350MPa
5 fyv = 400MPa 5 fyv = 400MPa
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Angle (°) Angle (°)
(a) Circular section (b) Square section

Fig. 17. The influence of stirrup strength on the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC columns under pure torsion

can be reflected by the ratio of fr and the axial compression strength of where, t is the thickness of the steel tube (mm); fy is the yield
concrete fc. strength of steel tube (MPa); D is the diameter of the steel tube or
side length of the cross-section (mm); fr is the restraining stress of
2tf y steel tube on concrete (MPa); fc is the axial compression strength of
fr ¼ ð28Þ
D−2t concrete (MPa); a, b, c are constant coefficients.
As shown in Eq. (27), the reinforcement term includes the reinforce-
and ment strength ratio of the longitudinal reinforcements and the stirrups,
 c and takes the constant coefficient A as 1.2 based on the variable angle
fr space truss model and reliability. When deriving the coefficient B in
A¼aþb ð29Þ
fc the calculation formula of the torsional capacity of STRC column, the

30 C-T 30
S-T
25 25
Torque(kN·m)

Torque(kN·m)

20 20

15 dsv = 6mm 15 dsv = 6mm

dsv = 8mm dsv = 8mm
10 10
dsv = 10mm dsv = 10mm
5 dsv = 12mm 5 dsv = 12mm
0 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Angle (°) Angle (°)
(a) Circular section (b) Square section

Fig. 18. The influence of stirrup ratio on the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC columns under pure torsion.

80 80
Formula results TuC(kN·m)

Formula results TuC(kN·m)

70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
Circular section Square section
10 10
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
FE simulation results TuF(kN·m) FE simulation results TuF(kN·m)
(a) Circular section (b) Square section

Fig. 19. Accuracy of the formula.

