Engineering Structures 155 (2018) 157–166

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engstruct

Effects of steel-to-member depth ratio and axial load on flexural ductility of T

concrete-encased steel composite columns
⁎
Cheng-Cheng Chena, Chien-Chung Chenb, , Jia-Hau Shena
a
Department of Construction Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei 10607, Taiwan
b
Department of Mechanical and Civil Engineering, Purdue University Northwest, Hammond, IN 46323, USA

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

Keywords: This paper experimentally studies flexural ductility of eight concrete-encased steel composite columns. The
Encased composite member composite columns are tested under cyclic loading with various axial load levels. In addition to the axial load
SRC column level, effects of steel-to-member depth ratios on flexural behavior of encased composite members are in-
Drift ratio vestigated in this study. Two types of concrete-encased steel composite specimens are designed to represent two
Plastic hinge rotation
steel-to-member depth ratios. Displacement ductility ratios, drift ratios, and plastic hinge rotations obtained
Cyclic loading
from cyclic load tests are used for evaluating flexural ductility of test specimens. Results from this study show
that both the axial load level and steel-to-member depth ratio have a significant impact on flexural performance
of concrete-encased steel composite columns.

1. Introduction of concrete on local buckling of structural steel members for both

The ability of concrete-encased steel composite columns, referred to
as steel reinforced concrete (SRC) columns hereafter, to sustain strong
earthquake loads depends on the drift ratio capacity of SRC columns.
Different from reinforced concrete (RC) members, a SRC member con-
tains reinforcing steel bars and a structural steel shape embedded inside
the member. The embedded structural steel shape may be deemed as
part of reinforcement in addition to reinforcing bars that are used in
typical RC members. Due to some similarities in materials used in SRC
and RC members, i.e., concrete and reinforcing bars, design con-
siderations for RC members may be applicable to SRC members. For
instance, past studies [1–4] indicated that deformation capacity/duc-
tility of RC columns could be affected by many factors including, but
not limited to: amount and yield strength of transverse reinforcement,
axial load level, concrete strength, and reinforcement detailing. Con-
sequently, similar effects of those factors on structural behavior of SRC
columns may exist. In this study, one of the objectives was to in-
vestigate effects of the axial load level on flexural ductility of SRC
columns.
Lateral deformation capacity of RC columns mainly relies on the
level of confinement provided by transverse reinforcing steel bars. On
the other hand, lateral deformation capacity of SRC columns relies on
concrete core confinement provided by not only transverse reinforcing
steel bars but also the structural steel shape. Confining effects of various
structural steel sections on concrete strength and the restraining effects
concrete-encased and concrete-filled composite members were in-
vestigated by [5,6]. Also, it was reported in other studies [7,8] that an
increase in strength and ductility of concrete due to the confinement by
a wide-flange structural steel shape should be considered in the ana-
lyses of SRC columns. As a wide-flange structural steel shape provides
axial and flexural capacities to SRC columns, it also confines the core
concrete within the flanges when the steel shape is subjected to major-
axis bending [9]. Simultaneously, the surrounding concrete provides
restraints to the steel shape to prevent or delay the onset of local
buckling. Therefore, the ratio of the depth of the steel shape and the
depth of the member section could influence effectiveness of the steel
shape in confining core concrete; this ratio is referred to as steel-to-
member depth ratio hereafter. A SRC section with a higher steel-to-
member depth ratio confines a higher percentage of the concrete area
within the section than a SRC section with a lower steel-to-member
depth ratio, given the same section dimensions. El-Tawil and Deierlein
[10] recommended that the steel core area could be increased to pro-
vide confinement and to lessen constructability issues caused by the
transverse reinforcement required by building codes. Consequently,
increasing the steel-to-member depth ratio in a SRC section can po-
tentially enhance flexural ductility of a SRC column and ease the re-
inforcement congestion problem. Owing to the aforementioned bene-
fits, it was of interest of this study to examine effectiveness of increasing
the steel-to-member depth ratio in enhancing concrete confinement,
leading to an improvement on lateral deformation capacity of SRC

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: chen1736@pnw.edu (C.-C. Chen).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.11.036
Received 15 June 2016; Received in revised form 11 October 2017; Accepted 14 November 2017
Available online 20 November 2017
0141-0296/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
C.-C. Chen et al. Engineering Structures 155 (2018) 157–166

Nomenclature experiment
Mna nominal flexural capacity of a SRC column obtained from
Ag gross area of the cross section the P-M diagram using the actual material properties
bf width of the flange of steel shape tf thickness of the flange of steel shape
d depth of the steel shape tw thickness of the web of steel shape
fc′ actual compressive strength of concrete α drift ratio
Hmax maximum lateral load αu drift ratio capacity
Hn lateral load obtained by Mn/L Δ lateral displacement at the level of the horizontal actuator
L length of the column specimen measured from the lateral Δu ultimate lateral displacement
loading point to the face of the footing Δy yield lateral displacement
Mexp flexural capacity of a SRC column obtained from the θp plastic hinge rotation capacity

