Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composites Part B
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compositesb

Impact of curvature type on the behavior of slender reinforced concrete

rectangular column confined with CFRP composite
Rajai Z. Al-Rousan *, Muneer H. Barfed
Department of Civil Engineering, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, Jordan

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

Keywords: Strengthening and repairing structures using carbon fiber reinforced polymers (CFRP) composites is a relatively
Double curvature effective new technique leading to enhancing structure performance. Since the use of this technique is relatively
Single curvature new, limited number of analytical and theoretical models is obtained. In this study, a nonlinear finite element
CFRP volumetric ratio
analysis (NLFEA) has been developed to study the mechanical behavior of uniaxially loaded RC slender columns.
NLFEA
Eccentricity
Firstly, the control models were simulated and validated against published experimental results. Secondly, the
Interaction diagram NLFEA was expanded as parametric studies based on different parameters (concentric loading, one-dimensional
eccentric loading, and two-dimensional eccentric loading, FRP volumetric ratio, and single or double column
curvature type). Since the columns undergo simultaneous axial force and bending moment, a sudden concrete
crushing and steel yield followed by concrete crushing and buckling mode failures was observed on concentri­
cally and eccentrically loaded, respectively. The result shows an enhancement of ultimate load capacity and
energy absorption as CFRP volumetric ratio increased, but this could be reduced as load eccentricity increase.
Also, the concrete in double curvature columns was more confined compared with single curvature. Finally,
Interaction diagrams were constructed and proposed for all simulated columns.

1. Introduction high-strength which would eliminate some unwanted properties such as

Columns are structural elements designed to resist axial compression
loads. The loads could be concentrically in the center of the section or
eccentrically in one or two directions. Because of the eccentricity, a
moment will be produced accompanied with the axial load. The axial
loads in short columns are resisted more than the case of slender col­
umns having the same cross section. When the column is slender, a
complete non-linear analysis may be required to be performed to ensure
that second order effects are considered in the design. Alternatively, for
columns of usual building and based on the second order moment effect,
the moment magnification factor that incorporates the column curva­
ture type (single or double) is used in codes to design the reinforced
concrete (RC) slender columns. Also, that load carrying capacity
increased when eccentricity decreased. So, using a high strength con­
crete at low eccentricity loads and column slender ratios is more ad­
vantageous presence, in all cases the concrete cover becomes ineffective
as the concrete compressive strength of the unconfined concrete RC
columns is reached. However, wrapping the eccentric RC columns could
be more useful instead of raising the concrete strength from normal to
brittle behavior [1–7].
In external FRP wrapping, the RC columns ductility, axial load and
moment capacity, and energy absorption are enhanced because of the
external passive confinement which depends on the lateral expansion of
the concrete as a response of axial loading. Although, the studies of
confined slender reinforced columns are relatively few, these types of
researches are needed since the slender columns are included in many
concrete structures. Unlike the short columns where the compression
stress is predominant, the orientation and the location of FRP composite
on the slender RC columns have a pronounced effect on the strength­
ening since the column under compression and bending stresses during
most of loading steps. The bending moment produced is increasing
nonlinearly as the eccentric load increases. Most of researches
concluded that rupture and delamination of the fiber reinforced poly­
mers (FRP) composite was the common failure mode in wrapped col­
umns. As a result of FRP wrapping, improving the bending stiffness was
observed in the bi-linear load-deflection relationship and the curvatures
decreasing, the bending moment capacity was enhanced significantly
[8–14].

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: rzalrousan@just.edu.jo (R.Z. Al-Rousan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.106939
Received 13 September 2018; Received in revised form 6 May 2019; Accepted 27 May 2019
Available online 30 May 2019
1359-8368/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
R.Z. Al-Rousan and M.H. Barfed
Fig. 1. Geometries and reinforcement details [23].
Few researches were carried out to construct axial load-bending
moment (P-M) diagrams for single curvature concrete columns
confined with FRP like [15–17]. Bisby et al. [18] deduced that the
procedure used in ACI code [1] to develop a design-oriented PM inter­
action diagrams can provide a considerable and conservative prediction
when used in RC columns confined with FRP composite. However, some
modifications on the reduction factors should be applied. So, many pa­
rameters should be introduced in studying the effect of column
Fig. 2. Stress-Strain curve for (a) Concrete, (b) Longitudinal steel, (c) Lateral steel, and (d) CFRP composite.
2
Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939
curvature type (single or double) on P-M curves.
As the behavior complexity of structural elements increase, the
relative cost, effort and time consuming in experimental testing and
analysis substantially increased, in addition to less safety in actual sit­
uations. Thus, many researchers prefer to simulate the RC columns
strengthened with FRP composites using the non-linear finite element
analysis (NLFEA), which proved to have an excellent analysis results
because of the correlation between its outcomes and the experimental
counterpart [19–21].
2. Significance of the study
Strengthening and repairing structures using carbon fiber reinforced
polymers (CFRP) composites is a relatively effective technique leading
to enhancing structure performance, so limited number of analytical and
theoretical models of RC slender columns is found in literature. There is
a need for better understanding of the behavior of eccentric loaded RC
slender columns confined with CFRP composites under the effect of
different parameters. Also, simple or direct methods for design use such
axial load–bending moment (P-M) interaction diagrams that provide a
considerable and conservative prediction should be proposed. A NLFEA
was carried out to study the mechanical behavior of uniaxially loaded
columns along with simulating and validating the control models
against previous experimental study. The NLFEA was carried out as
parametric studies based on different parameters. Finally, the results
were analyzed and discussed.
3. The non-linear finite element analysis program
3.1. General
The non-linear finite element analysis (NLFEA) is used as a numerical
tool to investigate the behavior of slender columns strengthened with
FRP composites. The original structure is discretized into finite ele­
ments, where each element consists of eight nodes. The algebraic
R.Z. Al-Rousan and M.H. Barfed Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939

