Composite Structures 225 (2019) 111106

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composite Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct

Compression behavior of expansive concrete-encased-steel filled square T

CFRP tubes
Qi Caoa, Xiaojun Lia, Zhibin Linb, , Zhimin Wua
⁎

a
State Key Laboratory of Coastal and Offshore Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian 116024, China
b
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, USA

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The concrete-encased-steel filled FRP tube (CSFFT) is a composite that enables taking advantage of combined
CFRP effects of material properties of FRP, concrete and steel. Such composites outperform the conventional concrete
Steel or steel structures, by integrating outer FRP wrapping as lateral confinement and chemical barrier to concrete
Expansive concrete core and encased steel section, as well as the load-carrying capacity of concrete and steel section. While the
Prestress
CSFFT composites exhibit a great potential for broader applications, the issues associated with concrete shrin-
Ultimate load
Axial strain
kages and stress hysteresis experienced in FRP confinement as observed by previous studies could weaken their
performance at some cases. Therefore, to overcome these drawbacks, this study was to investigate active con-
finement on the CSFFT composites using expansive concrete-generated prestress. A total number of 24 concrete-
encased-steel filled square CFRP tube (CSFSCT) specimens were casted and tested under axial compression. The
variables studied included the number of CFRP layers (one, two and three layers), and the area of the section
steel (type A and B). Test results showed that the CSFSCT failed by the rupture of the CFRP in the hoop direction.
For test specimens with the same sectional area of steel and CFRP layer, the normalized ultimate load capacity of
the prestressed specimen was 1.03–1.13 times that of the non-prestressed specimen, which indicated that the
pre-stress effect made the tube specimens had higher strength enhancement ratio. As the number of CFRP layer
increased, the ultimate load capacity and ultimate axial strain increased, and the slope of the second linear
segment of the load-strain curve increased. Moreover, it was revealed that the area of the steel was effective in
increasing the Pu/Po and strain reduction factor of tube specimens. The models of ultimate stress and axial strain
of confined concrete were formulated to account for both FRP-induced passive confinement and expansive
concrete-generated active confinement and were validated by the experimental data.

1. Introduction section as a major load-carrying component; and (c) a concrete infill as

Fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) materials, due to their favorable
strength-to-weight ratio, have increasingly been used by providing ef-
fective confinement and correspondingly enhanced capacity/ductility
for civil structures, such as FRP-based external jacketing for concrete
columns [1–10]. Besides that, the FRP material exhibits excellent che-
mical resistance against environmental attacks, and thus they could
serve as a stay-in-place form to offer long-term durable solutions for
structures in harsh environments. For such reasons, the concrete-en-
cased-steel filled FRP tube (CSFFT) column that are recently proposed
[11–16] are one of the new hybrid FRP-based forms. As illustrated in
Fig. 1(a) or (b), such composite column efficiently integrates the ma-
terial merits of: (a) an outer FRP tube as a stay-in-place form, providing
confinement to concrete core and steel section; (b) an encased steel I-
the lateral stiffness for the steel section as well as the load-carrying
component.
Karimi et al. [11] first studied the axial compression behavior of
seven FRP-encased steel-concrete circular columns, and defined the
compressive strength and ultimate strain of confined concrete. Yu et al.
[12] studied the concentric compression and eccentric compression
mechanical properties of the FRP-confined concrete-encased steel
square columns. Their results demonstrated that the FRP tube could
effectively confine the inner concrete and section steel. Huang et al.
[13] also indicated that the FRP-confined composite column exhibited
the enhanced ductility and ultimate load capacity. Karimi et al. [14]
studied six FRP-encased steel-concrete composite columns, and pro-
posed an analytical model that predicts the axial behavior of different
slender-scale composite columns. Huang et al. [15] reported that the

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: Zhibin.lin@ndsu.edu (Z. Lin).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.111106
Received 4 February 2019; Received in revised form 10 April 2019; Accepted 30 May 2019
Available online 19 June 2019
0263-8223/ © 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Q. Cao, et al. Composite Structures 225 (2019) 111106