columns. In addition, Ricles and Paboojian [11] showed that flexural
ductility of SRC columns could be affected by axial loads. They sug-
gested that more research was needed to determine transverse re-
inforcement requirements for SRC columns. Hence, it was also of in-
terest of this study to investigate effects of various axial load levels on
transverse reinforcement requirements.
In this study, two types of SRC columns were designed to identify
potential benefits of utilizing a deep structural steel shape in SRC col-
umns. Eight SRC column-footing assemblages, including two specimens
from a previous study by Chen et al. [9], were tested under cyclic lat-
eral loading with various axial load levels. Displacement ductility ra-
tios, drift ratios, and plastic hinge rotations obtained from the cyclic
load tests were utilized to investigate effects of axial load levels and
steel-to-member depth ratios on ductility of SRC columns.
2. Experimental program
2.1. Test specimens
Eight SRC column-footing assemblages were constructed and tested
in this study. Fig. 1 shows the two types of SRC sections investigated
herein. One type is a typical SRC section, and the other type is a deep
SRC section (with a deep structural steel shape). Table 1 provides in-
formation of the transverse reinforcing bars and structural steel shape
of the eight SRC specimens. Two types of sections, typical and deep SRC
sections, were used in the eight specimens, as shown in Fig. 1. The deep
SRC section possesses a deep structural steel shape, which extends to
inside edges of transverse hoops. Three X-series specimens were the
typical SRC section, and five XD-series specimens were the deep SRC
section. Among the X-series specimens, Specimens X3.5–21 and
X2.6–35 were part of a previous study by Chen et al. [9]. For the eight
specimens studied herein, two structural steel wide-flange shapes
H260 × 200 × 9 × 14 (d × bf × tw × tf in mm) and
H340 × 200 × 9 × 14 (d × bf × tw × tf in mm) were used to form the
typical and deep SRC sections. Also shown in Fig. 1, all specimens used
eight #6 (D19) rebars as longitudinal reinforcing bars and utilized the
same configuration of transverse reinforcing steel bars including closed
hoops and inner ties. Four inner ties were utilized to provide lateral
support to the middle four longitudinal reinforcing bars owing to the
presence of the web of the structural steel shape in the middle of the
section, impeding the feasibility of using a continuous crosstie across
longitudinal steel bars from both sides.
In addition to the transverse reinforcement and structural steel
shape, Table 1 also lists the confining stress, applied axial load, and
concrete strength for each specimen. The amount of effective confining
reinforcing bars is presented in terms of confining stress, Ash fyt/sbc,
which is the ratio of transverse steel bars (Ash/sbc) multiplied by the
actual yield strength of the steel bars obtained from tension tests. As
concrete confinement was provided by transverse reinforcing bars that
were perpendicular to the axis of bending, only the steel bar area of
closed hoops (2 legs per hoop) were used in the determination of
available confining stress. Although AISC 341–10 [12] does not limit
width-to-thickness (b/t) ratios for encased composite members, the b/t
ratio of the flanges of H260 × 200 × 9 × 14 and
H340 × 200 × 9 × 14 (b/t = 7.1) satisfies the b/t requirement for the
flange of I-shaped sections prescribed by AISC 341–10 [12], which
limits the b/t ratio of the flange of I-shaped sections for highly ductile
members to 0.3 E / Fy = 7.2. The b/t ratios of the webs of
H260x200x9x14 and H340 × 200 × 9 × 14 were 22.9 and 31.8, re-
spectively, also meeting the corresponding limiting b/t ratio,

H340×200×9×14 Fig. 1. Typical and deep SRC sections.

H260×200×9×14 Closed hoop Closed hoop
Inner tie Inner tie
65 100 120 100 65
65 100 120 100 65

A A A A
450
450

Inner tie Inner tie

connector connector

65 65 65 65
450 450

Typical SRC section Deep SRC section

Inner tie
connector #6 (D19) steel bar
Unit: mm
A – A section

158
C.-C. Chen et al. Engineering Structures 155 (2018) 157–166

Table 1
Specimen matrix.

Specimen Transverse reinforcement Structural Steel Confining stress Ashfyh/sbca (MPa) Axial load (kN) Concrete strength, fc′ (MPa)

Hoops Crossties

X3.5-21 2-#3 SD420 2-#3 SD280 H260 × 200 × 9 × 14 3.52 1667 39.2
X2.6-35 2-#3 SD280 2-#3 SD280 H260 × 200 × 9 × 14 2.61 2746 39.1
X3.4-60 2-#3 SD420 2-#3 SD280 H260 × 200 × 9 × 14 3.37 4609 37.9
XD2.5-21 2-#3 SD280 2-#3 SD280 H340 × 200 × 9 × 14 2.45 1667 38.7
XD3.5-21 2-#3 SD420 2-#3 SD280 H340 × 200 × 9 × 14 3.52 1667 38.7
XD1.3-35 1-#3 SD280 2-#3 SD280 H340 × 200 × 9 × 14 1.31 2746 39.1
XD1.3-60 1-#3 SD280 2-#3 SD280 H340 × 200 × 9 × 14 1.31 4609 37.9
XD3.4-60 2-#3 SD420 2-#3 SD280 H340 × 200 × 9 × 14 3.37 4609 37.9

a
Only hoops were used in the calculation of the confining pressure.

