Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 714–725

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

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

Effectiveness of adding confinement for ductility improvement of high-strength

concrete columns
J.C.M. Ho ∗ , J.Y.K. Lam, A.K.H. Kwan
Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong

article info abstract

Article history: The use of high-strength concrete (HSC) can reduce the size of columns in tall buildings and save space.
Received 28 May 2008 However, this will also reduce the flexural ductility of the columns. To restore the flexural ductility after
Received in revised form using HSC, additional confinement has been recommended. In this paper, the effect of adding confinement
16 November 2009
on the flexural ductility of HSC columns is studied by nonlinear moment–curvature analysis taking into
Accepted 27 November 2009
Available online 16 December 2009
account the stress-path dependence of the steel reinforcement. The analytical results reveal that the
addition of confinement would enhance the flexural ductility of columns by increasing the balanced steel
Keywords:
ratio and balanced axial load level. However, the effectiveness of adding confinement to improve the
Axial load flexural ductility of columns decreases as the axial load level or concrete strength increases. Finally, to
Column evaluate the effectiveness of adding confinement, two previously derived formulas correlating the flexural
Confinement ductility to various structural parameters are extended to incorporate the effect of the confining pressure.
Ductility © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Design formulas
High-strength concrete

1. Introduction account the actual stress–strain curves of the constitutive ma-

High-strength concrete (HSC) is increasingly used for the
construction of tall buildings. This is because the use of HSC
can reduce the dimensions of the structural members and hence
save space. However, HSC, whose stress–strain curve generally
has a relatively steep and short post-peak branch, is also more
brittle than normal-strength concrete (NSC). The potentially brittle
behaviour of HSC members has been a major concern of structural
engineers using HSC. For instance, in a series of beam tests carried
out by Pam et al. [1], it was found that HSC beams could fail in a
brittle manner if they were provided with excessive amounts of
tension steel. In another series of column tests carried out by Li
et al. [2], it was reported that HSC columns with concrete cylinder
strength of 100 MPa could be very brittle if they were not provided
with adequate confining reinforcement.
To evaluate the flexural ductility of HSC beams or columns, non-
linear moment–curvature analysis extended into the post-peak
range is needed [3,4]. It has been shown in a previous study on
HSC beams [5] that in the analysis, the stress-path dependence
of the steel reinforcement should be taken into account or other-
wise there would be significant errors in the moment–curvature
curve and flexural ductility obtained. To overcome this problem, a
method of nonlinear moment–curvature analysis that takes into
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +852 28591966; fax: +852 25595337.
E-mail address: johnny.ho@hku.hk (J.C.M. Ho).
0141-0296/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.11.017
terials as well as the stress path dependence of the steel rein-
forcement has been proposed [5]. The proposed method has been
employed in a series of theoretical studies on HSC beams [5–8],
from which it was seen that the use of HSC at the same tension
steel ratio could improve the flexural ductility of the beams, but at
the same degree of reinforcement (at the same tension to balanced
steel ratio) would reduce the flexural ductility of the beams. Hence,
the flexural ductility of beams is dependent not only on the ductil-
ity of the concrete but also on the amount of steel reinforcement.
Apart from beams, columns also have to be provided with
sufficient flexural ductility in the performance-based design
approach [9–12]. In some structures, it is simply not possible to
avoid the formation of plastic hinges in the columns. For example,
in the substructures of bridges, plastic hinges would be formed at
the base of the columns when the bridges are subjected to extreme
lateral loads. Therefore, the columns in bridges should be designed
with adequate flexural ductility to cater for the formation of plastic
hinges. The authors have recently carried out a theoretical study
on the flexural ductility of unconfined concrete columns using
the proposed method of nonlinear moment–curvature analysis
[13,14]. From the results, it was evident that the use of HSC in
lieu of NSC would reduce the flexural ductility of the columns if
the axial load level (the ratio of the applied axial load to the axial
capacity of the gross concrete area) is kept constant. Nevertheless,
at a constant axial stress level (the ratio of the applied axial load
to the gross concrete area), the flexural ductility of the columns
would not be significantly affected by the use of HSC. Anyway, the
 J.C.M. Ho et al. / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 714–725 715

Herein, the effect of confining pressure on the flexural ductility

Notations of columns cast of concrete of various strength grades and
subjected to various axial load levels is investigated theoretically
Ag Area of column section (Ag = bh) through a comprehensive parametric study using the proposed
As Total area of longitudinal steel reinforcement
method of nonlinear moment–curvature analysis, which takes into
Asb Area of balanced steel reinforcement
account the stress-path dependence of the steel reinforcement.
Asc Area of compression steel reinforcement
Two formulas developed previously for direct evaluation of
Ast Area of tension steel reinforcement
the flexural ductility of columns with tension and compression
b Breadth of column section
failures [13] are extended to incorporate the effect of confining
di Depth to centroid of steel at ith layer from extreme
pressure. Lastly, a comparison is made with available experimental
compressive fibre
results to verify the applicability of the two extended formulas.
dn Depth to neutral axis
∂µ/∂ fr Rate of change of ductility with respect to confining
pressure 2. Method of analysis
Ec Elastic modulus of concrete
Es Elastic modulus of steel reinforcement The constitutive model for confined concrete developed by
fc0 Cylinder strength of concrete Attard and Setunge [33], which has been compared with the
fco Peak stress on stress–strain curve of unconfined stress–strain curves obtained by other researchers [34–36] and
concrete shown to be applicable to a broad range of concrete strength from
fcu Cube strength of concrete 20 to 130 MPa, is adopted in the moment–curvature analysis. The
fi Concrete stress corresponding to εi stress–strain curve of the constitutive model, illustrated in Fig. 1(a)
fj Concrete stress corresponding to εj for concrete under different confining pressures, is given by:
fo Peak stress on stress–strain curve of confined
concrete
 2
 