Fig. 3. Typical finite element meshing of (a) model, (b) Steel Reinforcement distribution, and
(c) CFRP composite configurations.

equations are then formulated and solved for this system of finite ele­
ments. Then the assemblage of the large equations is being formed to
model the original structure. The models of column columns were built
using the finite element analysis software package ANSYS 16.0 [22].
Thirty full scale models strengthened with different FRP composite
configurations are developed, calibrated and validated. Finally, the
analysis results were used to perform parametric study.
3.2. Experimental work review
The experimental work used in the validation was conducted by
Cengiz et al. [23]. In their experimental study, RC columns were casted
and wrapped in different configurations of confinements. All columns
were square with 125 � 125 mm and 1300 mm in cross section and
length, respectively. Two heavy reinforced concrete brackets of
200 � 200 � 200 mm were attached at column ends to encompass all

Fig. 4. Control column validation: (a) Load-lateral dipsmaement curve, (b) Mode of failure.

3
R.Z. Al-Rousan and M.H. Barfed Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939

Fig. 5. Fully confined column validation: (a) Load-lateral dipsmaement curve, (b) Mode of failure.

Table 1
Validation summary of control and fully FRP composite confined RC columns.
Column Ultimate Load, kN Max Lateral Deflection, mm

Experimental NLFEA Error % Experimental NLFEA Error %

Control 155 153.4 0.323 9.1 8.8 3.3

Fully confined 255 255.5 0.2 13.97 13.72 1.8

eccentric biaxial loading application cases. The slenderness ratio of the using four linear variable differential transducers (LVDTs) located at
column columns was 34.67 according to ACI Standard 318–08 [1]. mid height length of each column. The load was applied incrementally
Column geometry, lateral and longitudinal reinforcement details of to obtain complete load-deflection curves.
column and bracket sections and FRP composites location are shown in
Fig. 1. The columns were tested vertically with pin-pin end conditions
using universal testing machine. The lateral deformations were recorded

Table 3
Results of all tested columns.
Group NO. Column designation Ultimate Load Lateral deflection, mm Axial deflection, mm Axial strain, με Lateral strain, με

kN %a

1 CNS0 730 – 5.90 0.27 3502 3933

CNS25X 412 44 5.78 11.06 3110 3440
CNS50X 218 70 6.60 18.31 4150 4760
CNS25XY 332 55 8.24 11.70 3760 4380
CNS50XY 139 81 7.52 14.15 3610 4026
BN 19.3 – 21.93 – 3360 3645
2 CSS0 876 – 6.48 0.51 4940 5410
CSS25X 450 38 4.54 9.74 5740 5510
CSS50X 276 62 7.08 20.33 6180 6740
CSS25XY 368 50 7.79 11.46 5060 5190
CSS50XY 164 78 11.04 18.30 8053 8632
BS 23.0 – – 11.00 6560 6120
3 CFS0 990 – 9.91 0.61 2772 2491
CFS25X 612 16 10.71 23.89 2389 2112
CFS50X 380 48 11.00 28.13 3836 3306
CFS25XY 500 32 14.67 20.94 3284 2824
CFS50XY 248 66 14.69 22.05 3142 3202
BF 36.0 – – 8.18 2228 2103
4 CND25X 496 32 4.07 1.95 3530 3890
CND50X 328 55 3.62 2.71 2467 2679
CND25XY 450 38 4.37 1.96 3489 3625
CND50XY 238 67 3.64 2.76 3060 3242
5 CSD25X 630 14 4.37 3.53 4218 4755
CSD50X 440 40 3.98 4.51 2430 2681
CSD25XY 544 25 5.09 3.86 3502 3933
CSD50XY 302 59 4.28 3.74 3110 3440
6 CFD25X 700 4 4.75 3.54 4150 4760
CFD50X 532 27 5.09 4.98 3760 4380
CFD25XY 628 14 5.63 3.78 3610 4026
CFD50XY 338 54 4.37 4.20 3360 3645
a
Percentage with respect to CNS0.

4
R.Z. Al-Rousan and M.H. Barfed Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939

Fig. 6. Deformed shapes of (a) Concentric loaded column, (b) Pure beam bending, (c) Double curvature, and (d) Single curvature.