1.49 E / Fy = 35.9.
Materials used for the structural steel shapes and longitudinal re-

620
inforcing steel bars were A572 Grade 50 and A615 Grade 60, respec- Cyclic loading, P
tively. The specified compressive strength of concrete was 34 MPa. Two
(+) (-)
steel grades, A615 Grade 40 and Grade 60, were used for transverse
reinforcing steel bars in this study in order to create various levels of
confining effects among the specimens. Tables 1 and 2 tabulates actual

2270
Column
material strength for the concrete, structural steel shape, longitudinal

L = 1650
reinforcing bars, and transverse reinforcing bars used in this study.
Dimensions of the test specimens and details of reinforcing bar
placement are shown in Figs. 2 and 3. The spacing of transverse steel
bars in plastic hinge regions was set at 110 mm, which was in-
tentionally chosen to be close to the limiting spacing requirements re-
quired by ACI 318–11 [13], six times the diameter of longitudinal steel Footing
bars (6db = 114 mm) and one-quarter of the minimum member di-
mension (450 mm/4 = 112.5 mm). As the spacing of transverse re-
630

inforcing steel bars was kept constant in all specimens, effects of axial
load and steel section depth on flexural ductility of the studied SRC
specimens could be effectively evaluated. (a) Side view
As SRC columns are typically connected to steel beams in a moment
resisting frame, the extent of tensile strain penetration of the steel shape Footing
is limited. Details of the tensile strain penetration phenomenon of SRC
columns are discussed in [9]. As shown in Fig. 4, two
H450 × 200 × 9 × 14 girder segments were welded to the two flanges
800

450

Column
of the steel column to simulate the boundary condition of SRC columns
in a moment resisting frame. Continuity plates were inserted and
welded between the column flanges at the level of the girder top flanges
to ensure the continuity. The steel shapes and longitudinal reinforcing 450
bars were welded to a bottom plate to facilitate the positioning of the
2200
steel shape and longitudinal steel bars. The bottom plate provided an-
chorage to the steel shapes and steel bars and was also designed to (b) Top view Unit: mm
transfer forces between bottom flanges of the two steel girders.
Fig. 2. Specimen dimensions and configurations.
The specimen ID designation was based on the bending axis, section

Table 2
Mechanical properties of steel shapes and reinforcing bars.

Specimen Type Yield strength (MPa) Ultimate strength (MPa)

X3.5–21 Steel shape 440 580

XD2.5-21 Longitudinal bar Grade 60 #6 480 680
XD3.5-21 Transverse bar Grade 40 #3 340 490
Transverse bar Grade 60 #3 490 720
Transverse bar Grade 60 #4 440 680

X2.6-35 Steel shape 440 580

XD1.3-35 Longitudinal bar Grade 60 #6 480 680
Transverse bar Grade 40 #3 363 412
Transverse bar Grade 60 #3 468 597

X3.4–60 Steel shape 430 546

XD1.3-60 XD3.4-60 Longitudinal bar Grade 60 #6 436 697
Transverse bar Grade 40 #3 363 412
Transverse bar Grade 60 #3 468 632

159
C.-C. Chen et al. Engineering Structures 155 (2018) 157–166

to manufacture the H260 × 200 × 9 × 14 and H340 × 200 × 9 × 14

steel column sections used in this study. To produce
H260 × 200 × 9 × 14 sections, the flange and web of
H340 × 250 × 9 × 14 were initially flame cut to specific sizes to create
two T-sections, which were later connected by complete joint pene-
tration welds. To produce H340 × 200 × 9 × 14 sections, only the
7@220
flanges were flame cut to make 200 mm-wide flanges.
For research purposes, welded hoops were used as the closed hoops
(details of the welded hoops can be found in [9]). The first layer of

2270
transverse reinforcing bars including closed hoops and inner ties were
placed at a distance of 55 mm from the face of the footing. Above the
first layer of transverse reinforcing bars, five layers of transverse re-
inforcing bars were placed at a spacing of 110 mm, followed by seven
layers of transverse reinforcing bars with a spacing of 220 mm. While
XD1.3–35 and XD1.3–60 used one closed hoop in each layer of trans-
5@110

verse reinforcing bars, the other specimens used two closed hoops in
each layer of transverse reinforcing bars.
Specimens were fabricated in the following sequence: (1) the in-
stallation of steel shapes and steel bars; (2) the formwork of the footing;
(3) the concrete casting of the footing; (4) the formwork of the column;
110×4

630
and (5) the concrete casting of the column.

2.3. Test setup and instrumentation

Welded to bottom plates Unit: mm
Fig. 5 schematically shows the experimental setup and arrangement
Fig. 3. Details of steel bars (structural steel shape is not shown). of test instrument. The vertical actuator was utilized to apply a constant
axial load to the column. The footing was fixed to the strong floor using
two tie-down beams and four high strength rods. The applied axial load
and the normal force applied by the tie rods created friction force be-
H260×200×9×14 or tween the specimen and strong floor, preventing the footing from
H340×200×9×14 moving during cyclic load testing. To apply a lateral force, a horizontal
220×7

servo-controlled actuator with a built-in load cell was mounted to a

reaction wall and connected to the specimen at the height of 1650 mm.
Inner tie connector @220
2350

A linear variable differential transducer (LVDT) was mounted at the

2800

height of the applied lateral load. In addition, four dial gauges were
Inner tie connector @110
installed at the ends of the footing to monitor movements of the footing
and uniaxial strain gauges were installed to monitor strains of steel
110×5

Continuity plate
shapes and steel bars. Furthermore, three rotation gauges were installed
H450×200×9×14 to measure rotations of the vertical and horizontal actuators. The
measured rotations were used to correct the applied lateral force.
Stiffner
Typ. CJP
450