Nomenclature Ef the elastic modulus of the FRP material (GPa)

t the thickness of FRP (mm)
Pu ultimate load capacity of CSFSCTs (KN) b side length of square section (mm)
Po nominal ultimate load capacity of the composite square r corner radius of square section (mm)
column (KN) a section width of section steel (mm)
fco' the unconfined concrete strength (MPa) d section height of section steel (mm)
fy the yield strength of the steel (MPa) t1 flange thickness of section steel (mm)
Ag the concrete sectional area (mm2) t2 web thickness of section steel (mm)
As the area of the steel section (mm2) D 2 b 2r ( 2 1)
Pco fco' Ag Ac effective confined concrete area (mm2)
Pso fy As co the peak strain of the unconfined concrete
h, rup FRP’s ultimate tensile strain measured from specimens k2 the strain enhancement factor
fu FRP’s ultimate tensile strain obtained from coupon tensile fl equivalent prestress generated from expansive concrete
test (MPa)
k strain reduction factor f cc peak strength of actively confined concrete in square
cu ultimate axial strain column (MPa)
fl lateral confining pressure (MPa) *
cc the peak strain of actively confined concrete
fcc' compressive strength of the FRP-confined concrete (MPa) k3 enhancement factor due to active confinement effects
k1 confinement effectiveness coefficient
ks the shape factor

Encased steel I-section Encased steel I-section

Concrete infill
Concrete infill

Outer FRP tube Outer FRP tube

Cross section view Cross section view

(a) Circular (b) Rectangular

Fig. 1. The CSFFT composites.

encased steel profiles in the composite circular columns could provide
additional confinement for concrete core, as compared to concrete filled
FRP tube columns.
While the previous studies have confirmed the great potential of the
FRP-encased steel-concrete composite columns, FRP wrapping only
provides passive confinement effects when subjected to relatively high
lateral dilation of concrete core [17,18]. As a result, FRP presented a
certain level of stress lag/hysteresis, with low efficiency for concrete
confinement. Different to passive confinement, several researchers
[11,18–24] have used expansive concrete in the FRP systems to gen-
erate active prestressing effects for concrete core. Karimi et al. [11]
studied the effect of concrete shrinkage on the axial compression per-
formance of the composite column. Their results demonstrated that the
composite column after adding the shrinkage reducing agent had a
considerable increase in the ultimate load capacity, as compared to the
control specimens. Mortazavi et al. [18] added the expansive mortar
between the existing concrete cylinder and the FRP tube. It exhibited
that the ultimate load capacity of the expansive specimen was increased
by 35% compared with the unexpansive specimen, which had more
than 4 times compared with the unconfined specimen. Cao et al.
[19,20] found that CFRP confined expansive concrete performed better
relative to CFRP confined ordinary concrete. Vincent and Ozbakkaloglu
[21] demonstrated the favorable increase of the axial compressive be-
havior of AFRP confined expansive high-strength concrete columns and
revealed that there was no stress loss in the stress-strain curve of the
specimens with expansion agent. Cao et al. [22] also studied the be-
havior of FRP-steel confined concrete tubular columns made of ex-
pansive self-consolidating concrete under axial compression. It was
reported that the normalized ultimate load of expansive concrete filled
double-skin tubular columns was higher than that of double-skin tub-
ular column filled with normal concrete. Yan et al. [23,24]’s study re-
vealed that the specimens modified by post-tensioned FRP composite
shells with expansive cement concrete showed higher axial strain and
axial compression strain compared with specimens confined with
bonded FRP jackets without shape modification.
Thus, this study is to implement the expansive concrete in the FRP
confined steel-concrete rectangular composites (see Fig. 1b) and ex-
plore how the prestressing effects could affect compressive behavior of