σc + A εεc
B εεc
fr Confining pressure produced by confining rein- o o

forcement
=  2 (1)
fo
 
fy Yield strength of steel reinforcement
εc
1 + (A − 2) ε + (B + 1) εεc
o o
h Overall depth of the column section
Mp Maximum moment on moment–curvature curve in which σc and εc are the compressive stress and strain at any
P Axial load applied at centroid point on the stress–strain curve, fo and εo are the compressive
(P /Ag fco )b Balanced axial load level stress and strain at the peak of the stress–strain curve, and A and
εc Strain in concrete B are coefficients dependent on the concrete grade. Taking into
εo Strain at peak stress on stress–strain curve of account the confining effect, the values of fo and εo have been
confined concrete derived as:
εi Strain at inflection point on descending branch of  k
fr
stress–strain curve fo = fco 1+ √ (2a)
εj = εi + (εi − εo ) 0.56 fco
εps Residual plastic strain in steel reinforcement 
4.11fco0.75

fr

εs Strain in steel εo = 1 + (17 − 0.06fco ) (2b)
εy Yield strain of steel Ec fco
φu Ultimate curvature
 
fr
φy Yield curvature k = 1.25 1 + 0.062 fco−0.21 (2c)
fco
µ Curvature ductility factor
ρ Longitudinal steel ratio (ρ = As /Ag ) where fco is the peak stress of unconfined concrete (i.e. the uniaxial
σc Stress in concrete concrete strength), fr is the confining pressure, Ec is the initial
σs Stress in steel reinforcement Young’s modulus. It should be noted that fco can be determined
from the respective cube or cylinder strength using appropriate
conversion factors for NSC [37] and HSC [38,39]. Two sets of values
use of HSC could have an adverse effect on the flexural ductility for A and B are used to define the shape of the stress–strain curve,
of columns and remedial measures might be needed to restore which are given as follows:
the flexural ductility of HSC columns to the level that has been
For the ascending branch where εc ≤ εo :
provided to NSC columns.
Research on the effect of confining reinforcement in beams E c εo (A − 1)2
[15–17] has revealed that the addition of confining reinforcement A= ; B= − 1. (3a)
could significantly improve the flexural ductility of beams, regard- fo 0.55
less of the concrete strength. Likewise, experimental studies on For the descending branch where εc > εo :
the effect of confinement in the form of confining steel [18–22],
εj − εi εj f i 4εi fj
  
steel tube [23–26] and FRP [27–30] in NSC and HSC columns have
demonstrated that the addition of confinement could consider- A= − (3b)
εo εi (fo − fi ) εj (fo − fj )
ably improve the flexural ductility of both NSC and HSC columns.  
Somehow, the addition of confinement is generally less effective fi 4fj
B = (εi − εj ) − (3c)
in HSC columns than in NSC columns [31,32]. This implies that HSC εi (fo − fi ) εj (fo − fj )
columns may need more confinement to maintain the flexural duc-
tility at a certain minimum level for structural safety. However, where εi is the strain at the inflection point on the descending
although such a phenomenon has been observed experimentally, branch of the stress–strain curve, εj = εi + (εi − εo ), and fi and fj
there has been little theoretical study on how to evaluate the effect are the stresses corresponding to εi and εj , respectively. The values
of confining pressure on the flexural ductility of HSC columns. of εi , fi and fj are given by the following equations:
716 J.C.M. Ho et al. / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 714–725

(a) Stress–strain curves of concrete with various confining pressure. (b) Stress–strain curve of steel with stress-path dependence
considered.

Fig. 1. Stress–strain curves of concrete and steel reinforcement.