3.3. Description of NLFEA ratio could be classified as High Strength Concrete (HSC), the analytical
equations used herein were obtained from Wee et al. [24] model pre­
3.3.1. Element type sented below in Eqs. (1) and (2):
SOLID65 element type was used to model the nonlinearly concrete � �
material. The capability of this element to predict cracks in tension, f =c � β � εεo
crushing in compression and plastic deformation makes it suitable for fc ¼ � � �β � 0 � ε � εo (1)
concrete. The element is defined by eight nodes each one has three de­ β 1þ ε
εo
grees of freedom. The steel reinforcement was simulated in concrete as
smeared reinforcement within the SOLID65 element. However, good � �
results were obtained when the reinforcement is simulated as discrete k1 � f =c � β � ε
εo
model by using the 3D LINK180 uniaxial tension-compression spar that fc ¼ � �k2 �β ! ε > εo (2)
predicts plasticity effects, rotation and large stain and deflection. For ε
k1 � β 1þ
CFRP composite wrapping, Solid or Shell element types could be used to εo

model this type of confinement since wrapping materials have small

thickness compared with their length and width dimensions. Steel plates " !# !3
0:25 fc
=
50
were added at the two ends of the column to avoid stress concentration where, εo ¼ 0:00078ðf =c Þ β ¼ 1= 1 εo Eit , and k1 ¼ . The
fc
=

as the load applied at those locations. Hence, SOLID186 and SOLID185

were used to simulate the CFRP composites and steel plates,
respectively.
3.3.2. Material properties
Fig. 2(a) shows the multi-linear isotropic (MISO) relationship
nonlinearity between stress-strain behaviors, also tensile strength (ft)
was identified. To simulate this material behavior, several constitutive
material models are provided. The available experimental data used in
this study are the main factor to choose the proper material model. Since
the ultimate compressive concrete was 75.8 MPa with 0.2 for poison’s
1=3
concrete modules of elasticity (Eit ¼ 10200ðf =c Þ ¼ 40472MPa) rep­
resents the slope of the linear portion of the stress-strain curve. The open
and close transfer shear coefficients, (βt) and (βc) were set to be 0.2 and
1.0, respectively. Elastic-perfectly plastic behavior was assumed for the
steel reinforcement in tension and compression, so it was simulated as
Bilinear Isotropic (BISO) material that based in von Mises criterion.
Modulus of elasticity of 200 GPa, Poison’s ratio of 0.3, yield strength of
longitudinal of 630 MPa, and yield strength of lateral reinforcements of
550 MPa were employed in the NLFEA models as shown in Fig. 2(b) and
(c), respectively. The CFRP with thickness, ultimate tensile strength and

5
R.Z. Al-Rousan and M.H. Barfed Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939

Fig. 7. Crack patterns of (a) single curvature (1st crack), (b) double curvature (1st crack), (c) single curvature (failure), (d) double curvature (failure).

ultimate strain of 0.166 mm, 0.015 and 3900 MPa as shown in Fig. 2(d), Ux ¼ 0 and Uz ¼ 0. Also, to apply the point force load at the specific
respectively used in the test had a bi-directional orthogonal material location along axial direction, the translation and rotation were
property. released. The load was applied incrementally to avoid solution diver­
gence; hence, more load sub-steps within the loading step were used at
first crack, steel yield and after crushing stages. At each load increment,
3.4. Failure criteria and analysis
the full Newton-Raphson equilibrium iterative method was used to
achieve the nonlinear response convergence that depends on the toler­
William and Wranke 1975 [25] proposed a failure criterion based on
ance value accompanied with other convergence criteria. Full bond was
von Mises criterion of concrete in case of multiaxial state of stress. Five
assumed between concrete with steel and CFRP. After the convergence
parameters were defined to create a linear-elastic stress-strain rela­
study was conducted to specify the optimum mesh size of 12.5 mm.
tionship. The nonlinearity in the ascending part was neglected in the
three-dimensional failure surface. Hence, using (MISO) plasticity
together with William-Wranke model, cracking and crushing checks
enabled. These criteria could be presented in plane stress condition. The
failure is taken place when the principle compressive or tensile stress in
any direction lies outside the failure surface [22]. As the solution con­
verges, the principle stress orthogonal to first crack direction was
reduced to zero in the stress relaxation process in which the formulation
of the first crack showed a sudden decrease in the ultimate tensile
concrete strength to T0 � ft, then the relaxation diminishing linearly to
zero. As more load increments are applied, the elastic moduli are set to
zero in all directions when concrete reached its compressive strength
capacity (crushing). CFRP failed when the stress equaled the maximum
tensile strength (rupture mode failure).
The lateral displacement at the bottom end of the column was con­
strained at whole cross section nodes and the axial direction Uy was
constrained at the specific location-load eccentricity. The boundary
conditions at upper part of the columns were the lateral displacements Fig. 8. Loading behavior stages of the RC columns.