2
Q. Cao, et al.
the composite. Literature showed that the current studies on expansive
concrete in FRP systems [11,19–22] focused on circular-shape columns.
Thus, the models and results associated with circular columns may be
improper for rectangular ones, while encased steel section may also
affect the stress distribution and associated confinement in the rectan-
gular column. Therefore, one attempt is to understand how the shape
factor (rectangular section) affects the actively confined columns. To
meet the need, this study experimentally and analytically investigated
the axial compression behavior of concrete-encased-steel filled square
CFRP tubes (CSFSCTs). A total number of twenty-four short rectangular
specimens with and without expansive concrete were tested, while
three different FRP tube thickness and two encased I-sections were
selected for a comparative study. The formulation of the models were
carried out to determine confined concrete strength and ultimate axial
strain for the FRP-confined expansive concrete in square composites.
2. Experimental program
2.1. Specimen design
A total number of twenty-four concrete-encased-steel filled square
CFRP tube specimens were fabricated to study the mechanical proper-
ties under axial compression. The CFRP tubes were made by a wet hand
lay-up process and the unidirectional carbon fiber was brushed layer by
layer with the overlap length of the CFRP of 90 mm on the mold and
epoxy resin was glued. After fabrication, specimens were cured at room
temperature for at least 24 h until removing the mold, and the concrete
was poured after at least one week after demolding. The concrete was
poured between steel and CFRP tube. The side length of square column
is 150 mm with a corner radius of 30 mm. The schematic diagram of the
square column is shown in Fig. 2.
The specimen height is 300 mm. The concrete used was expansive
and ordinary (non-expansive) concrete. Three different CFRP confine-
ment ratios were selected which are 1-layer, 2-layer and 3-layer. Two
types of steel were used. The area of the first type of steel is 1234.5 mm2
as type A. The second section steel area is 2276.3 mm2 which is clas-
sified as type B. The details of specimens are shown in Table 1. Each test
set included two specimens. As listed in Table 1, the specimens were
labeled according to the amount of expansive agent, the number of
CFRP layers and the type of steel. The OS and ES represent the ordinary
concrete square column and expansive concrete square column, re-
spectively. The first number following OS (ES) represents the number of
CFRP layers and the second number means the type of steel. For ex-
ample, OS-1-1 indicates that the ordinary concrete square column with
one-layer CFRP confinement and type A section, while ES-2-2 denotes
the expansive concrete with encased type B section confined by two-
layer CFRP tube.
2.2. Materials
2.2.1. CFRP material
In this experiment, the CFRP was made of unidirectional carbon
fiber, and the elastic modulus and tensile strength of CFRP were de-
termined through the coupon tensile tests in accordance with the ASTM
D3039, as shown in Table 2. The component properties of CFRP pro-
vided by the manufacturer was also incorporated in Table 2.
2.2.2. Encased steel section
As illustrated in Fig. 2, the mechanical properties of the steel for
both sections A and B were obtained from the axial compression test.
The average yield strength of the steel was 284 MPa and the ultimate
strength was 352 MPa.
2.2.3. Ordinary concrete and expansive concrete
The mix designs for expansive concrete and ordinary concrete were
listed in Table 3, the coarse aggregate is 5–16 mm gravel, the fine
3
Composite Structures 225 (2019) 111106
aggregate is medium sand and the cement is P.O 42.5R ordinary Port-
land cement. The expansive concrete is made of calcium oxide-based
expansive agent at 10% dosage (relative to cementitious material).
Based on the information provided by the material supplier, the initial
setting time of the expansive agent is 165 min and the final setting time
is 200 min, and the restrained expansion rate in air for 21 days is
0.02%. Concrete cured under sealed condition for 28 days.
To understand the shrinkage behavior of fresh concrete, the prism
specimens with dimension of 100 mm × 100 mm × 400 mm were
casted for both expansive concrete and ordinary concrete and were then
monitored during the concrete curing process. The expansion and
shrinkage - time curves are shown in Fig. 3 for expansive concrete and
ordinary concrete, respectively.
It can be seen from Fig. 3 that, for ordinary concrete specimens, the
shrinkage is continuously increased during the curing period, and the
shrinkage strain is about 250 microstrains at 28 days. For the expansive
concrete specimens, it expanded at a higher speed at the first three
days, and then it was gradually stabilized after that. The expansive
strain at 28 days is about 3000 microstrains.
2.3. Instrumentation and test setup
Strain gauges with gage length of 20 mm were attached on CFRP
tube along both circumferential and axial directions to measure the
axial and hoop strains of the tested column specimen. Another set of
three strain gauges were mounted on the surfaces of the encased steel
section in middle height of specimens to record the axial strain of the
steel section, as shown in Fig. 4. Axial compression test was performed
after 28 days of concrete curing. The test setup is shown in Fig. 5. A
10,000-kN capacity universal testing machine was used to load the
specimens, while the specimen deformation was measured by four
LVDTs. And all the strain data was measured by strain gauges.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Prestress generated from expansive concrete on the CSFSCT columns
The circumferential expansive strain of the expansive concrete
column specimen was monitored during the 28-day concrete curing and
were plotted in Fig. 6 and listed in Table 4. Clearly, the expansion of the
expansive specimen, illustrated in Fig. 6, increased significantly during
the first 5 days, and then reached a state of plateau, which is consistent
with the previous observation shown in Fig. 3.
It can be seen from Fig. 6 that, as the number of CFRP layers in-
creases, the expansion strain of the expansive specimen decreased. It
can be explained that the larger number of CFRP layers, the greater the
confinement stiffness of CFRP on the core concrete-encased-steel
column. The pre-stress of concrete and CFRP in the expansive specimen
is also calculated and shown in Table 4.
3.2. Failure modes of the composite columns
The initial hoop strain increased slowly at the initial loading stage.
t1
I-section:
concrete
A (B)
t2 d=100mm (100mm)
CFRP d
a=68mm (100mm)
steel t1=5.5mm (7.8mm)
t2=5mm (7.72mm)
a
Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of column section.
Q. Cao, et al. Composite Structures 225 (2019) 111106