2.5 − 0.3 ln(fco ) − 2

 
εi = εo 2 + (4a)
1 + 1.12(fr /fco )0.26
1.41 − 0.17 ln(fco ) − 1
 
fi = fo 1 + (4b)
1 + 5.06(fr /fco )0.57
1.45 − 0.25 ln(fco ) − 1
 
fj = fo 1 + . (4c)
1 + 6.35(fr /fco )0.62
Since there is only very small strain reversal in the concrete, as
the curvature of the section increases monotonically even at the
post-peak stage [40,41], the constitutive behaviour of the concrete
is considered as stress-path independent.
For the steel reinforcement, a linearly elastic-perfectly plastic
stress–strain curve is adopted. Since there could be strain reversal
in the tension reinforcement at the post-peak stage despite the
monotonic increase of curvature, the stress–strain curve of the
Fig. 2. Column sections analysed.
steel is stress-path dependent. It is assumed that when strain
reversal occurs, the unloading path of the stress–strain curve is
fys are respectively the volumetric ratio and yield strength of
linear and has the same slope as the initial elastic portion of
confining steel. In the analysis, the axial load is applied at the
the stress–strain curve. Fig. 1(b) shows the resulting stress–strain
geometric centre of the column section at the beginning before
curve of the steel reinforcement.
any curvature or moment is applied. The moment–curvature
Five basic assumptions are made in the analysis: (1) Plane
behaviour of the column section is analysed by applying prescribed
sections before bending remain plane after bending. (2) The tensile
curvatures to the column section incrementally starting from
strength of the concrete may be neglected. (3) There is no relative
zero. At a prescribed curvature, the stresses developed in the
slip between concrete and steel reinforcement. (4) The concrete
concrete and the steel are determined from the strain profile across
core is confined while the concrete cover is unconfined. (5) The
the section and their respective stress–strain curves. Then, the
confining pressure provided to the concrete core by confinement
neutral axis depth and resisting moment are evaluated from the
is assumed to be constant throughout the concrete compression
axial and moment equilibrium conditions, respectively. The above
zone. Assumptions (1) to (4) are commonly accepted and have
procedure is repeated until the curvature is large enough for the
been adopted by various researchers [3,4,42–44]. Assumption
resisting moment to increase to the peak and then decrease to 50%
(5) is not exact because the confining pressure varies in the
of the peak moment.
concrete compression zone with strain gradient. However, it is
a fairly reasonable assumption in the sense that: (i) At small
concrete strains, the variation of confining pressure would not 3. Nonlinear moment–curvature analysis
have significant effect on the confined concrete stress [33–36].
(ii) When the extreme fibre of confined concrete reaches about 3.1. Stress-path dependence of steel reinforcement
0.003–0.004 before concrete cover spalls off entirely, there would
be some variations of confining pressure within the concrete The column sections analysed are shown in Fig. 2. To illus-
compression zone due to strain gradient. However, as this happens trate the effect of stress-path dependence of steel reinforcement
within a narrow range of concrete strain, the differences in the at different levels of confining pressure, the column sections hav-
confined concrete compressive force and moment capacity of ing a concrete strength of fco = 70 MPa, longitudinal steel ratio
column are not significant. (iii) After the concrete cover had of ρ = 4% and subjected to an axial load level of P /Ag fco = 0.6
spalled off completely at large concrete strain, the Poisson’s ratio were analysed twice, first with the stress-path dependence con-
of concrete increases abruptly causing the confining steel to yield. sidered and again with the stress-path dependence ignored. Three
The confining pressure becomes a constant equal to 0.5ke ρs fys , different levels of confining pressure at fr = 0, 2 and 4 MPa were
where ke is the confinement effectiveness factor [45], and ρs and provided. The moment–curvature curves so obtained are shown
 J.C.M. Ho et al. / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 714–725
(a) fco = 70 MPa, ρ = 4%, P /Ag fco = 0.6 and fr = 0 MPa.
(c) fco = 70 MPa, ρ = 4%, P /Ag fco = 0.6 and fr = 4 MPa.
Fig. 3. Effects of stress-path dependence of steel reinforcement.
in Fig. 3. From the figure, it can be seen that although when the
confining pressure is relatively low, the effect of stress-path de-
pendence is not conspicuous because the strain reversal actually
occurs before the steel reaches the yield point, when the confining
pressure is relatively high, the effect of stress-path dependence is
quite significant because the strain reversal only occurs after the
steel has yielded. Hence, the effect of stress-path dependence is
generally larger at a higher level of confining pressure. This may
be explained by the fact that a higher confining pressure would en-
hance considerably the strength and ductility of the concrete core,
leading to the development of higher stresses in the steel before
strain reversal occurs. In any nonlinear moment–curvature analy-
sis, therefore, it is important to take into account the stress-path
dependence of steel reinforcement, especially when the column
section is confined.
3.2. Balanced axial load level
Three failure modes have been observed. Tension failure occurs
in columns subjected to a relatively low axial load level and/or
provided with a relatively high confining pressure. Compression
failure occurs in columns subjected to a relatively high axial
load level and provided with a relatively low confining pressure.
In between, balanced failure occurs, whereby the most highly
stressed tension steel just reaches the yield point during failure of
the column. The axial load level at which balanced failure occurs
is called the balanced axial load level and denoted by (P /Ag fco )b .
The balanced axial load level is needed for the determination of the
failure mode (below which tension failure occurs and above which
compression failure occurs). It may be evaluated rigorously using
nonlinear moment–curvature analysis by an iterative process of
adjusting the axial load level until balanced failure occurs. The
717
(b) fco = 70 MPa, ρ = 4%, P /Ag fco = 0.6 and fr = 2 MPa.
balanced axial load levels so evaluated for column sections with
concrete strength fco ranging from 40 to 100 MPa, longitudinal steel
ratio ρ ranging from 2% to 6% and confining pressure fr ranging
from 0 to 4 MPa are listed in Table 1.
From the table, it can be seen that at a fixed uniaxial concrete
strength fco , the balanced axial load level increases as the confining
pressure fr increases. This is because when the column section is
subjected to a higher confining pressure, the effective concrete
strength fo is higher, leading to a higher axial load level that would
cause balanced failure. It can also be seen that at a fixed confining
pressure fr , the balanced axial load level decreases as the uniaxial
concrete strength fco increases. This is because at a higher concrete
strength, the descending branch of the stress–strain curve of the
concrete is shorter (i.e. the concrete is less ductile) and the increase
in effective concrete strength fo due to the confining pressure
provided is smaller, leading to a lower axial load level that would
cause balanced failure. On the other hand, it is evident that the
balanced axial load level is not sensitive to the longitudinal steel
ratio ρ except at a relatively low concrete strength of fco ≤ 50 MPa.
Hence, for simplicity, the effect of the longitudinal steel ratio ρ on
the balanced axial load level may be ignored and a single value
of balanced axial load level may be adopted for each combination
of concrete strength and confining pressure. The single value of
balanced axial load to be adopted may be taken as the average of
the balanced axial load levels at ρ = 2%, 4% and 6%, as tabulated in
the last column of Table 1.
In a previous study [46], a formula for direct evaluation of the
balanced axial load level has been developed. It is rewritten in the
following form:
(P /Ag fco )b = (Asb + Asc − Ast )(fy /Ag fco ) (5)
where Asb , Asc and Ast are the balanced steel, compression steel and
tension steel areas, respectively [5–8,13–17]. The balanced steel
718 J.C.M. Ho et al. / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 714–725