6
R.Z. Al-Rousan and M.H. Barfed
Fig. 9. Axial load versus (a) lateral deflection for concentric loading, and (b) lateral deflection for beam loading.
Fig. 3 shows the typical NLFEA meshing of the simulated models.
3.5. Validation process
After the calibration of the model, two columns have been simulated
and results were obtained and compared with the available experi­
mental results.
3.5.1. Validation of control column
The result was presented as load versus lateral deflection at mid-
height of the column. Fig. 4(a) showed that the general correlation be­
tween result of the NLFEA model and experimental results of column
(C2-0) [23]. The mode failure of NLFEA column was steel yielding fol­
lowed by concrete crushing at upper half of column with 79.7 MPa more
than concrete compressive strength which was same as the experimental
test mode failure as shown in Fig. 4(b).
3.5.2. Validation of fully confined column
Results of the fully confined CFRP composites RC column were ob­
tained and correlated with available experimental results of column (C2-
I) in terms of load versus lateral deflection. The steel yielding and con­
crete crushing without FRP rupture at failure was the mode of failure of
NLFEA and experimental tests as shown in Fig. 5. Table 1 presents the
validation process results. Therefore, based on the high accuracy of
NLFEA results which gave same response of the experimental tests, the
validated columns were expanded to understand the theoretical effect of
applying different parameters using NLFEA.
3.6. NLFEA investigated parameters
Thirty slender RC columns with a length of 1700 mm were modeled
with different parameters as shown in Table 2. The columns were
divided into six groups based on the investigated parameters. The col­
umn notations presented herein are: the first letter refers to the struc­
tural element type (that is, C: column or B: beam). The second letter
specifies the wrapping case or CFRP configuration: N for no confine­
ment, S for strips and F for fully confinement. The third one signifies the
type of curvature which are: S for single and D for double. Last one refers
to the value followed by direction of eccentricity at X and Y axes.
Volumetric ratio of CFRP (ρf) composite was calculated using the
following equation:
wf � Nf � tf � nf
ρf ¼ 4
D � lf
where, wf wf is CFRP strip width, tf is thickness of CFRP composite of
0.166 mm, nf is the number of layers of CFRP, D is the diagonal length of
cross section, lf is column length and Nf is the number of CFRP strips in
Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939
three cases as shown in the Fig. 3(c).
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Mode of failure
Table 3 shows a summary of all tested columns with ultimate load
capacity, max lateral and axial deflections. Inspection of Table 3 reveals
that the axial deflection was lower than lateral deflection. In general, the
slender RC columns confined with CFRP typically fail by buckling with
large lateral deformation which matches the mode failure [23]. The
considerable difference in the behavior inside and outside the core in
unconfined columns results a sudden failure in concrete cover region, so
the failure mode tends to be brittle failure (concrete crushing) in un­
confined and strips confined RC slender columns after steel reinforce­
ment yielding in some columns as shown in Fig. 6(a), whereas the failure
mode of four-point loading beams was yielding of steel reinforcement
after cracks propagation in tension side, followed by concrete crushing
at the loading side as shown in Fig. 6(b). Also, the deformed shapes of
column under double and single curvature are shown in Fig. 6(c) and
(d), respectively. In addition to the RC slender column under concentric
loading and four-point beam loading cases as well as another four load
eccentricities were investigated and results were obtained (Fig. 6). The
failure mode ranges from tension-controlled failure region (bending) in
all columns with high eccentricities and the pure bending loading to
compression-controlled failure region in concentrically loaded column
(Fig. 6(b)).
Hence, the highly confinement of concrete leads to that ultimate load
capacity in double curvature was higher than for single curvature, and
reverse results are obtained in terms of deformations. This obviously
observed in the lower 1st crack initiation load of 24 kN of single cur­
vature compared with higher load value of 48 kN of the same column in
double curvature, also the wide spread crack propagation density at
ultimate load of single curvature column of 137.26 kN and the limited
crack density in the counterpart column of 238 kN as shown in Fig. 7. It
could be noticed that double curvature RC columns behave as a stiff
material, but in a brittle manner since they showed low deformations
while the single curvature one was conducting in ductile behavior with
lower stiffness. Unlike the single curvature columns, the axial de­
flections values in double curvature columns are approximately same as
the lateral deflections with small difference in unconfined RC column
cases.
(3)
4.2. Load deflection behavior
The behavior of RC columns during the period of loading could be
represented and divided as shown in Fig. 8. The first stage was when first
7
R.Z. Al-Rousan and M.H. Barfed
Fig. 10. Axial load versus axial deflection for single and double curvature.
cracks stated to be created also column lateral expansions were small
and this stage ranged from zero load until 0.65Nu. the second stage
ranged from 0.65Nu to (0.82–0.86Nu) in which the cracks propagated in
the tension side of concrete as well as the steel reinforcement was
yielded and concrete crushing was occurred at end of this stage. Last
stage started after the end of second stage up to column failure in which
the flexural crakes spread within the concrete and large axial as well as
8
Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939
lateral deflections were observed with slow load rising. The main vari­
ables of the expanded parametric study were: confinement configuration
(volumetric ratio of CFRP), load application eccentricity and type of
curvature.
Fig. 9 shows the axial load versus lateral deflection for concentric
loading and beam loading. Inspection of Fig. 9(a) reveals that the lateral
deflection of columns loaded concentrically was increased as the CFRP
R.Z. Al-Rousan and M.H. Barfed
Fig. 11. Energy absorption versus volumetric CFRP ratio for concen­
tric loading.
confinement increase which is the result of column buckling. The four-
point loading columns results in Fig. 9(b) shows lesser deformations
when ρf of 0.0038 compared with lower ρf values. This indicates that
wrapping of the RC columns with CFRP composites enhanced the ulti­
mate bending moment capacity and increased the lateral deflection
capacity due to the RC column ductility improvement, hence the second
moment of confined columns should be considered as shown in Fig. 10.
4.3. Energy absorption (EA)
Area under the axial load versus deflection curve in Fig. 11 was
divided into three regions (A1, A2 and A3) corresponded to each load
stage (1st, 2nd and 3rd stages), respectively. Energy Absorption (EA) is
represents the area under each part of the axial load-axial deflection
curve. The relationship between EA and confinement configuration or ρf
was plotted in order to study the contribution of each region with