Table 1 Table 3
Details of specimens. Concrete mix proportions and mechanical properties.
Specimen No. of Layers of Dosage of expansive Steel type Mixtures and mechanical properties OC EC
specimens CFRP agent (%)
3
Cement (kg/m ) 450 450
OS-1-1 2 1 0 A Coarse aggregate (kg/m3) 995 995
OS-1-2 2 1 0 B Fine aggregate (kg/m3) 636 591
OS-2-1 2 2 0 A Water (kg/m3) 220 220
OS-2-2 2 2 0 B Expansive admixture (kg/m3) 0 45
OS-3-1 2 3 0 A Concrete strength (MPa) 43.51 36.8
OS-3-2 2 3 0 B Elastic modulus (GPa) 34.1 30.6
ES-1-1 2 1 10 A Poisson's ratio 0.26 0.221
ES-1-2 2 1 10 B
ES-2-1 2 2 10 A
ES-2-2 2 2 10 B
ES-3-1 2 3 10 A 3000
ES-3-2 2 3 10 B

2500

Expansive strain(microstrain)
After reaching the inflection point, the load slowly increased and the
2000
strain increased rapidly. For one-layer CSFSCTs, the stress dropped after EC
the load reached the inflection point, and then the load continued to NC
increase until it reached the peak stress. However, it was not observed 1500

the same phenomena for two-layer and three-layer specimens. It is

speculated that it is because one-layer specimens have lower confine-
ment stiffness than that of two-layer and three-layer specimens. Upon
reaching the peak load, the CFRP ruptured and the specimen failed. The
CFRP rupture mainly occurred at the chamfer position in the middle
height of the specimen or at the change of curvature. It was also shown
that the position CFRP rupture is corresponding to the place of the steel
buckling. The typical failure modes of expansive specimens and or-
dinary (unexpansive) specimens are shown in Fig. 7. All specimens have
a certain residual load capacity after failure, which is shown greater
than the ultimate load capacity of the steel. Since the concrete was not
completely peeled off at this time, and it has a certain load capacity. In
the same time, it can be found that the deformation of the section steel
reached the yielding strain.
3.3. Confinement effects on load-carrying capacity of the composite
columns
The combined action in concrete-encased-steel filled square CFRP
tube occurs between CFRP, section steel and concrete. Ignoring the
axial load carrying capacity of the CFRP tube, the nominal ultimate
load capacity Po of the composite column can be given by Eq. (1)
Po = Pco + Pso = f co' Ag + f y As
where is the unconfined concrete strength, fy is the yield strength of
fco'
the steel obtained from the axial compression test, Ag is the concrete
sectional area, and As is the area of the steel section. The results of the
axial compression test are shown in Table 5.
It can be seen from Table 5 that the ultimate load capacity of the
composite column is much larger than the calculated nominal ultimate
load capacity, and its Pu/Po is between 1.14 and 1.86. This is because
the CFRP tube plays a good role in confining the inner core steel-con-
crete column, and the ultimate load carrying capacity of the composite
column is improved under the action of three-direction stress. Previous
study have shown that the FRP’s ultimate tensile strain h, rup measured
1000
500
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-500 Time(days)
Fig. 3. Free expansion test results of concrete.
from columns is less than the strain fu obtained from coupon tensile test
[3]. Meanwhile, it can be seen from Table 5 that the strain reduction
factor k = h, rup/ fu [25] is less than one.
As stated earlier, FRP confined concrete columns have obvious
hysteresis. Previous studies have shown that pouring expansive con-
crete in FRP tubes can solve this problem well [19]. It can be seen from
this study that the CFRP has a more confinement effect on the inner
core steel reinforced concrete column after adding the expansion agent.
For non-prestressed specimens, Pu/Po is between 1.14 and 1.78, while
for prestressed specimens, Pu/Po is between 1.23 and 1.86. For the
specimens of the same number of layers and section steel, the Pu/Po of
the prestressed specimen is higher than that of the non-prestressed
(1) specimen, and the Pu/Po of the expansive test specimen is 1.03–1.13
times of the non-prestressed test specimen. It can be seen from Table 5
that except for the first layer, the strain reduction factors of the pre-
stressed specimens of the same type of steel and the number of layers of
the specimens are higher than that of the non-prestressed specimens,
that is, the hoop failure strain of prestressed specimens is higher. This
shows that CFRP is more fully utilized under prestressing after the
addition of the expansion agent. At the same time, it can be seen from
Fig. 8 that for specimens of the same number of layers and section steel,
the normalized inflection point stress (as discussed by Wu et al. [8]) of
the prestressed specimens is higher than that of the non-prestressed
specimens, because the concrete cracks develops more slowly under