 X. Nie et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222
effects of the steel tube on the stirrups and the inclination of compres-
sion strut are taken into consideration. The deduced coefficient B is
expressed as Eq. (30).
pffiffiffiffi
B¼d γ
and
f yl  Astl
γ¼  
f yv Ast1
ucor þ tf y
s
where, γ is the ratio of strength between the longitudinal and trans-
verse steel; d is the calculation constant; fyl is the yield strength of the
longitudinal reinforcement (MPa).
The ultimate torsional capacity of STRC column was thus obtained by
a large number of simulation calculations with varying parameters. Af-
terward, the values of constants a, b, c, and d were obtained by means
of regression fitting. Since the constraint mechanism of the circular sec-
tion and the square section were different, the parameter fittings were
carried out respectively.
  c 
fr pffiffiffiffi f yv Ast1 Acor
Tu ¼ aþb  f tWt þ d γ 
fc s China 1985, pp. 119–125.
with
For circular section : a ¼ 1:507; b ¼ 20:566; c ¼ 0:666; d ¼ 4:702 ð33Þ
and
For square section : a ¼ 0:35; b ¼ 15:003; c ¼ 0:634; d ¼ 1:2
where, ft = 0.375f0.55
cu,k , fcu,k is the cubic compression strength of concrete
(MPa).
Comparisons between the ultimate torsional capacities of STRC col-
umn obtained by Eq. (32) and those from the FE analysis are summa-
rized in Fig. 19. The calculation error δ (=(TuC − TuF)/TuF) of the
formula is below 10%. In addition, the correlation coefficients between
the calculation results and the FE simulations for circular and square
cross-sections are 0.97 and 0.98, respectively. Therefore, the calculation
formulae proposed in this paper are feasible to be used in the prediction
of the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC members.
7. Conclusion
The quasi-static tests of two of STRC column specimens under pure
torsion were carried out, with further finite element analysis conducted
on the ultimate torsional capacity of STRC. The main conclusions can be
drawn as follows:
(1) The proposed finite element model generally showed good
agreements with experimental results in terms of the failure be-
havior and the ultimate torsional capacity.
(2) Based on the results of parametric analysis, with the increasing of
the yield strength of steel tube fy, the thickness of steel tube t, the
dimension of section D, the strength of concrete fcu,k, the yield
strength of longitudinal reinforcement fyl and the diameter of
longitudinal reinforcement dl (the corresponding ratio of longi-
tudinal reinforcement), a similar trend was observed as the in-
creasing of the ultimate torsional capacity. However, the effect
of the thickness of the steel tube, the size of the cross-section
and the diameter of longitudinal reinforcement on the improve-
ment of ultimate torsional capacity were larger than those of
other factors.
(3) According to the variable angle space truss model, the modified
calculation formulae obtained by based on massive simulations
221
with varying parameters are proved feasible to be used in the
prediction of the torsional capacity of STRC members.
Acknowledgments
ð30Þ
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support provided
by the National Key Research and Development Program of China
(2017YFC0703406), Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Uni-
ð31Þ versities(2019CDQYTM028)，111 Project (Grant No. B18062)，and
the National Natural Science Fundation of China (51822804 and
51890902).
References
[1] Y. Xiao, Y.R. Guo, W.H. He, H. Wu, Retrofit of reinforced concrete columns using par-
tially stiffened steel jackets, J. Build. Struct. 24 (6) (2003) 79–86.
[2] Y. Xiao, W.H. He, X. Mao, Development of confined concrete filled tubular (CCFST)
columns, J. Build. Struct. 25 (6) (2004) 59–66.
[3] K. Choi, Y. Xiao, W. He, Confined concrete-filled tubular columns, J. Struct. Eng. 131
(3) (2005) 488–497.
[4] M. Tomii, Lateral load capacity of reinforced concrete short columns confined by
steel tube, Proceedings of the International Speciality Conference on Concrete Filled
Steel Tubular Structures, Harbin, China 1985, pp. 19–26.
[5] M. Tomii, K. Sakino, Y. Xiao, et al., Earthquake Resisting hysteretic behavior of rein-
forced concrete short columns confined by steel tube, Proceedings of the Interna-
ð32Þ tional Speciality Conference on Concrete Filled Steel Tubular Structures, Harbin,
[6] K. Sakino, M. Tomii, K. Watanabe, Sustaining load capacity of plain concrete stub col-
umns confined by circular steel tube, Proceeding of the International Speciality Con-
ference on Concrete Filled Steel Tubular Structures, Harbin, China 1985,
pp. 112–118.
[7] K. Sakino, Y.P. Sun, N. Toshihiko, Behavior of concrete confined in square steel tube
under axial compression, part 1: details of test specimens, Summaries of Technical
Papers of Annual Meeting Architectural Institute of Japan, Structures II 1991,
pp. 215–216.
[8] A. Kawaguchi, Y.P. Sun, K. Sakino, et al., Effect of configuration of transverse steel on
ð34Þ the behavior of reinforced concrete columns: (part 1) outline of experiment pro-
gram//summaries of technical papers of annual meeting architectural Institute of
Japan, Struct. II. Archit. Inst Jpn. (1994) 437–438.
[9] Y. Xiao, W.H. He, Development of confined CFST columns, J. Harbin Inst. Technol. 35
(z1) (2003) 40–42.
[10] G.H. Yao, Han Lin-Hai. Cyclic behavior of steel tube confined concrete beam-