Table 1 but a considerable beneficial effect on the flexural ductility. At the

Balanced axial load levels. same confining pressure, the flexural ductility is generally higher
fr (MPa) fco (MPa) Balanced axial load level (P /Ag fco )b at lower concrete strength and lower at higher concrete strength.
ρ = 2% ρ = 4% ρ = 6% Adopted value This is obviously due to the lower ductility of higher strength con-
40 0.44 0.47 0.52 0.48 crete. For this reason, when HSC is used in lieu of NSC, a higher
50 0.41 0.42 0.45 0.43 confining pressure may need to be provided to maintain the same
60 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.40 flexural ductility.
0 70 0.37 0.38 0.38 0.38
The moment–curvature curves for columns with various axial
80 0.36 0.36 0.37 0.36
90 0.34 0.35 0.35 0.35 load levels of P /Ag fco = 0.1, 0.3 and 0.6 and various confining
100 0.33 0.34 0.34 0.34 pressures of fr = 0, 1 and 2 MPa are shown in Fig. 5. From this
40 0.64 0.69 0.75 0.69 figure, it can be seen that the provision of confining pressure has
50 0.58 0.62 0.67 0.63 little effect on the flexural strength at an axial load level of 0.1 or
60 0.53 0.57 0.61 0.57 0.3 but would slightly increase the flexural strength at an axial load
1 70 0.50 0.53 0.56 0.53
level of 0.6. On the other hand, the provision of confining pressure
80 0.47 0.50 0.52 0.50
90 0.45 0.46 0.49 0.47
would considerably improve the flexural ductility at all axial load
100 0.43 0.44 0.46 0.44 levels. At the same confining pressure, the flexural ductility is
40 0.76 0.81 0.87 0.81 generally higher at lower axial load level and lower at higher axial
50 0.68 0.72 0.77 0.73 load level. For this reason, when the axial load level is relatively
60 0.62 0.66 0.70 0.66 high, particular care is needed to ensure that the column has
2 70 0.58 0.61 0.65 0.61 sufficient flexural ductility.
80 0.54 0.57 0.60 0.57
90 0.51 0.54 0.56 0.54
To verify the applicability of the analytical programme of de-
100 0.49 0.51 0.53 0.51 riving the moment–curvature curves of concrete column section,
40 0.86 0.92 0.98 0.92
the moment–curvature curves of some concrete column sections
50 0.77 0.82 0.87 0.82 previously tested by the authors [31,32,47] were re-evaluated us-
60 0.70 0.74 0.78 0.74 ing the analytical program. The analytical results were subse-
3 70 0.65 0.68 0.72 0.68 quently compared with the experimental data obtained, which are
80 0.61 0.64 0.66 0.64
shown in Fig. 6. From the figure, it is evident that the analytical
90 0.57 0.60 0.62 0.60
100 0.54 0.56 0.59 0.56 moment–curvature curves almost coincide with the experimen-
40 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02
tal curves in the ascending branch. However, the analytical curves
50 0.86 0.89 0.95 0.90 generally underestimate the post-peak moment–curvature curves
60 0.78 0.82 0.85 0.82 of the columns.
4 70 0.72 0.75 0.78 0.75
80 0.67 0.70 0.72 0.70 4. Flexural ductility analysis
90 0.62 0.65 0.68 0.65
100 0.59 0.61 0.63 0.61
4.1. Flexural ductility evaluation and parametric study
areas, each expressed as a percentage of the gross concrete area, for
The flexural ductility of a column section may be expressed
different combinations of concrete strength and confining pressure
in terms of the curvature ductility factor µ defined by Park and
are listed in Table 2. It can be shown that the balanced axial load Paulay [42] as:
levels directly evaluated by this formula agree very closely with the
corresponding values rigorously evaluated by moment–curvature µ = φu /φy (7)
analysis. However, since this formula requires the determination where φu and φy are the ultimate and yield curvatures, respec-
of the neutral axis depth for calculating the values of Asc and Ast , it tively. The ultimate curvature φu is taken as the curvature when
is not convenient to use in practical design applications. the resisting moment of the section has, after reaching the peak
To simplify the evaluation of balanced axial load level, it is moment Mp , dropped to 0.8 Mp . The yield curvature φy is taken as
proposed herein to ignore the effect of the longitudinal steel and the curvature at which the peak moment Mp would be reached if
derive a new formula for direct evaluation of the balanced axial the stiffness of the section is equal to the secant stiffness at 0.75 Mp
load level from just the concrete strength and confining pressure. defined by Watson and Park [48].
Correlating the rigorously evaluated balanced axial load levels Based on the above definition, a parametric study on the
to the concrete strength and confining pressure, the following effects of various factors on the curvature ductility factor has been
formula is derived: conducted. The column sections analysed are shown in Fig. 2.
(P /Ag fco )b = 3.1fco−0.5 (1 + 2fr )0.3 . (6) They represent typical square column sections with longitudinal
steel placed around their perimeters. In the parametric study, the
Comparing the balanced axial load levels directly evaluated by the uniaxial concrete strength fco was varied from 40 to 100 MPa, the
above formula with the corresponding rigorously evaluated values, longitudinal steel ratio ρ was varied from 1% to 6%, the axial load
it has been found that the above formula is in all cases accurate to level P /Ag fco was varied from 0.1 to 0.6, and the confining pressure
within 10% error, which should be sufficiently good for practical fr was varied from 0 to 4 MPa. On the other hand, the steel yield
design applications. strength fy was fixed at 460 MPa.

3.3. Moment–curvature behaviour 4.2. Effects of column dimensions

The moment–curvature curves for columns with various con-
crete strengths of fco = 40, 70 and 100 MPa and various confin-
ing pressures of fr = 0, 1 and 2 MPa are shown in Fig. 4. From
this figure, it can be seen that in all such cases, the provision of
confining pressure has basically no effect on the flexural strength
The effects of column dimensions on the curvature ductility
of columns were studied by comparing the ductility of columns
obtained from three different column dimensions: 500 × 500 mm2 ,
1000 × 1000 mm2 and 1500 × 1500 mm2 . The obtained ductility
factors for these sections are shown in Fig. 7(a) for various axial
 J.C.M. Ho et al. / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 714–725 719

Table 2
Balanced steel areas.
fco (MPa) BalancedsteelareaAsb asapercentageofgrossconcreteareaAg (%)
fr = 0 MPa fr = 1 MPa fr = 2 MPa fr = 3 MPa fr = 4 MPa

40 3.62 4.57 5.35 6.02 6.71

50 4.29 5.28 6.09 6.80 7.48
60 4.93 5.94 6.77 7.51 8.25
70 5.54 6.57 7.42 8.19 8.89
80 6.12 7.16 8.01 8.79 9.51
90 6.66 7.71 8.57 9.35 10.09
100 7.19 8.22 9.07 9.86 10.61

(a) fco = 40 MPa, ρ = 4% and P /Ag fco = 0.3. (b) fco = 70 MPa, ρ = 4% and P /Ag fco = 0.3.

(c) fco = 100 MPa, ρ = 4% and P /Ag fco = 0.3.