Table 2
Material properties of CFRP.
Type Thickness (mm/ Provided by manufacturer (fiber) Obtained from coupon test (FRP)
layer)
Ultimate tensile Ultimate tensile strain Elasticity modulus Ultimate tensile Ultimate tensile strain Elasticity modulus
strength (MPa) (microstrain) (GPa) strength (MPa) (microstrain) (GPa)

Carbon 0.167 3848 16,033 240 3549 16516.96 214.87

Resin – 45 – 2.62 – – –

4
Q. Cao, et al. Composite Structures 225 (2019) 111106

overlap region

strain gage

strain gage

(a) (b)
Fig. 4. Layout of strain gauges: (a) Strain gauges layout of column surface; (b) Strain gauges layout of steel.

prestressing and it causes the enlargement of elastic region of the

column specimen. 1200

3.4. Confinement effects on load-strain curves of the composite columns 1000

The normalized load-strain curves of CSFSCTs are shown in Fig. 8. microstrain

800
The normalized load-strain curve for concrete-encased-steel filled
square CFRP tube columns is typically bilinear. The normalized load-
600 ES-1
strain curve is roughly divided into an initial linear segment, an elas-
Expansive strain

ES-2
toplastic segment, and an enhanced segment. For the ordinary concrete- ES-3
CSFSCT, at the initial linear section, the section steel and concrete 400
mainly undertakes the load on the composite columns, and CFRP does
not play a role. This is the hysteresis of the CFRP confined concrete
200
column. And then the crack continues to develop, the load-strain curve
turns into the elastoplastic section. As the load increases and the
column expands laterally, CFRP begins to function and enters the 0
strengthening section. At this time, the load is mainly taken by CFRP. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
For the expansive specimens, the hoop strain of the column has an in- Time day
itial value due to the prestressing force. CFRP starts to function from the
Fig. 6. Strain-time curves of expansive specimens during curing.
beginning of the load. The prestressing action eliminates the hysteresis
of the CFRP confined concrete column.
ordinary and expansive concrete specimens. The confinement stiffness
of CFRP on the inner core steel reinforced concrete column is reflected
3.5. Confinement effects associated with the CFRP layers
by the number of CFRP layers. The larger number of the CFRP layers,
the higher the confinement stiffness of CFRP to the core steel reinforced
The normalized load-strain curves of different CFRP layers of the
concrete column. It can be seen from Fig. 9 that as the number of CFRP
CSFSCT column specimens are shown in Fig. 9(a) and (b) for both

25mm thick square steel

loading plate

Fig. 5. Test setup and the layout of the LVDTs.

5
Q. Cao, et al. Composite Structures 225 (2019) 111106

Table 4
Prestress of expensive specimens.
Specimen Strain of FRP (microstrain) Prestress of FRP (MPa) Equivalent prestress of concrete (MPa), f l Prestress of concrete (MPa)

ES-1 1146.9 246.43 0.44 0.33

ES-2 989.4 212.59 0.76 0.57
ES-3 806 173.19 0.93 0.70

of CFRP layers in this stage has less influence on the inner core steel
reinforced concrete column. After entering the elastoplastic stage, the
lateral expansion deformation of the composite column increases, and
the inner core steel concrete column reaches the ultimate load-carrying
capacity, and the axial load begins to be mainly undertaken by CFRP. It
can be seen from Fig. 9 that as the number of CFRP layers increases, the
slope of the second section of the normalized load-strain curve in-
creases.