columns, Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib. 24 (6) (2004) 89–96.
[11] L.H. Han, G.H. Yao, Z.B. Chen, et al., Experimental behaviors of steel tube confined
concrete (STCC) columns, Steel Compos. Struct. 5 (6) (2005) 459–484.
[12] X.H. Zhou, J.P. Liu, Seismic behavior and strength of tubed steel reinforced concrete
(SRC) short columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 66 (7) (2010) 885–896.
[13] J.P. Liu, X.H. Zhou, Behavior and strength of tubed RC stub columns under axial com-
pression, J. Constr. Steel Res. 66 (1) (2010) 28–36.
[14] X.H. Zhou, J.P. Liu, Seismic behavior and shear strength of tubed RC short columns,
Steel Const. 66 (3) (2010) 385–397.
[15] X.H. Zhou, B. Yan, J.P. Liu, Behavior of square tubed steel reinforced-concrete (SRC)
columns under eccentric compression, Thin-Walled Struct. 91 (2015) 129–138.
[16] X.H. Zhou, J.P. Liu, X.D. Wang, et al., Behavior and design of slender circular tubed-
reinforced-concrete columns subjected to eccentric compression, Eng. Struct. 124
(2016) 17–28.
[17] X.H. Zhou, J.P. Liu, The Performance and Design of Steel Tube Confined Concrete Col-
umn, Science Press, 2010.
[18] H.T. Qi, The Static Behavior of Steel Tube Confined Concrete Columns under Axial
and Eccentric Loading, Harbin Institute of Technology, 2014.
[19] J.H. Zhu, Su M, J. Huang, T. Ueda, F. Xing, The ICCP-SS technique for retrofitting rein-
forced concrete compressive members subjected to corrosion, Constr. Build. Mater.
167 (2018) 669–679.
[20] J.H. Zhu, L. Wei, H. Moahmoud, E. Redaelli, F. Xing, L. Bertolini, Investigation on CFRP
as dual-functional material in chloride contaminated solutions, Constr. Build. Mater.
151 (2017) 127–137.
[21] S. Prakash, A. Belarbi, Y.M. You, Seismic performance of circular RC columns sub-
jected to axial force, bending, and torsion with low and moderate shear, Steel Con-
struct. 32 (1) (2010) 46–59.
[22] E.T. Lee, B.H. Yun, H.J. Shim, et al., Torsional behavior of concrete-filled circular steel
tube columns, J. Struct. Eng. 135 (10) (2009) 1250–1258.
[23] L.H. Han, Tao Zhong, Liu Wei, Concrete-filled steel tubular structure—theory and
practice, J. Fuzhou Uni. Nat. Sci. 29 (6) (2001) 24–34.
[24] L.H. Han, Y.F. Yang, Experimental study on strength torsional capacity of rectangular
concrete-filled steel tube under axial compression member, China Civil Eng. J. 34 (4)
(2001) 22–31.
[25] L. Han, S. Zhong, Interaction equations for the torsional capacity of concrete filled
steel tubular (CFST) member subjected to compression-torsion and bending –
torsion, J. Harbin Uni. Civil Eng. Archit. 2 (1994) 32–37.
[26] J. Xu, G. Lee, Experimental studies on steel tube, cored concrete and concrete filled
steel tube short column under compression and torsion, J. Beijing Inst. Civil Eng.
Archit. 2 (1991) 1–10.
222 X. Nie et al. / Journal of Constructional Steel Research 160 (2019) 207–222
[27] J. Xu, J. Zhou, Experimental Study on Long Columns in Concrete-Filled Steel Tube
under Combined Compressive-Torsionl Forces//Proceedings of the Third Annual
Meeting of China Steel Association - Concrete Composite Structure Association,
1991.
[28] J. Xu, George Lee, K.C. Chang, Kunitomo, Experimental study on concrete filled steel
tube short column under the combined action of compression and torsion, J. Beijing
Instit. Civil Eng. Archit. 2 (1991) 1–10.
[29] G.H. Yao, Research on Behavior of Concrete-Filled Steel Tubes Subjected to Compli-
cated Loading States, Fuzhou University, 2006.
[30] J.G. Nie, Y.H. Wang, J.S. Fan, Experimental study on seismic behavior of concrete
filled steel tube columns under pure torsion and compression-torsion cyclic load,
J. Constr. Steel Res. 79 (1) (2012) 115–126.
[31] J.G. Nie, Y.H. Wang, J.S. Fan, Experimental research on concrete filled steel tube col-
umns under combined compression-bending-torsion cyclic load, Thin-Walled
Struct. 67 (2) (2013) 1–14.
[32] J.G. Nie, Y.H. Wang, J.S. Fan, Experimental study on seismic behavior of concrete
filled steel tube columns under pure torsion and compression–torsion cyclic load,
J. Constr. Steel Res. 79 (1) (2012) 115–126.
[33] Y.H. Wang, Y.F. Guo, J.P. Liu, et al., Experimental study on torsion behavior of con-
crete filled steel tube columns subjected to eccentric compression, J. Constr. Steel
Res. 129 (7) (2017) 119–128.
[34] J.G. Nie, Y.H. Wang, J.S. Fan, Experimental study on concrete filled steel tubular col-
umns under combined compression, flexure and torsion, J. Build. Struct. 33 (9)
(2012) 1–11.
[35] J.G. Nie, Y.H. Wang, Comparison study of constitutive model of concrete in Abaqus
for static analysis of structure, Eng. Mech. 30 (4) (2013) 59–67.
[36] Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary, ACI318M-05.
, American Concrete Institute, 2005.
[37] L.H. Han, Concrete-filled steel tube structure- theory and practice, Science press, Bei-
jing, 2004.
[38] Model Code 90, CEB-FIP. Lausanne: Mai, 1993.
[39] Code for Design of Concrete Structures, GB50010, China Architecture & Building
Press, Beijing, China, 2012.
[40] P. Lampert, B. Thürlimann, Ultimate Strength and Design of Reinforced Concrete
Beams in Torsion and Bending, 1972.
[41] L.H. Han, S.T. Zhong, The studies of pure torsion problems of concrete filled steel
tube, Ind Const. 25 (1) (1995) 7–13.
[42] L.H. Han, G.H. Yao, Z. Tao, Performance of concrete-filled thin-walled steel tubes
under pure torsion, Thin-Walled Struct. 45 (1) (2007) 24–36.