2.4. Test procedure

340 Bottom Plate

710 710
1760
Unit: mm
Fig. 4. Details of steel shapes.
type, confining stress, and axial load level. The first part of the spe-
cimen ID denotes the bending axis and section type with X representing
a typical SRC section subjected to major-axis bending and XD re-
presenting a deep SRC section subjected to major-axis bending.
Immediately following the letter(s), a number was used to represent the
amount of confining stress (in MPa) provided by the closed hoops.
Separated by a dash line, the last part of the specimen ID designates the
percentage of the applied axial load with respect to Agfc′. As an ex-
ample, X3.5–21 was a typical SRC section, with available confining
stress of 3.5 MPa provided by transverse hoops, subjected to a constant
axial load equal to 21% of Agfc′. In the determination of Agfc′, actual
concrete compressive strength listed in Table 1 was used for fc′.
2.2. Specimen fabrication
Hot-rolled H340 × 250 × 9 × 14 structural steel sections were used
The assigned axial compressive load, tabulated in Table 1, was ap-
plied to the column and remained constant throughout the test using a
force-controlled setting. At the beginning of tests, the axial load was
first applied. Subsequently, a lateral load controlled by lateral dis-
placements was exerted on the column. The lateral load was applied in
a quasi-static manner. As shown in Fig. 6, the loading history used in
the previous study [9] was adopted. Specimens were subjected to three
consecutive cycles for drift ratios less than 1%, then two consecutive
cycles for drift ratios greater than 1%. The drift ratio, α, was defined as
the ratio of the lateral displacement, Δ, and vertical height of the
horizontal actuator, L, as shown in Fig. 5. Loading test was terminated
after the lateral load dropped below 85% of the peak lateral load
reached by each specimen.
3. Test results and discussions
3.1. General behavior
The effective lateral load-drift ratio hysteresis loops of test speci-
mens are shown in Fig. 7. As the column deformed, the actuators had to
rotate to comply with column deformations, resulting in the change of
the loading direction and P-Δ effects. Hence, the effective lateral load,
calibrated to account for P-Δ effects and columns deformations, was

160
C.-C. Chen et al. Engineering Structures 155 (2018) 157–166

Axial load reaction frame is not shown in this figure. Fig. 5. Test setup and instrument.

Actuator Unit: mm

Rotation gauge Rotation gauge

620
Actuator
LVDT Δ
Pull (+) Push (-)

Column
Reaction
Wall

L = 1650

2900
2280
Tied down rod

630
Dial gauge Footing Dial gauge

Strong Floor

N-S view

Axial load
Steel
reaction frame
girder
Actuator
Steel column

Steel column
Column

Use a hinge
connection to
allow the reaction
frame to rotation
with the column
Footing

E-W view

calculated by dividing the moment at the face of the footing by the
distance measured from the lateral loading point to the face of the
footing, L.
For all specimens, first cracking started at about α = 0.25–0.5%.
Observed from strain gage readings, longitudinal steel bars and steel
flanges at the critical section (at the top surface of the footing) yielded
between α = 1% and 2%, followed by concrete crushing and spalling.
Strength deterioration started after buckling of longitudinal steel bars.
Although initial behavior was similar among the test specimens, final
failure mechanisms were different between specimens under low to
medium axial loading (21–35% of Agfc′) and specimens under high axial
loading (60% of Agfc′). For specimens under low to medium axial
loading, major strength deterioration was observed after ruptures of
longitudinal steel bars. For specimens under high axial loading, failures
were initiated by flange buckling of the steel section, accompanied with
the deterioration of the core concrete. The concrete deterioration was
aggravated by the loss of hoop confinement due to rupture and/or
severe distortion of hoops. Cracking and spalling patterns from re-
presentative specimens are presented in Figs. 8–10. In general, test
results showed that, under the same axial load level, concrete spalling
of a deep SRC specimen was less severe than that of a typical SRC
specimen at the same drift ratio. While the same type of SRC specimens
with different axial loads were compared (Figs. 8 and 10), specimens
subjected to a higher axial load exhibited more spalling than specimens
subjected a lower axial load. Although the b/t ratios of the flange and
web of the steel shape used in the current study satisfied the AISC
limiting b/t ratios for highly ductile I-shaped members as discussed in
Section 2.1, local buckling of the steel section was observed in speci-
mens under high axial loading (60% of Agfc′), but no local buckling was
observed in specimens subjected to low to medium axial loading
(21–35% of Agfc′). It should be noted that no limiting b/t ratios are
required by the AISC specification for encased composite members. The
results of this study suggested that a minimum b/t ratio might be re-
quired for encased composite members in order to achieve expected

161
C.-C. Chen et al. Engineering Structures 155 (2018) 157–166

10 165

8 ±7% 132

6 ±5% 99
Lateral drift ratio (%)

4 66

Displacement (mm)
±3%
±1.5%
2 33
±0.25% ±0.75%
0 0
±0.5% ±1%
-2 -33
±2%
-4 -66
±4%
-6 -99
±6%
-8 -132
±8%
-10 -165
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
No. of cycles
(a) ș = 6% (b) ș = 8%
Fig. 6. Loading history.
Fig. 8. Cracking and spalling patterns for X3.5-21.
(%) (%)
-10 -6 -2 2 6 10 -6 -2 2 6 10
800 180
(a) X3.5-21 (b) X2.6-35
400 90
P (kips)
P (kN)

0 0

-400 -90

800
-800 -180
(c) X3.4-60 (d) XD2.5-21
400 90
P (kips)
P (kN)