3.6. Confinement effects from encased steel section

Two types of section steel were used, and the area of the section
steel is different by 1041.8 mm2. It can be seen from Table 5 that for the
composite columns of the same number of layers and the prestressing
(a) (b) level, the average difference of the ultimate load capacity of the two
composite columns of different section steel is 368KN (average Pu,B-
Fig. 7. Failure mode of concrete-encased-steel filled square CFRP tube columns:
Pu,A = 368KN), because the yield load of the profiled steel differs by
(a) Expansive concrete specimen; (b) Ordinary concrete specimen.
approximately 296 KN (284 MPa × 1041.8 mm2 = 296 kN). It can be
seen from Fig. 10(a) that except for OS-3 and ES-1, the Pu/Po of the
CSFSCTs using B type steel is slightly larger than that of the A type steel
layers increases, the Pu/Po of the composite column increases, the
composite column. At the same time, it can be seen from Fig. 10(b) that
maximum growth rate is 30.9%, and this can be seen between OS-3-1 to
the strain reduction factor k of the CSFSCTs with B type steel as a
OS-2-1. At the same time, it can be seen that the ultimate axial strain of
whole is larger than that of the CSFSCTs with A type steel. The average
the composite column also increases, the maximum growth rate is
strain reduction factor of composite columns with B type steel is 0.725
167.9%, and this value is obtained from ES-2-2 relative to ES-1-2, in-
which is higher than 0.683 the average strain reduction factor of
dicating that the ductility of the composite column increases with the
CSFSCTs with A type steel, which explains that, to some extent, the
increase of the number of CFRP layers. Moreover, it can be seen from
confinement effect of CFRP on the reinforced concrete column with B
Fig. 9 that the normalized load-strain curves of CSFSCTs with different
type steel is higher.
layers in the elastic stage are basically coincident, because the hoop
deformation of the concrete is small in the elastic stage, and the number

Table 5
Test results.
Specimen Pu AveragePu Po Average Pu /Po cu Average cu h, rup Average h, rup k

OS-1-1-01 1394 1421.5 1242.31 1.14 −0.0065 −0.00676 0.0112 0.01179 0.714
OS-1-1-02 1449 −0.00702 0.01238
OS-1-2-01 – 1712 1492.9 1.15 −0.00825 0.0125 0.757
OS-1-2-02 1712 −0.00825 0.0125
OS-2-1-01 1659 1684.5 1242.31 1.36 −0.01424 −0.01371 0.01015 0.009755 0.591
OS-2-1-02 1710 −0.01317 0.00936
OS-2-2-01 2077 2165.5 1492.9 1.45 −0.01337 −0.01322 0.0107 0.011425 0.692
OS-2-2-02 2254 −0.01306 0.01215
OS-3-1-01 2187 2208 1242.31 1.78 −0.02104 −0.01906 0.01121 0.01153 0.698
OS-3-1-02 2229 −0.01707 0.01185
OS-3-2-01 2428 2451.5 1492.9 1.64 −0.01721 −0.01771 0.00934 0.011925 0.722
OS-3-2-02 2475 −0.0182 0.01451
ES-1-1-01 1425 1414 1104.8 1.28 −0.00467 −0.00485 0.01282 0.01177 0.713
ES-1-1-02 1403 −0.00503 0.01072
ES-1-2-01 1711 1679 1362.38 1.23 −0.0058 −0.00579 0.01226 0.012305 0.745
ES-1-2-02 1647 −0.00577 0.01235
ES-2-1-01 1710 1689.5 1104.8 1.53 −0.01473 −0.01298 0.01176 0.010875 0.658
ES-2-1-02 1669 −0.01123 0.00999
ES-2-2-01 2187 2105.5 1362.38 1.55 −0.0191 −0.01554 0.01253 0.01175 0.711
ES-2-2-02 2024 −0.01197 0.01097
ES-3-1-01 2134 2018 1104.8 1.83 −0.01663 −0.01835 0.01296 0.01196 0.724
ES-3-1-02 1902 −0.02006 0.01096
ES-3-2-01 2572 2531 1362.38 1.86 −0.01351 −0.0158 0.01259 0.01194 0.723
ES-3-2-02 2490 −0.01809 0.01129