respect to total EA. In concentric loading RC column case, it has been
seen in Fig. 11 for un-confined RC column that the three regions had the
similar contribution on EA. Although, region A1 did not affect by CFRP
confining, A2 and A3 regions increased rapidly with the increase of
volumetric CFRP ratio. It is worth to mention that 33–50% of total EA
was come from A3 region which indicates that CFRP composites have the
essential domination in the confined RC slender column behavior under
concentric loading.
Fig. 12 shows the energy absorption-volumetric CFRP ratio for single
and double curvatures with four load eccentricities in each case (one-
dimensional and two-dimensional). In general, large amount of total EA
in single curvature with highly increasing rate as the volumetric CFRP
ratio increase was observed because of large deformation compared
with double curvature. This EA value decreased when load eccentricity
increased which indicates that CFRP composites have lower effect in
confining eccentric loaded RC slender columns. The same trend in
increasing of EA in A3 was obtained in different eccentricities. It is good
to notice that EA values for two-dimensional eccentricity cases were
more than that for counterpart case.
4.4. Load strain behavior
Many researchers presented their results as load-deflection behavior
only which did not introduce the overall loading status of the RC slender
column. Hence, the values of axial and lateral strains at ultimate loads
(failure points) are summarized in Table 3. In case of un-confined RC
columns, the average maximum axial compression strain was 0.00335
which more compatible with the ultimate strain of plain concrete. This
value was increasing to 0.00362 and 0.00488 for strip and fully confined
RC columns, respectively. This indicates that CFRP composite wrapping
could delay the column failure by the confining effect. Inspection of
Table 3 reveals that the ultimate axial strains decreased as the
9
Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939
eccentricity increased in the one-dimensional and two-dimensional di­
rections because of the RC slender column with larger eccentricity failed
at small load level. This demonstrates that strengthening RC slender
columns with CFRP composite with predominant bucking failure make
no significant enhancement.
The variation of compression axial and lateral strains with axial load
is shown in Fig. 13. All curves approximately have the same axial and
lateral strain trends. The purpose of measuring the lateral strains was to
evaluate the CFRP confinement effect during loading stages. These
values were obtained from the compression face which leads to the RC
slender columns to fail in flexural mode shape. Inspection of the Fig. 13
reveals that similar slope of linear part of load-lateral strain curves was
obtained in the different volumetric CFRP ratios. The strain distribution
for unconfined and confined RC columns is presented in Fig. 14. In­
spection of Fig. 14 reveals that the majority of concrete cross section of
unconfined column was under the lateral tensile strain; however,
wrapping the RC column with CFRP reduced this type of strain. Also, the
same behavior occurred in terms of axial tensile strains.
4.5. Load volumetric strain (dilation properties) behavior
The volumetric strain could be calculated by dividing the change in
volume (ΔV) per unit volume of RC column (V). It is preferable to use the
following formula in terms of axial and lateral strains εA and εL,
respectively.
εV ¼ εA þ 2εL (4)
where, εV is volumetric strain, εA is axial strain and εL is lateral strain.
Fig. 15 showed the axial load versus the volumetric strain of RC slender
column eccentrically loaded. It seen that the dilation decreased as the
volumetric CFRP ratio increased because of the confinement effect that
acquired from CFRP wrapping, so the loaded column showed a high
compacted behavior period followed by flexural behavior. In single
curvature two-dimensional eccentricities, the columns failed in the
compacted stage.
4.6. Effect of the volumetric ratio of CFRP
All load axial displacement curves (Fig. 10) can be divided into two
parts (bilinear behavior). The slope of first part (linear) of unconfined
RC columns is much lower than the cases of confined RC columns which
have analogous behavior. However, the flexural stiffness is higher in
confined columns compared with unconfined counterparts. Also, the
first slope of second part (nonlinear) was large in fully confined RC
columns compared to lower confined columns, in other words, the
ductility of RC slender columns increases with the increase of volumetric
CFRP ratio. This leads to, when the concrete is crushed, the CFRP
composite starts to confine the RC column gradually and the load is
carried by the confinement pressure effect and the high tensile strength
of CFRP up to failure point which is similar to the previous experimental
results [13].
The effect of three different values of volumetric ratio of FRP (ρf) was
investigated and the results show that ultimate load capacity increased
with the increasing of ρf. The enhancement percentages of load capacity
and maximum lateral deflection in strips and fully confined columns of
ρf of 0.0019 and 0.0038 respectively as shown in Table 3. In single
curvature of un-confined columns, the reduction percentages in load
capacity are 44% and 70% for one and two-dimensional eccentricities,
respectively. Whereas 55% and 81% are the reduction percentages in
load capacity for double curvature cases for the same eccentricities. It is
notice that CFRP strips enhanced the ultimate load capacity by
decreasing the reduction percentage with little percentage as shown in
Table 3. In single curvature of columns with CFRP strips, the reduction
percentages in load capacity are 38% and 62% for one and two-
dimensional eccentricities, respectively. Whereas the reduction
R.Z. Al-Rousan and M.H. Barfed
Fig. 12. Energy Absorption (EA) versus Volumetric CFRP ratio for single and double curvature.
percentages in load capacity for double curvature cases for the same
eccentricities are 50% and 78%. But the fully CFRP wrapping had a
significant impact on the ultimate load than the CFRP strips. Inspection
of Table 3 reveals that the reduction percentages in load capacity for
single curvature case are 16% and 48% for one and two-dimensional
eccentricities. This indicates that the strip confinement is not adequate
for RC slender column as fully confinement. Whereas the reduction
percentages in load capacity for double curvature cases for the same
eccentricities are 32% and 66%.
10
Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939
4.7. Effect of load eccentricity
The typical axial load versus axial and lateral deflection for un-
confined column (Control) for single curvature and double curvature
is showed in Fig. 16. In general, high values of the ultimate load capacity
were obtained with the decreasing of the eccentricity. However, the
enhancement of CFRP confinement may still be expected but this could
be reduced as load eccentricity increase. The lateral deflection values
increased as the eccentricity increases giving maximum lateral deflec­
tion value at ex ¼ 50 and ey ¼ 0, after that the deflection started to
R.Z. Al-Rousan and M.H. Barfed Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939