0 0

-400 -90

-800
800 -180 (a) ș = 6% (b) ș = 8%
(e) XD3.5-21 (f) XD1.3-35
400 90 Fig. 9. Cracking and spalling patterns for XD3.5-21.
P (kN)

P (kips)

0 0

-400 -90

800
-800 -180
(g) XD1.3-60 (h) XD3.4-60
400 90
P (kN)

P (kips)

0 0

-400 -90

-800 -180

-165 -82.5 0 82.5 165 -82.5 0 82.5 165

(mm) (mm)
Fig. 7. Lateral force-displacement hysteresis loops of test specimens.
(a) ș = 3% (b) ș = 4%
ductility for highly ductile members. Fig. 10. Cracking and spalling patterns for X3.4-60.
As illustrated by Chen et al. [9], the flange and the web of the steel
shape are acting together to provide confinement to the concrete. The
detrimental to the deterioration of the core concrete than the axial
flange collects the confining stress underneath the width of the flange,
loads lower than 35% of Agfc′. When the specimens were subjected to
and the collected confining stress is then balanced by the tensile force in
the axial load of 60% of Agfc′, the core concrete deteriorated at a faster
the web. As a result, the web is able to provide part of the strength
rate than other specimens. The concrete deterioration was accompanied
required to confine the concrete. Based on the test results of this study,
with flange local buckling, followed by failures of confinement hoops,
it was suggested that the high axial load (60% of Agfc′) was more
which led to the ultimate failure of the SRC columns.

162
C.-C. Chen et al.
In summary, the failure mechanism of the specimens subjected to
low to medium axial loading was attributed to the following behaviors:
(1) spalling and crushing of concrete cover; (2) buckling of longitudinal
steel bars; (3) rupture of longitudinal steel bar. The first two behaviors
led to the deterioration of the core concrete. After that, the rupture of
longitudinal steel bars caused strength reduction in tension side, which
accelerated the strength deterioration. The failure mechanism of the
specimens subjected high axial loading was owing to (1) spalling and
crushing of concrete cover; (2) buckling of longitudinal steel bars; (3)
local buckling of steel flanges; and (4) failures of confinement hoops.
3.2. Flexural strength
Experimental flexural capacities (Mexp) of the specimens, defined as
the average value of the maximum flexural strengths obtained from the
positive and negative loads, are tabulated in Table 3. The flexural ca-
pacity of each specimen was compared with its theoretical nominal
flexural capacity (Mna). The nominal flexural capacities were calculated
based on the AISC [14] plastic stress distribution method using the
actual material properties listed in Table 1 and Table 2. As the flexural
capacity of SRC columns varies with applied axial load levels, axial
load-moment interaction diagrams (P-M diagrams) were constructed in
order to obtain corresponding nominal flexural strength for each axial
load level. Detailed procedures of constructing P-M diagrams for com-
posite sections by the plastic stress distribution method are provided by
Roik and Bergmann [15]. As shown in Table 3, test flexural strength of
each specimen was greater than its nominal flexural strength; the ratios
of the test-to-nominal flexural strength from all specimens ranged from
1.04 to 1.30.
It should be noted that shear anchors, which are required for
achieving composite action according to the AISC building codes [14],
were not used between the steel flanges and concrete in all specimens.
Nevertheless, it was evident that the flexural strength of the specimens
was not adversely affected. The results also showed that utilizing a deep
steel section without any clear distance between the steel shape and
hoops did not jeopardize the partial, if not full, composite action that
existed in the specimens. When comparing the nominal flexural
strengths between the specimens, it was shown that the nominal flex-
ural strengths (Mna) of deep SRC sections were 16–18% higher than
those of the typical SRC sections with the same axial load. This fact
could encourage engineers to take the advantage of using a deep steel
shape in a SRC section, leading to a significant increase in flexural
capacity and a reduction in the amount of longitudinal reinforcing bars
used in a composite section. The latter could ease potential steel con-
gestion in a heavily reinforced SRC section.
3.3. Flexural ductility
Table 4 lists yield lateral displacement, ultimate lateral displace-
ment, displacement ductility ratio, drift ratio capacity, and plastic hinge
rotation capacity for each specimen. As shown in Fig. 11, the yield
lateral displacement, Δy, was determined by linearly extrapolating the
lateral displacement to the maximum lateral force using the elastic
stiffness obtained by 0.75Hn/Δ0.75Hn; the ultimate lateral displacement,
Δu, was defined as the lateral displacement when the lateral force de-
creased to 85% of the maximum lateral load. The displacement ductility
ratio, μ, was determined by dividing the difference of ultimate and yield
lateral displacements by the yield lateral displacement. The plastic
hinge rotation capacity, θp , was computed by dividing the difference of
ultimate and yield lateral displacements by L. The equation used to
compute the plastic hinge rotation capacity is as follows:
Δu−Δy
θp =
L (1)
The plastic hinge rotation capacities of all specimens ranged from
0.022 to 0.062. Another indicator of column ductility was drift ratio
163
Engineering Structures 155 (2018) 157–166
capacity (αu), the drift ratio capacities of the specimens ranged from
3.3% to 7.7%, all greater than 3%, a performance target commonly
used for evaluating ductility of RC columns. As mentioned earlier, the
structural steel section could be utilized to provide concrete confine-
ment and lessen the reinforcement congestion [10]. Furthermore, the
inclusion of the structural steel section in SRC columns reduces the
axial load capacity demand from the RC section. Consequently, the
quantity of confinement hoops used in this study, in terms of confining
pressure, are less than the confinement requirement by ACI 318–11,
Section 21.6.4.4 [13], ranging from 19% to 53% of the required con-
finement reinforcement, as listed in Table 4.
3.4. Effects of axial loads
As mentioned earlier, the level of axial load could impact the de-
formation capacity of SRC columns. In this section, three groups of two
specimens were utilized to examine effects of the axial load level on
ductility of SRC columns. As tabulated in Table 5, the selected three
groups were (1) X3.5-21 and X3.4-60; (2) XD3.5-21 and XD3.4-60; and
(3) XD1.3-35 and XD1.3-60. Comparisons of elastic stiffness, displace-
ment ductility ratio, drift ratio capacity, and plastic hinge rotation ca-
pacity for each group are shown in Table 5. Specimens from the first
group (X3.5-21 and X3.4-60) were two typical SRC sections with the
same confinement reinforcement. Applied axial loads of X3.5-21 and
X3.4-60 were 1667 kN (21% of Agfc′) and 4609 kN (60% of Agfc′), re-
spectively. As shown in Table 5, with the increased axial load, the re-
sulting drift ratio capacities, plastic hinge rotation capacities, and dis-
placement ductility ratios decreased from 7.1% to 3.5%, from 0.058 to
0.025, and from 4.11 to 2.67, respectively. In the other two groups,
similar comparisons were made for the deep SRC specimens. In the
second group, the drift ratio capacities, plastic hinge rotation capa-
cities, and displacement ductility ratios of XD3.5-21 and XD3.4-60 de-
creased from 7.6% to 5.0%, from 0.061 to 0.037, and from 4.12 to 2.97,
respectively as the applied axial load increased from 21% to 60% of
Agfc′. In the third group, XD1.3-35 (35% of Agfc′) was subjected to a
lower applied axial load than XD1.3-60 (60% of Agfc′) with the same
confinement reinforcement. Similar results were observed, the drift
ratio capacity, plastic hinge rotation capacity, and displacement duc-
tility of XD1.3-35 were 82%, 109%, and 65% higher than those of
XD1.3-60, respectively. The comparisons indicated that flexural ducti-
lity of SRC columns was adversely affected by the increased axial load
regardless of the type of SRC sections (typical or deep), given that the
same quantity of confinement hoops was used in the columns. This
finding indicated that the level of the applied axial load had a sig-
nificant impact on the required confinement reinforcement of SRC
columns. Also, Table 5 compares the elastic stiffness of the specimens in
each group. K60 is the elastic stiffness of the specimen with a 60% axial
load. The results showed 21–52% increases in the elastic stiffness of the
specimens that were subject to a higher applied axial load.
Table 3
Flexural strength.
Specimen ID Mexp (kN·m) Mna (kN·m) Mexp
Mna
X3.5-21 842 787 1.07
X2.6-35 867 833 1.04
X3.4-60 875 756 1.16
XD2.5-21 1005 921 1.09
XD3.5-21 990 921 1.07
XD1.3-35 1088 969 1.12
XD1.3-60 1042 889 1.17
XD3.4-60 1155 889 1.30
C.-C. Chen et al. Engineering Structures 155 (2018) 157–166