6
Q. Cao, et al. Composite Structures 225 (2019) 111106

1.4 1.4

1.2 1.2

1.0 1.0

0.8 0.8
OS-1-2-02

PU/PO
OS-1-1-01
PU/PO
ES-1-2-01
0.6 OS-1-1-02 0.6
ES-1-2-02
ES-1-1-01
ES-1-1-02 0.4
0.4

0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0
-0.010 -0.005 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 -0.010 -0.005 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015
Axial strain Hoop strain axial strain hoop strain

(a) (b)
1.8
1.6
1.6
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.2

1.0
1.0

PU/PO
0.8 OS-2-1-01 0.8 OS-2-2-01
PU/PO

OS-2-1-02 OS-2-2-02
0.6 ES-2-1-01 0.6 ES-2-2-01
ES-2-1-02
ES-2-2-02
0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0
-0.015 -0.010 -0.005 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 -0.020 -0.015 -0.010 -0.005 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015
axial strain hoop strain axial strain hoop strain

(c) (d)

2.0
2.0
PU/PO
PU/PO

1.5
1.5

1.0
1.0
OS-3-2-01
OS-3-1-01
OS-3-2-02
OS-3-1-02
ES-3-1-01 ES-3-2-01
0.5
0.5
ES-3-1-02 ES-3-2-02

0.0 0.0
-0.025 -0.020 -0.015 -0.010 -0.005 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 -0.020 -0.015 -0.010 -0.005 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020
axial strain hoop strain axial strain hoop strain

(e) (f)
Fig. 8. Normalized load-strain curves of the composite columns: (a) OS/ES-1-1; (b) OS/ES-1-2; (c) OS/ES-2-1; (d) OS/ES-2-2; (e) OS/ES-3-1; (f) OS/ES-3-2.

7
Q. Cao, et al. Composite Structures 225 (2019) 111106

2.0
2.0

PU/PO
PU/PO
1.5
1.5

1.0
1.0
ES-1-1
OS-1-1 ES-2-1
OS-2-1 ES-3-1
0.5
OS-3-1
0.5

0.0 0.0
-0.025 -0.020 -0.015 -0.010 -0.005 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 -0.020 -0.015 -0.010 -0.005 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015
Axial strain Hoop strain Axial strain Hoop strain

(a) (b)
Fig. 9. Comparison of normalized load-strain curves for specimens with different layers.

4. Analytical solutions for FRP-confined expansive concrete in the effective confined area under FRP wrapping, as shown in Fig. 12.
square columns The lateral confining pressure, fl , from FRP wrapping on a square sec-
tion, illustrated in Fig. 11 is equivalent to the pressure on a circle with a
4.1. FRP-confined concrete strength and ultimate axial strain in square diameter of D (= 2 b 2r ( 2 1) ) (see Fig. 12).
columns 2Ef fu t
fl =
D (3)
Much research [12–16] has been directed to the prediction of FRP-
confined concrete strength. These studies demonstrated that the FRP where Ef is the elastic modulus of the FRP material, fu is the tensile
confinement to the concrete core results from the rupture of FRP ma- rupture strain of FRP, t is the thickness of FRP.
terials associated with the concrete dilation, as shown in Fig. 11. The The rectangular section with rounded corners is shown in Fig. 12,
compressive strength of the FRP-confined concrete in square column, where the shaded area is defined as the effective confined concrete core
fcc' , could be given as a function of the lateral confining pressure, fl , by by FRP material with an area of Ac. Thus, the shape factor, ks, is defined
the form [26]: as the ratio of the effective confined area over the entire square area Ag
[26]:
fcc' fl
= 1 + k1 ks (1 2 b ) 2
r
fco' fco' (2) Ac 2
ks = =1 r
Ag 3 1 (4 )( b ) 2 (4)
where, k1 = confinement effectiveness coefficient and the literature
revealed that this coefficient has been defined as a constant value, where b is the side length of the square column and r is the corner
varying from 2 to 3.5 (based on the data curve fitting), as well as a radius. In this case, we have b = 150 mm and r = 30 mm, and thus the
nonlinear form with respect to fco' . ks = the shape factor associated with shape factor ks is about 0.75 .

2.0
1.86 0.8
1.78 1.83 0.757 0.745
1.8 0.714 0.713 0.724 0.722 0.711 0.723
0.698
1.64 0.7
0.658
0.692

1.6 1.53 1.55

1.45 0.591
1.36 0.6
1.4
1.28 1.23
K

1.15
Pu/Po

1.2 1.14 0.5

OS-1
1.0 0.4 OS-2
OS-1
0.8
OS-3
OS-2
0.3 ES-1
OS-3
0.6 ES-2
ES-1
0.2 ES-3
0.4 ES-2
ES-3
0.1
0.2

0.0 0.0
A B A B
Steel type Steel type

(a) (b)
Fig. 10. Comparison between different types of steel: (a) Pu/Po; (b)k .