Fig. 4. Effects of confining pressure for columns with various concrete strengths.

load levels and Fig. 7(b) for various concrete strengths. It can be
seen from these figures that the variation of column ductility at
various values of fco and P /Ag fco is very small. Therefore for square-
shaped columns, the ductility is relatively insensitive to the cross-
section dimensions compared with other factors (e.g. fco , P /Ag fco
and fr ).
4.3. Effects of confining pressure
The curvature ductility factor µ is plotted against the confining
pressure fr for different concrete strengths of fco = 40, 70 and
100 MPa in Fig. 8(a). It is seen that the provision of confining
pressure would considerably increase the flexural ductility at all
concrete strength levels. At a concrete strength of fco = 40 MPa,
the provision of a confining pressure of fr = 1 MPa would increase
the µ-value by 177% from 3.0 to 8.3. At a higher concrete strength
of fco = 70 MPa, the provision of the same confining pressure
would increase the µ-value by 100% from 2.0 to 4.0. At an even
higher concrete strength of fco = 100 MPa, the provision of the
same confining pressure would increase the µ-value by 81% from
1.6 to 2.9. Hence, the increase in flexural ductility with confining
pressure decreases as the concrete strength increases.
The curvature ductility factor µ is plotted against the confining
pressure fr for different axial load levels of P /Ag fco = 0.1, 0.3 and
0.6 in Fig. 8(b). It is noted that the provision of confining pressure
would considerably increase the flexural ductility at all axial load
levels. At an axial load level of P /Ag fco = 0.1, the provision of a
confining pressure of fr = 1 MPa would increase the µ-value by
169% from 3.9 to 10.5. At a higher axial load level of P /Ag fco = 0.3,
the provision of the same confining pressure would increase the µ-
value by 100% from 2.0 to 4.0. At an even higher axial load level of
P /Ag fco = 0.6, the provision of the same confining pressure would
increase the µ-value by 71% from 1.7 to 2.9. Hence, the increase
in flexural ductility with confining pressure also decreases as the
axial load level increases.
The curvature ductility factor µ is plotted against the confining
pressure fr for different longitudinal steel ratios of ρ = 2%, 4% and
6% in Fig. 8(c). From the curves plotted, which are quite close to
each other, it is apparent that the longitudinal steel has a small
beneficial effect on the flexural ductility.
720 J.C.M. Ho et al. / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 714–725
(a) fco = 70 MPa, ρ = 4% and P /Ag fco = 0.1.
(c) fco = 70 MPa, ρ = 4% and P /Ag fco = 0.6.
Fig. 5. Effects of confining pressure for columns subjected to various axial load levels.
4.4. Effectiveness of confinement in improving ductility
From the above, it is evident that the effectiveness of adding
confinement to improve the flexural ductility of columns is very
much dependent on the concrete strength and axial load level and
only slightly dependent on the longitudinal steel ratio. The effec-
tiveness of providing confining pressure to improve the flexural
ductility of columns may be studied in terms of the differential
coefficient of µ with respect to fr , denoted herein by ∂µ/∂ fr . To
study how the concrete strength, axial load level and longitudinal
steel ratio affect the effectiveness of providing confining pressure,
the differential coefficient ∂µ/∂ fr is plotted against the concrete
strength, axial load level and longitudinal steel ratio in Fig. 9.
From Fig. 9(a), it can be seen that the differential coefficient
∂µ/∂ fr rapidly decreases as the concrete strength fco increases
until it reaches a steady value at fco ≥ 80 MPa. This indicates
that the increase in flexural ductility per unit increase in confining
pressure is always smaller at a higher concrete strength and
that therefore the addition of confinement to improve flexural
ductility is generally less effective in HSC columns. From Fig. 9(b),
it can be seen that the differential coefficient ∂µ/∂ fr also rapidly
decreases as the axial load level P /Ag fco increases until it reaches
a steady value at P /Ag fco ≥ 0.4. This indicates that the increase
in flexural ductility per unit increase in confining pressure is
always smaller at a higher axial load level and that therefore the
addition of confinement to improve flexural ductility is generally
more difficult in heavily loaded columns. Putting it all together,
it is evident that maintaining the flexural ductility of heavily
loaded HSC columns is particularly difficult and may require an
exceptionally large amount of confining reinforcement, if no upper
limit is imposed on the concrete strength or axial load level.
On the other hand, Fig. 9(c) shows that the differential
coefficient ∂µ/∂ fr slightly increases as the longitudinal steel ratio
(b) fco = 70 MPa, ρ = 4% and P /Ag fco = 0.3.
ρ increases. Hence, the addition of more longitudinal steel has a
small beneficial effect on the increase in flexural ductility per unit
increase in confining pressure.
5. Formulas for direct evaluation of flexural ductility
5.1. Factors affecting flexural ductility
The above parametric study revealed that the major factors
affecting the flexural behaviour and ductility of columns are
the concrete strength, axial load level, confining pressure and
longitudinal steel ratio. Hence, when evaluating the flexural
ductility of columns, all these factors need to be considered.
However, since the effects of these factors are dependent on the
failure mode, columns failing in tension and columns failing in
compression have to be dealt with separately. For this purpose,
the failure mode may be determined as tension failure when the
axial load level is lower than the balanced axial load level and
as compression failure when the axial load level is higher than
the balanced axial load level. Having determined the failure mode,
the flexural ductility may be evaluated directly using the formulas
developed below.
5.2. Columns failing in tension
In a previous study by the authors [13] on unconfined columns,
the following formula for direct evaluation of the flexural ductility
of unconfined columns failing in tension has been developed:
 −1.25
P + Ast fy − Asc fy
µ = 10.7 (fco )−0.45 . (8)
Asb fy

Fig. 6. Comparison of analytical and experimental moment–curvature curves.
This formula is actually applicable also to unconfined beams failing
in tension [18]. To account for the effects of the confining pressure
fr , it is proposed to change the formula into the following form:
 F (fr /fco )
P + Ast fy − Asc fy −0.45
µ = 10.7 (fco )
Asb fy
in which F (fr /fco ) and G(fr /fco ) are functions of the confining
pressure fr . For the case of confined beams, these two functions
J.C.M. Ho et al. / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 714–725 721
have been derived by Kwan et al. [46] as:
F (fr /fco ) = −1.25[1 + 5(fr /fco )] (9b)
G(fr /fco ) = 1 + 2.5(fr / fco ).
p
(9c)
G(fr /fco ) (9a) Herein, an attempt is made to apply the above formula, as given
by Eqs. (9a)–(9c), to confined columns. The µ-values directly
evaluated by the formula are compared to the µ-values rigorously
evaluated by nonlinear moment–curvature analysis in Fig. 10.
722 J.C.M. Ho et al. / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 714–725

(a) fco = 60 MPa and fr = 0 MPa. (b) P /Ag fco = 0.2 MPa and fr = 0 MPa.