Table 4
Displacement ductility ratio, drift ratio capacity, and plastic hinge rotation capacity.

Specimen Yield displ. Δy Ultimate displ. Δu Displ. ductility ratio Drift ratio capacity Plastic hinge rotation capacity θp Ashfyh/sbc (MPa) Used/ACI
(mm) (mm) μ αu (radians)
Used ACI

X3.5-21 23.1 118.0 4.11 7.1% 0.058 3.52 6.72 0.52

X2.6-35 20.4 99.3 3.87 6.0% 0.048 2.61 6.70 0.39
X3.4-60 15.77 57.83 2.67 3.5% 0.025 3.37 6.49 0.52
XD2.5-21 24.66 126.9 4.15 7.7% 0.062 2.45 6.63 0.37
XD3.5-21 24.47 125.4 4.12 7.6% 0.061 3.52 6.63 0.53
XD1.3-35 21.99 98.5 3.48 6.0% 0.046 1.31 6.70 0.19
XD1.3-60 17.37 54 2.11 3.3% 0.022 1.31 6.49 0.20
XD3.4-60 20.83 82.6 2.97 5.0% 0.037 3.37 6.49 0.52

Note: The yield displacement, ultimate displacement, drift ratio capacity, and plastic hinge rotation were the averages of the data from the positive and negative loading directions.