Fig. 13. Axial load versus axial and lateral strain for single and double curvature.

decrease. Inspection of Fig. 16 reveals that for unconfined RC columns, that each two columns with the same eccentricities on X-axis (ex)
the nonlinear part in the curve reduced as the eccentricity decreased that approximately have similar first slope of the linear part of the curve. In
explains the concrete crushing sudden failure as the eccentricity goes to single curvature curvatures, it is worth to mention that the maximum
zero. Furthermore, it can be observed in all load-lateral deflection curves axial deflection in two-dimensional eccentricity cases was high

11
R.Z. Al-Rousan and M.H. Barfed
Fig. 14. Lateral strain distribution for (a) unconfined, (b) strip confined, and (c) fully confined [(a) 3-D profile (b) zoomed at maximum (c) cross-section
at maximum].
compared with one-dimensional eccentricities. Inspection of Table 3
reveals that the reduction percentage is more pronounced in one
dimensional eccentricity than and two-dimensional eccentricities.
Whereas the reduction percentages in load capacity for double curvature
case is larger than the single curvature case.
4.8. Effect of curvature type
Single and double curvature bending types of RC columns were
investigated and analysis of the results was obtained in terms of axial
load versus axial and lateral deflections plots. Fig. 17 illustrates the
typical comparison between single and double curvature bending of the
columns with same eccentricities. As mentioned previously that the
single curvature slender RC columns showed the typical flexural failure
mode due to the existence of load eccentricity, also in case of double
curvature, the RC columns were exposed to extra shear stresses with the
usual bending moment stresses. In case of fully confined RC columns, the
enhancement percentage in ultimate capacities of double curvatures
with respect to single curvatures is 14% and 40% for one directional
eccentricity and 6 and 36% for two directional eccentricities as shown in
Fig. 17. In single curvature of columns, the reduction percentages in load
capacity are (16%–44%) and (32%–55%) for one and two-dimensional
eccentricities, respectively. While, the reduction percentages in load
capacity for double curvature cases are (4%–32%) and (14%–38%).
4.9. Interaction diagrams
Axial compression load combined with bending moment were
applied (eccentric loads) to the RC slender column resulting a cross-
12
Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939
sectional strain gradient. Theoretically, the axial load (P) and bending
moment (Mxy) were calculated by integrating the internal stresses over
the cross-section. Here, the (P) was the ultimate load capacity at failure
and (Mxy) as first order-moment (linear dependence) was obtained by
multiplying the load (P) by the initial load eccentricity (exy), whereas in
critical cross-sections, the second order-moment (nonlinear depen­
dence) that calculated as load (P) multiplied by the corresponded
maximum lateral deflection (δ) added to first order-moment should be
estimated as final bending moment i.e. Mxy ¼ P (exy þ δxy) as shown in
Fig. 18 for single and double curvatures. It is worth mentioning here that
the previous equation is adequate for uniaxial bending moment (one-
dimensional eccentricity) (Mxy). In case of biaxial bending moment
(two-dimensional eccentricity), the equivalent uniaxial bending
moment was calculated using following equation cases [16]:
b My b
Mequ ¼ My þ 0:55Mx if > (5)
h Mx h
b My b
Mequ ¼ Mx þ 0:55My if � (6)
h Mx h
where; b and h are column dimensions. In this study, the two-
dimensional eccentricities were: ðex Þðey Þ ¼ 25 .and (i.e. Mx ¼ My )
with square cross-section, so second case was used as shown in Fig. 18.
Fig. 19 showed a simplified RC column multi-points interaction
curve that varying from pure axial compression case passing through
different ultimate compression and tension side strain cases ending up
with the pure bending case. Interaction diagrams of RC slender column
with the three-different confinement configurations (ρf ¼ 0.0, 0.0019
and 0.0038) for each single and double curvatures are shown in Fig. 20.
R.Z. Al-Rousan and M.H. Barfed Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939