Fig. 7. Effects of column dimensions on curvature ductility factors.

(a) fco = 40, 70, 100 MPa, ρ = 4% and P /Ag fco = 0.3. (b) fco = 70 MPa, ρ = 4% and P /Ag fco = 0.1, 0.3, 0.6.

(c) fco = 70 MPa, ρ = 2%, 4%, 6% and P /Ag fco = 0.3.

Fig. 8. Effects of concrete strength, axial load level and longitudinal steel ratio on ductility.

Correlation between the corresponding µ-values yielded a very of unconfined columns failing in compression has been developed:
good coefficient of correlation of R2 = 0.98. Hence, this formula, −0.45
P /Ag fco

though originally developed for confined beams, is also applicable µ = 14.0 (fco )−0.45 . (10)
to confined columns failing in tension. (P /Ag fco )b
From the above formula, it can be seen that for columns For the purpose of incorporating the effects of the confining
failing in tension, the effects of the confining pressure include pressure fr , it is proposed to change the formula into the following
a significant increase in the balanced steel ratio Asb (the actual form:
increases are presented in Table 2) and slightly increases in the −0.45
absolute magnitudes of F (fr /fco ) and G(fr /fco ). Among these, the P /Ag fco

µ = 14.0 (fco )−0.45 H (fr /fco ) (11a)
major effect is the increase in balanced steel ratio. (P /Ag fco )b
in which H (fr /fco ) is a function of the confining pressure fr .
5.3. Columns failing in compression
By regression analysis of the available data generated by the
parametric study, the function H (fr /fco ) is derived as:
In the same study by the authors [13] on unconfined columns,
the following formula for direct evaluation of the flexural ductility H (fr /fco ) = 1 + 30(fr /fco ). (11b)
 J.C.M. Ho et al. / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 714–725
(a) ρ = 4% and P /Ag fco = 0.3.
(c) fco = 70 MPa and P /Ag fco = 0.3.
Fig. 9. Effects of concrete strength, axial load level and longitudinal steel ratio on ∂µ/∂ fr .
Fig. 10. Accuracy of proposed formula for columns failing in tension.
The µ-values directly evaluated by the above formula, as given
by Eqs. (11a) and (11b), are compared to the µ-values rigorously
evaluated by nonlinear moment–curvature analysis in Fig. 11.
Correlation between the corresponding µ-values yielded a very
good coefficient of correlation of R2 = 0.94. Hence, this formula
should be sufficiently accurate for practical design applications.
From the above formula, it can be seen that for columns failing
in compression, the effects of the confining pressure include a
significant increase in the balanced axial load level (P /Ag fco )b (the
actual increases are presented in Table 1) and a moderate increase
in the absolute magnitude of H (fr /fco ). Among these, the major
effect is the increase in balanced axial load ratio.
723
(b) fco = 70 MPa and ρ = 4%.
Fig. 11. Accuracy of proposed formula for columns failing in compression.
5.4. Comparison with experimental results
The two formulas, i.e. Eq. (9) for columns failing in tension and
Eq. (11) for columns failing in compression, are herein further ver-
ified by comparing with available experimental results [31,32,49–
51].
The details of the columns, together with the experimentally de-
termined µ-values, are presented in Table 3 for unconfined con-
crete columns and Table 4 for confined concrete columns. As
depicted in the tables, the columns were cast of concrete with cube
strengths (fcu or fc0 ) ranging from 25 to 110 MPa, provided with con-
fining pressures fr ranging from 0.0 (unconfined) to 5.0 MPa, and
subjected to axial load levels P /Ag fco ranging from 0.15 to 0.91. It
should be noted that the uniaxial concrete strengths are taken as
724 J.C.M. Ho et al. / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 714–725

Table 3
Comparison with experimental results for unconfined concrete columns.
Specimen code fcu or [fc0 ] (MPa) fco (MPa) fr (MPa) P /Ag fco (P /Ag fco )b Curvature ductility factor µ
Experimental results By proposed formulas

Ho and Pam [32]

BS-60-06-61-S 56.5 40.7 0.0 0.753 0.596 2.3 2.8
BS-60-06-61-C 60.4 43.5 0.0 0.738 0.595 2.4 2.7
BS-100-03-24-S 95.1 68.5 0.0 0.393 0.505 2.9 2.1
BS-100-03-24-C 108.4 78.8 0.0 0.440 0.470 1.7 1.8
Ho and Pam [31]
BS-80-01-09-R6 89.6 64.5 0.0 0.150 0.472 7.3 6.5
BS-80-01-09-R8 85.4 61.5 0.0 0.149 0.484 7.2 6.8
BS-80-01-09-R10 83.2 59.9 0.0 0.154 0.506 7.7 6.6
Sheikh and Yeh [49]
E-8 [25.9] 22.0 0.0 0.913 0.989 3.2 2.7
A-11 [27.9] 23.7 0.0 0.867 0.929 4.3 2.6
F-12 [33.4] 28.4 0.0 0.707 0.858 3.7 2.9
D-14 [26.9] 22.9 0.0 0.880 0.954 4.3 2.7
A-16 [33.9] 28.8 0.0 0.706 0.876 5.3 3.0

Table 4
Comparison with experimental results for confined concrete columns.
Specimen code fcu or [fc0 ] (MPa) fco (MPa) fr (MPa) P /Ag fco (P /Ag fco )b Curvature ductility factor µ
Experimental results By proposed formulas