Lateral Force H
Hmax Skeleton curve
0.85Hmax
0.75Hn
0.75Hn y Displacement
u
Fig. 11. Definition of yield and ultimate lateral displacements.
3.5. Effects of steel-to-member depth ratios
The studied typical and deep SRC sections had steel-to-member
depth ratios of 0.58 and 0.76, respectively. In this section, effects of
steel-to-member depth ratios on lateral deformation capacity of SRC
columns were investigated by comparing displacement ductility ratios,
drift ratio capacities, and plastic hinge rotation capacities of six groups
of selected typical and deep SRC specimens, as shown in Table 6.
The two specimens in each of the first three groups were chosen
with the focus on the effects of the depth of the steel section on the
flexural ductility of SRC columns by keeping confining stress the same
between the specimens. The first three groups examined were X3.5-21
vs. XD3.5-21, X2.6-35 vs. XD2.5-21, and X3.4-60 vs. XD3.4-60. The
results suggested that the deep SRC sections were more effective in
enhancing flexural ductility than the typical SRC sections for SRC col-
umns under a high axial load, in this case, 60% of Agfc′. In order to
manifest the improvement in flexural ductility provided by the deep
steel section, the specimens with the deep steel section in each of the
last three groups were selected to possess less confining reinforcement
than those of typical SRC sections. The last three comparisons were
X3.5-21 vs. XD 2.5-21, X2.6-35 vs. XD 1.3-35, and X3.4-60 vs. XD1.3-
60. X3.5-21 and XD2.5-21 were subjected to the same axial load of
1667 kN. Although X3.5-21 possessed a higher confining pressure
(more transverse reinforcing bars) than XD2.5-21, the drift ratio capa-
city, plastic hinge rotation capacity, and displacement ductility ratio of
XD2.5-21 were higher than those of X3.5-21. In the second comparison,
XD1.3-35 utilized only 50% of the transverse reinforcing bars used in
X2.6-35. Nevertheless, the lower transverse reinforcing bars did not
severely reduce lateral deformation capacity of XD1.3-35, only resulted
in 4% decrease in the plastic hinge rotation capacity and 10% decrease
in the displacement ductility ratio (the drift ratio capacity was not
decreased). Another similar comparison was made between X3.4-60
and XD1.3-60. The transverse reinforcing bars provided in XD1.3-60
were reduced by 62%, compared with X3.4-60. Although XD1.3-60
showed decreases of 6%, 12%, and 21% in the drift ratio capacity,
plastic hinge rotation capacity, and displacement ductility ratio, com-
pared with X3.4-60, the decreases were not as prominent as the re-
duction (62% reduction) of the transverse reinforcing bars. These re-
sults suggested that flexural ductility of SRC columns was affected by
steel-to-member depth ratios. While a deep structural steel section was
used in a SRC column, the required confinement hoops might be re-
duced to achieve an equivalent lateral deformation capacity exhibited
by a comparable SRC column with a shallow steel section. This beha-
vior was attributed to two reasons: (1) a larger percentage of the core
concrete was confined by the structural steel shape in a SRC member
with a deep steel section (high steel-to-member depth ratio), as shown
in Fig. 12; (2) a deep steel section contributed to a higher percentage of
flexural strength of SRC members than a shallow steel section. The
former enhanced ductility and strength of the core concrete, and
therefore resulted in an increase in deformation capacity of SRC col-
umns. Owing to the inherent superior ductility of structural steel
members, the latter improved flexural ductility of SRC columns by in-
creasing the contribution of the structural steel section to flexural ca-
pacity of the composite member.
3.6. Effects of transverse steel bars
In general, as it is the case for RC columns, an increase in transverse
reinforcing bars improves ductility of columns. This trend could also be
observed from the SRC columns studied herein. The confining stress

Table 5
Effects of axial load levels on displacement ductility ratio, drift ratio capacity, and plastic hinge rotation capacity.

Specimen Elastic Stiffness Plastic hinge rotation capacity Drift ratio capacity Displ. ductility ratio Transverse Steel Bars (Used/ACI)

K (kN/mm) K/K60 θp(radians) θp/(θp)60 αu αu/αu,60 μ

X3.5-21 22.1 66% 0.058 232% 7.1% 203% 4.11 0.52

X3.4-60 33.6 100% 0.025 100% 3.5% 100% 2.67 0.52

XD3.5-21 24.5 73% 0.061 165% 7.6% 152% 4.12 0.53

XD3.4-60 33.6 100% 0.037 100% 5.0% 100% 2.97 0.52

XD1.3-35 30.0 82% 0.046 209% 6.0% 182% 3.48 0.19

XD1.3-60 36.4 100% 0.022 100% 3.3% 100% 2.11 0.20

164
C.-C. Chen et al. Engineering Structures 155 (2018) 157–166

Table 6
Effects of steel-to-member depth ratios on displacement ductility ratio, drift ratio capacity, and plastic hinge rotation capacity.

Specimen Steel-to-member depth ratio Plastic hinge rotation capacity Drift ratio capacity Displ. ductility ratio Transverse steel bars (Used/ACI)