Fig. 15. Axial load versus volumetric strain for single and double curvature.

It was observed that, considering the second moment effect could lead to 5. Conclusions
substantially increase in the maximum cross-sectional bending moment.
This increase obviously affected by the ρf as presented by previous This study was conducted to develop NLFEA of RC slender column
analytical models such as Hales et al. [26]. These interaction diagrams confined with CFRP composites under various loading cases. It was
imposed to be simple and suitable for direct use in design. concluded that:

13
R.Z. Al-Rousan and M.H. Barfed Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939

Fig. 16. The typical axial load versus axial and lateral deflection for un-confined speciemn (Control) for single curvature and double curvature.

Fig. 17. Axial Load versus axial and lateral deflections for single and double curvatures with ρf ¼ 0.0038.

Fig. 18. 1st and 2nd order moment (a) Single curvature (b) Double curvature.

Wrapping the RC slender columns with CFRP composites improved
their bending moment and load carrying capacities for single curvature,
double curvature, one and two-dimensional eccentricities.
Sudden failures in concrete cover region was observed in unconfined
and strips confined RC slender columns after steel yielding, so the failure
mode tends to be concrete crushing, whereas the fully CFRP confined
were typically failed by buckling with large lateral deformation.
Large amount of total EA in single curvature with highly increasing
rate as the volumetric CFRP ratio increased was observed because of
large deformation compared with double curvature cases. This EA value
decreased when load eccentricity increased which indicated that CFRP
composites have low significant effect in confining high eccentric loaded
RC slender columns.
The concrete dilation decreased with the increase of the volumetric
CFRP ratio as a results of the confinement effect that acquired from
CFRP wrapping, so the loaded column showed a high compacted
behavior period followed by flexural behavior.
High values of ultimate load capacities were obtained when the ec­
centricity decreased, however, the enhancement of CFRP confinement
may still be expected but this could be reduced as load eccentricity
increase.
In case of double curvature, the RC slender columns were exposed to
extra shear stresses with the usual bending moment stresses. Hence, the
concrete was highly confined which lead to that ultimate load capacity
was higher than in single curvature, and reverse results were obtained in
terms of deformations.
Interaction diagrams of RC slender columns with the three-different
confinement configurations (ρf ¼ 0.0, 0.0019 and 0.0038) for each sin­
gle and double curvatures were proposed and imposed to be simple and
suitable for direct use in design.

14
R.Z. Al-Rousan and M.H. Barfed Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939

(continued )
Group Column CFRP Configuration Curvature Load
designation (Volumetric ratio) Type Eccentricity

ex, ey,
mm mm

4 points
loading
2 CSS0
0 0 50 mm transversal
CFRP strips (0.0019)
CSS25X 25 0
CSS50X 50 0
CSS25XY 25 25
CSS50XY 50 50
BS 4 points loading
3 CFS0 Fully Confinement 0 0
CFS25X (0.0038) 25 0
CFS50X 50 0
CFS25XY 25 25
CFS50XY 50 50
BF 4 points loading
4 CND0 None (0.0) Double 0 0
Fig. 19. Simplified RC column interaction diagram. CND25X 25 0
CND50X 50 0
CND25XY 25 25
5.1. Investigated parameters CND50XY 50 50
5 CSD0 50 mm transversal 0 0
Group Column CFRP Configuration Curvature Load CSD25X CFRP strips (0.0019) 25 0
designation (Volumetric ratio) Type Eccentricity CSD50X 50 0
CSD25XY 25 25
ex, ey, CSD50XY 50 50
mm mm 6 CFD0 Fully Confinement 0 0
1 CNS0 None (0.0) Single 0 0 CFD25X (0.0038) 25 0
CNS25X 25 0 CFD50X 50 0
CNS50X 50 0 CFD25XY 25 25
CNS25XY 25 25 CFD50XY 50 50
CNS50XY 50 50
BN
(continued on next column)

Fig. 20. Interaction diagram for single and double curvature with 1st and 2nd order moments.