Ho [47]
NEW-100-03-61-C 108.8 78.4 4.1 0.417 0.681 11.3 9.8
NEW-80-03-24-C 90.4 65.1 3.4 0.389 0.712 9.8 9.3
Ho and Pam [31]
NEW-80-01-09-R12 85.9 61.8 1.2 0.151 0.589 12.8 12.5
Ho and Pam [32]
NEW-100-03-24-C 108.4 78.0 4.2 0.419 0.687 9.0 7.6
NEW-60-06-61-C 62.4 44.9 3.6 0.735 0.870 10.2 8.4
NEW-60-06-61-S 57.1 41.1 3.3 0.738 0.889 8.3 9.0
Sheikh et al. [51]
AS-3H [54.1] 46.0 3.0 0.728 0.818 2.8 2.1
AS-18H [54.7] 46.5 5.0 0.752 0.932 2.3 2.4
Sheikh and Khoury [50]
FS-9 [32.4] 27.5 3.0 0.894 1.057 3.5 3.2
ES-13 [32.5] 27.7 2.7 0.894 1.033 3.4 3.1
AS-3 [33.2] 28.2 3.0 0.706 1.045 6.9 5.5
AS-17 [31.3] 26.6 3.0 0.906 1.076 3.1 3.3
AS-18 [32.8] 27.8 5.0 0.906 1.204 3.3 3.6
AS-19 [32.3] 27.4 2.3 0.553 0.993 12.0 9.4
Sheikh and Yeh [49]
E-2 [31.4] 26.7 2.9 0.719 1.063 5.4 5.8
F-4 [32.2] 27.4 2.9 0.700 1.051 6.8 5.9
D-5 [31.2] 26.5 2.9 0.541 1.067 10.6 8.2
F-6 [27.2] 23.1 2.8 0.879 1.139 4.8 4.6
E-10 [26.3] 22.3 2.9 0.901 1.164 3.9 4.7
E-13 [27.2] 23.1 2.8 0.868 1.139 5.5 4.8
D-15 [26.9] 22.9 2.9 0.880 1.152 5.5 4.8