θp (radians) (θp)XD/(θp)X αu αu,XD/αu,X μ

X3.5-21 0.58 0.058 100% 7.1% 100% 4.11 0.52

XD3.5-21 0.76 0.061 105% 7.6% 107% 4.12 0.53

X2.6-35 0.58 0.048 100% 6.0% 100% 3.87 0.39

XD2.5-21 0.76 0.062 129% 7.7% 128% 4.15 0.37

X3.4-60 0.58 0.025 100% 3.5% 100% 2.67 0.52

XD3.4-60 0.76 0.037 148% 5.0% 143% 2.97 0.52

X3.5-21 0.58 0.058 100% 7.1% 100% 4.11 0.52

XD2.5-21 0.76 0.062 107% 7.7% 108% 4.15 0.37

X2.6-35 0.58 0.048 100% 6.0% 100% 3.87 0.39

XD1.3-35 0.76 0.046 96% 6.0% 100% 3.48 0.19

X3.4-60 0.58 0.025 100% 3.5% 100% 2.67 0.52

XD1.3-60 0.76 0.022 88% 3.3% 94% 2.11 0.20

was increased from 1.31 MPa to 3.37 MPa between XD1.3-60 and
XD3.4-60. As a result of that, the drift ratio and plastic hinge rotation
capacities between the two specimens were increased from 3.3% to
5.0% and from 0.022 to 0.037, respectively. Nevertheless, an inter-
esting finding was noted by comparing XD2.5-21 with XD3.5-21. The
two specimens had the same amount of longitudinal reinforcement and
were subjected to the same level of axial load. XD2.5-21 used less
confinement hoops than XD3.5-21, yet it exhibited the similar drift
ratio and plastic hinge rotation capacities as those of XD3.5-21.
Although this result suggested that after sufficient confinement re-
inforcement is provided in a SRC column, more transverse reinforcing
bars produced gain in ductility only up to a point; more research data is
needed to provide a conclusive finding.
4. Conclusions
Based on the results of this study, the following conclusions can be
drawn:
1. The required confinement reinforcement for SRC columns is sig-
nificantly affected by the level of the applied axial load.
2. When a higher steel-to-member depth ratio was used in a SRC
column, the required confinement hoops could potentially be
reduced to achieve a comparable deformation capacity possessed by
a similar SRC column with a lower steel-to-member depth ratio.
3. There is an upper limit on the ductility of a SRC column that can be
achieved by increasing confinement reinforcement; after sufficient
confinement reinforcement is provided, more transverse reinforcing
bars produce gain in ductility only up to a point, beyond which
further increases in transverse reinforcing bars does not further
enhance ductility of SRC columns.
4. With the used-to-ACI required confinement steel bars ratios ranging
from 0.19 to 0.53, all the SRC columns under an axial load of 21% or
35% of Agfc′ exhibited satisfactory flexural ductility, indicating that
the requirement of confinement steel bars for those SRC members
can be significantly reduced without compromising ductility re-
quirements. On the other hand, the results of this study suggested
that more confinement reinforcement should be required for SRC
columns under a high axial load, 60% of Agfc′ in this case, for
achieving equivalent ductility exhibited by the same columns under
lower axial loads.
5. Currently, no limiting b/t ratio was specified for encased composite
members by AISC 314-10 [12]. The experimental results of this
study suggest that local buckling of steel flanges can occur when
SRC columns are subjected to high axial loading, accelerating the
deterioration of the core concrete. In order for SRC columns to

Fig. 12. Concrete area confined by the steel shape in

Not well-confined typical and deep SRC sections.

Neutral Axis

Area confined by
the steel shape

Typical SRC section Deep SRC section

Tweb
Steel shape confinement mechanism

165
C.-C. Chen et al.
achieve the ductility expected for highly ductile members, a limiting
b/t ratio may be required.
6. With the transverse reinforcement used in this study, partial/full
composite action can exist in SRC columns without utilizing shear
anchors between the steel flange and concrete.
Acknowledgement
The research reported in this paper was sponsored by the National
Science Council of Taiwan under Project NSC-97-2221-E-011-069. The
support of the National Science Council is greatly appreciated.
Statements made in this paper reflect the views and findings of the
authors, and are not necessarily those of the National Science Council.
References
[1] Elwood KJ, Maffei J, Riederer KA, Telleen K. Improving column confinement – part
1: assessment of design provisions. Concr Int 2009;31(11):32–9.
[2] Elwood KJ, Maffei J, Riederer KA, Telleen K. Improving column confinement – part
2: proposed new provisions for the ACI 318 building code. Concr Int
2009;31(12):41–8.
[3] Paultre P, Legeron F. Confinement reinforcement design for reinforced concrete
columns. J Struct Eng 2008;134(5):738–49.
166
Engineering Structures 155 (2018) 157–166
[4] Bayrak O, Sheikh SA. Confinement reinforcement design considerations for ductile
HSC columns. J Struct Eng 1998;124(9):999–1010.
[5] Sakino K, Nakahara H, Morino S, Nishiyama I. Behavior of centrally loaded con-
crete-filled steel-tube short columns. J Struct Eng 2014;130(2):180–8.
[6] Shanmugam NE, Lakshmi B. State of the art report on steel-concrete composite
columns. J Constr Steel Res 2001;57(10):1041–80.
[7] Munoz PR, Hsu CTT. Behavior of biaxially loaded concrete-encased composite
columns. J Struct Eng 1997;123(9):1163–71.
[8] Spacone E, El-Tawil S. Nonlinear analysis of steel-concrete composite structures:
state of the art. J Struct Eng 2004;130(2):159–68.
[9] Chen CC, Chen CC, Hoang TT. Role of concrete confinement of structural steel shape
in steel reinforced concrete columns under cyclic loading. Eng Struct
2016;110:79–87.
[10] El-Tawil S, Deierlein GG. Strength and ductility of concrete encased composite
columns. J Struct Eng 1999;125(9):1009–19.
[11] Ricles JM, Paboojian SD. Seismic performance of steel-encased composite columns.
J Struct Eng 1994;120(8):2474–94.
[12] AISC. Seismic provisions for structural steel buildings. American Institute of Steel
Construction. ANSI/AISC 341–10, Chicago, Illinois, USA; 2010.
[13] ACI. Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary. ACI. -11.
USA: American Concrete Institute; 2011.
[14] AISC. Specification for structural steel buildings. American Institute for Steel.
Construction. ANSI/AISC 360–10, Chicago, Illinois, USA; 2010.
[15] Roik K, Bergmann R. Composite columns. In: Dowling PJ, Harding JE, Bjorhovde R,
editors. Constructional steel design: an international guide. London: Elsevier
Applied Science; 1992.