15
R.Z. Al-Rousan and M.H. Barfed Composites Part B 173 (2019) 106939

References concrete columns under combined axial and flexural loads. Compos B Eng 2017;
114(1):223–36.
[14] Ombres Luciano, Verre Salvatore. Structural behaviour of fabric reinforced
[1] ACI Committee. American Concrete Institute, and International Organization for
cementitious matrix (FRCM) strengthened concrete columns under eccentric
Standardization. Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318-08)
loading. Compos B Eng 2015;75(1):235–49.
and commentary. s.l. American Concrete Institute; 2008.
[15] Yazici Veysel, Hadi Muhammad N. Axial load-bending moment diagrams of carbon
[2] StandardsInstitution. British. Eurocode 2: design of concrete structures: Part 1-1:
FRP wrapped hollow core reinforced concrete columns. J Compos Constr 2009;13
general rules and rules for buildings. s.l. British Standards Institution; 2004.
(4):262–8.
[3] De Araújo, Milton Jos� e. Comparative study of the simplified methods of Eurocode 2
[16] Manie Salar, Jami Ehsan, Azarian Zana. Simplified design of FRP-confined square
for second order analysis of slender reinforced concrete columns. J Build Eng 2017;
RC columns under Bi-axial bending. Buildings 2017;7(74):1–14.
14(1):55–60.
[17] Yuan Wenqing, Mirmiran Amir. Buckling analysis of concrete-filled FRP tubes. Int J
[4] Claeson Christina, Kent Gylltoft. Slender high-strength concrete columns subjected
Struct Stab Dyn 2001;1(3):367–83.
to eccentric loading. J Struct Eng 1998;124(3):233–40.
[18] Bisby Luke, Ranger Michael. Axial–flexural interaction in circular FRP-confined
[5] Li J, Hadi MNS. Behaviour of externally confined high-strength concrete columns
reinforced concrete columns. Constr Build Mater 2010;24(9):1672–81.
under eccentric loading. Compos Struct 2003;62(2):145–53.
[19] Kachlakev Damian I, Thomas Miller S, Chansawat Yim K, Potisuk T. Finite element
[6] Sheikh Shamim A, Uzumeri Suzru M. Strength and ductility of tied concrete
modeling of concrete structures strengthened with FRP laminates. No. FHWA-OR-
columns. J Struct Div 1980;106. ASCE 15388 Proceeding.
RD-01-17. Research Group: Oregon Department of Transportation; 2001.
[7] Mander John B, Priestley Michael JN, Park R. Theoretical stress-strain model for
[20] Parvin Azadeh, Jamwal Aditya S. Effects of wrap thickness and ply configuration
confined concrete. J Struct Eng 1988;114(8):1804–26.
on composite-confined concrete cylinders. Compos Struct 2005;67(4):437–42.
[8] Kabir Mohammad Z, Shafei Erfan. Plasticity modeling of FRP-confined circular
[21] Ghanem, Sahar Yousef. (20165). Circular RC columns partially confined with FRP.
reinforced concrete columns subjected to eccentric axial loading. Compos B Eng
University of Kentucky, Theses and Dissertations, 38.
2012;43(8):3497–506.
[22] ANSYS Inc. ANSYS user’s manual revision 9.0. SAS IP; 2016.
[9] Fam Amir, Mandal Siddhwartha, Rizkalla Sami. Rectangular filament-wound glass
[23] Dundar Cengiz, Erturkmen Duygu, Tokgoz Serkan. Studies on carbon fiber polymer
fiber reinforced polymer tubes filled with concrete under flexural and axial
confined slender plain and steel fiber reinforced concrete columns. Eng Struct
loading: analytical modeling. J Compos Constr 2005;9(1):34–43.
2015;102(1):31–9.
[10] El-Hacha Raafat, Abdelrahman Khaled. Slenderness effect of circular concrete
[24] Wee TH, Chin MS, Mansur MA. Stress-strain relationship of high-strength concrete
columns confined with SFRP sheets. Compos B Eng 2013;44(1):152–66.
in compression. J Mater Civ Eng 1996;8(2):70–6.
[11] Monti Giorgio, Nicola Nistic� o, Santini Silvia. Design of FRP jackets for upgrade of
[25] William KJ. Constitutive model for the triaxial behavior of concrete. Int Assoc
circular bridge piers. J Compos Constr 2001;5(2):94–101.
Bridge Struct Eng Proc 1975;19(1):34–44. 1.
[12] Fan Xiaochun, Zhang Mingzhong. Behaviour of inorganic polymer concrete
[26] Hales Thomas A, Pantelides Chris P, Reaveley Lawrence D. Analytical buckling
columns reinforced with basalt FRP bars under eccentric compression. An
model for slender FRP-reinforced concrete columns. Compos Struct 2017;176(1):
experimental study Composites Part B: Engineering 2016;104(1):44–56.
33–42.
[13] Hadhood Abdeldayem, Mohamed Hamdy M, Ghrib Faouzi, Benmokrane Brahim.
Efficiency of glass-fiber reinforced-polymer (GFRP) discrete hoops and bars in

16