either 0.72fcu [39] or 0.85fc0 [37]. The confining pressures are deter-
mined from the confining reinforcement provided, using the equa-
tion proposed by Mander et al. [45]. The predicted µ-values by the
two formulas are listed in the last column of the tables for com-
parison. It is seen that on the whole, the predicted µ-values agree
quite closely with the experimental results.
6. Conclusions
The flexural behaviour and ductility of confined concrete
columns have been studied by nonlinear moment–curvature anal-
ysis taking into account the stress-path dependence of the steel
reinforcement. It was found that the effect of the stress-path de-
pendence is generally larger in confined columns than in un-
confined columns. Hence, the stress-path dependence must be
considered when analysing confined columns. It was also found
that as the confining pressure increases, both the balanced steel
ratio and balanced axial load level would increase, leading to a sig-
nificant increase in the flexural ductility of the confined column.
By nonlinear moment–curvature analysis, a comprehensive
parametric study has been carried out to investigate the effect
of confining pressure on the flexural ductility of HSC columns.
From the theoretical results so obtained, it may be concluded that
although the addition of confining pressure is generally effective in
improving the flexural ductility, its effectiveness rapidly decreases
as the concrete strength or axial load level increases. This implies
 J.C.M. Ho et al. / Engineering Structures 32 (2010) 714–725
that the design of heavily loaded HSC columns to have at least
the same level of flexural ductility that has been provided in the
past to NSC columns can be quite difficult and may require an
exceptionally large amount of confining reinforcement. Relatively,
the longitudinal steel has only a small beneficial effect on the
flexural ductility.
Lastly, one formula, i.e. Eq. (6), has been developed for direct
evaluation of the balanced axial load level, and two formulas, i.e.
Eqs. (9) and (11), have been developed for direct evaluation of the
curvature ductility factors of confined columns failing in tension
mode or compression mode. All the three formulas have been ver-
ified by checking against the corresponding rigorously evaluated
values by nonlinear moment–curvature analysis. In addition, the
two formulas for direct evaluation of curvature ductility factors
have been further verified by a comparison with experimental re-
sults.
References
[1] Pam HJ, Kwan AKH, Islam MS. Flexural strength and ductility of reinforced
normal- and high-strength concrete beams. Proc Inst Civil Eng Struct Build
2001;146:381–9.
[2] Li B, Park R, Tanaka H. Effect of confinement on the behaviour of high strength
concrete columns under seismic loading, In: Proceedings, pacific conference
on earthquake engineering. Auckland; 1991. p.67–78.
[3] Park H, Kang SM, Chung L, Lee DB. Moment-curvature relationship of flexure-
dominated walls with partially confined end-zones. Eng Struct 2007;29:
33–45.
[4] Kwak HG, Kim SP. Simplified monotonic moment–curvature relation consid-
ering fixed-end rotation and axial force. Eng Struct 2010;32:69–79.
[5] Pam HJ, Kwan AKH, Ho JCM. Post-peak behavior and flexural ductility of doubly
reinforced normal- and high-strength concrete beams. Struct Eng Mech 2001;
12(5):459–74.
[6] Ho JCM, Kwan AKH, Pam HJ. Post-peak flexural behaviour of normal- and high-
strength concrete beams. Struct Des Tall Special Build 2003;12(2):109–25.
[7] Kwan AKH, Ho JCM, Pam HJ. Flexural strength and ductility of reinforced
concrete beams. Proc Inst Civil Eng Struct Build 2002;152(4):361–9.
[8] Kwan AKH, Ho JCM, Pam HJ. Effects of concrete grade and steel yield strength
on flexural ductility of reinforced concrete beams. Aust J Struct Eng; 5(2):
119–138.
[9] Klemencic R, Fry JA, Hooper JD, Morgen BG. Performance-based design
of ductile concrete core wall buildings—Issues to consider before detailed
analysis. Struct Des Tall Special Build 2007;16:599–614.
[10] Xue Q, Wu CW, Chen CC, Chen KC. The draft code for performance-based
seismic design of buildings in Taiwan. Eng Struct 2008;30:1535–47.
[11] Mostafaei H, Vecchio FJ, Kabeyasawa T. Nonlinear displacement-based
response prediction of reinforced concrete columns. Eng Struct 2008;30:
2436–47.
[12] Dogangün A. Performance of reinforced concrete buildings during the May 1,
2003 Bingöl Earthquake in Turkey. Eng Struct 2004;26:841–56.
[13] Lam JYK, Ho JCM, Kwan AKH. Flexural ductility of high-strength concrete
columns with minimal confinement. Mater Struct 2009;42(7):909–21.
[14] Lam JYK, Ho JCM, Kwan AKH. Maximum axial load level and minimum
confinement for limited ductility design of concrete columns. Comput Concr
2009;6(5):357–76.
[15] Kwan AKH, Au FTK, Chau SL. Theoretical study on effect of confinement on
flexural ductility of normal and high-strength concrete beams. Mag Concr Res
2004;56(5):299–309.
[16] Kwan AKH, Au FTK, Chau SL. Effects of confinement on flexural strength and
ductility design of HS concrete beams. Struct Eng 2004;84(23–24):38–44.
[17] Kwan AKH, Chau SL, Au FTK. Improving flexural ductility of high-strength
concrete beams. Proc Inst Civil Eng Struct Build 2006;159:339–47.
[18] Pam HJ, Ho JCM. Length of critical region for confinement steel in limited
ductility high-strength reinforced concrete columns. Eng Struct 2009;31:
2896–908.
[19] Hong KN, Han SH, Yi ST. High-strength concrete columns confined by low-
volumetric-ratio lateral ties. Eng Struct 2006;28:1346–53.
[20] Eid R, Dancygier AN. Confinement effectiveness in circular concrete columns.
Eng Struct 2006;28:1885–96.
725
[21] Vintzileou E, Stathatos A. Assessment of the seismic behaviour of RC columns.
Eng Struct 2007;29:1296–311.
[22] Woods JM, Kiousis PD, Ehsani MR, Saadatmanesh H. Bending ductility of
rectangular high strength concrete columns. Eng Struct 2007;29:1783–90.
[23] Wang Q, Zhao D, Guan P. Experimental study on the strength and ductility of
steel tubular columns filled with steel-reinforced concrete. Eng Struct 2004;
26:907–15.
[24] Ellobody E, Young B. Design and behaviour of concrete-filled cold-formed
stainless steel tube columns. Eng Struct 2006;28:716–28.
[25] Bambach MR, Jama H, Zhao XL, Grzebieta RH. Hollow and concrete filled steel
hollow sections under transverse impact loads. Eng Struct 2008;30:2859–70.
[26] Dabaon MA, El-Boghdadi MH, Hassanein MF. Experimental investigation on
concrete-filled stainless steel stiffened tubular stub columns. Eng Struct 2009;
31:300–7.
[27] Sheikh SA, Li Y. Design of FRP confinement for square concrete columns. Eng
Struct 2007;29:1074–83.
[28] Eid R, Paultre P. Plasticity-based model for circular concrete columns confined
with fibre-composite sheets. Eng Struct 2007;29:3301–11.
[29] Ozcan O, Binici B, Ozcebe G. Improving seismic performance of deficient
reinforced concrete columns using carbon fiber-reinforced polymers. Eng
Struct 2008;30:1632–46.
[30] Wu YF, Wei YY. Effects of cross-sectional aspect ratio on the strength of CFRP-
confined rectangular concrete columns. Eng Struct 2010;32:32–45.
[31] Ho JCM, Pam HJ. Inelastic design of low-axially loaded high-strength
reinforced concrete columns. Eng Struct 2003;25(8):1083–96.
[32] Ho JCM, Pam HJ. Influence of transverse steel configuration on post-elastic
behaviour of high-strength reinforced concrete columns. Trans Hong Kong Inst
Eng 2003;10(2):1–9.
[33] Attard MM, Setunge S. The stress strain relationship of confined and
unconfined concrete. ACI Mater J 1996;93(5):432–42.
[34] Richart FE, Brandtzaeg A, Brown RL. Failure of plain and spirally reinforced
concrete in compression. Bulletin 190, University of Illinois, Engineering
Experimental Station, Champaign, Illinois, 1929.
[35] Dahl KKB. A constitutive model for normal and high-strength concrete. In: ABK
report no. R287, Department of Structural Engineering, Technical University of
Denmark, 1992.
[36] Attard MM, Stewart MG. A two parameter stress block for high-strength
concrete. ACI Struct J 1998;95(3):305–17.
[37] ACI Committee 318. In: Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete
and Commentary, Manual of Concrete Practice, ACI 318M-05, MI(USA):
American Concrete Institute; 2005, p. 436.
[38] Ibrahim HHH, MacGregor JG. Modification of the ACI rectangular stress block
for high-strength concrete. ACI Struct J 1997;94(1):40–8.
[39] Ho JCM, Kwan AKH, Pam HJ. Ultimate concrete strain and equivalent
rectangular stress block for design of high-strength concrete beams. Struct Eng
2002;80(16):26–32.
[40] Wu YF, Oehlers DJ, Griffith MC. Rational definition of the flexural deformation
capacity of RC column sections. Eng Struct 2004;26:641–50.
[41] Au FTK, Bai ZZ, Kwan AKH. Complete moment–curvature relationship of
reinforced normal- and high-strength concrete beams experiencing complex
load history. Comput Concr 2005;2(4):309–24.
[42] Park R, Paulay T. Reinforced concrete structures. New York, USA: John Wiley &
Sons; 1975. p. 769.
[43] Fafitis A, Shah SP. Prediction of ultimate behavior of confined columns
subjected to large deformations. ACI J 1985;82(4):423–33.
[44] Carreira DJ, Chu KH. The moment–curvature relationship of reinforced
concrete members. ACI J 1986;83(2):191–8.
[45] Mander JB, Priestley MJN, Park R. Theoretical stress–strain model for confined
concrete. J Struct Eng-ASCE 1988;114(8):1804–25.
[46] Kwan AKH, Chau SL, Au FTK. Design of high-strength concrete beams subjected
to small axial loads. Mag Concr Res 2006;58(6):333–41.
[47] Ho JCM. Inelastic design of reinforced concrete beams and limited ductile high-
strength concrete columns, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, The
University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Jan. 2003, p. 332.
[48] Watson S, Park R. Simulated seismic load tests on reinforced concrete columns.
J Struct Eng-ASCE 1994;120(6):1825–49.
[49] Sheikh SA, Yeh CC. Tied concrete columns under axial load and flexure. J Struct
Div-ASCE 1990;116(10):2780–801.
[50] Sheikh SA, Khoury SS. Confined concrete columns with stubs. ACI Struct J 1993;
90(4):414–31.
[51] Sheikh SA, Shah DV, Khoury SS. Confinement of high-strength concrete
columns. ACI Struct J 1994;91(1):100–11.