8
Q. Cao, et al. Composite Structures 225 (2019) 111106

f cc
Concrete dilation f cc

FRP-confined
f co

Stress
fl (passive confinement concrete
from FRP wrapping)
Unconfined
concrete
Ec

co cu
Equivalent circular section Strain

Fig. 11. FRP-confined concrete and associated stress-strain relation.

f cc
= 1 + ks g (f l )
fco' (6)
Effective confined
where, ks = the shape factor as defined in Eq. (4); g (f l )=confinement
area, Ac
D effectiveness associated with fl that can be determined by a constant
value (e.g., k3 = 3.5 [27] or = 4.1 [28]).
Unconfined area
f cc fl
= 1 + k3 ks
r fco' f co' (7a)
450
or a nonlinear form [29]
b
' 0.06
fco
Fig. 12. Shape factor associated with the FRP-confined square sections. f cc fl
= 1 + 5.2ks f co' 0.09
fco' f co' (7b)
Similarly, the ultimate axial strain is defined based on Lam and
Teng’s literature [26]: where, fl =the equivalent prestress generated from expansive concrete,
see Table 4. Based on [28]
0.45
cu fl h, rup
= 1.75 + k2 ks f cc
co f co' co (5) cc
=1+5 1
co fco' (8)
where cu = the ultimate strain of the confined concrete; co = the peak
strain of the unconfined concrete, taken as 0.002; h, rup = the actual From Eq. (7a) and Eq. (8), the following relationship can be ob-
hoop rupture strain of the FRP material, as listed in Table 5; and tained
k2 = the strain enhancement factor, which could be taken as a constant fl
cc
value (e.g., k2 = 12 used in Lam and Teng [26]). = 1 + 5k3 ks
co f co' (9)

4.2. Actively confined concrete strength associated with prestress from

expansive concrete
As illustrated in Fig. 13, the peak strength of actively confined
concrete in square column, f cc , could be defined with respect to the
lateral prestressing, fl , by the form:
4.3. FRP-confined expansive concrete strength and ultimate strain in square
columns
By integrating both active and passive confinement effects on the
concrete core, as illustrated from Fig. 14 the compressive strength of

f cc
Actively confined concrete
f cc

f cco
f l (active confinement
from expansive
Stress

concrete)
Unconfined
Ec
concrete
co cc cu
Strain
Fig. 13. Actively confined concrete and associated stress-strain relation.

9
Q. Cao, et al. Composite Structures 225 (2019) 111106

f cc
f cc
Concrete dilation
FRP-confined + active
f cc*

Stress
fl fl f co FRP-confined
(active + passive confinement)

Unconfined
Ec

co Strain cu

Fig. 14. FRP-confined expansive concrete in an equivalent circular column.

the FRP-confined expansive concrete in square column, fcc' , could be 4.4. Comparison of the predicted results with experimental data
written by the form:
fcc = +k1 ks fl = fco + k1 ks fl + k3 ks f l A total of 23 data points was available for comparisons between the
Passive (10a) predictions of the proposed models in Eqs. (11) and (13) and the ex-
Active
perimental results for the compressive strength and the ultimate axial
or in the normalized form: strain of FRP-confined expansive concrete in square columns. Fig. 15(a)
and (b) were plotted for assessing performance of the proposed models
fcc' fl fl
= 1 + k1 ks + k3 ks over test data for compressive strength and ultimate strain, while the
fco' fco' f co' (10b) results for compressive strength were also listed in Table 6. Clearly, the
errors between theoretical values and the experimental results for
where, the second term accounts for the FRP-induced passive confine-
compressive concrete strength are basically within 15% with reason-
ment, while the third term is responsible for the active confinement due
able accuracy. It can be inferred that the ultimate concrete strength of
to expansive concrete-generated prestressing. For a simplicity, the
the FRP confined concrete square column can be well predicted by
coefficients used in Eq. (10b) are determined using the constant value
using the above models. It can be found that the models were equally
in accordance with the literature (k1 = 3.3 [26] and k3 = 3.5 [27]), and
applicable to non-prestressed and prestressed specimens. In addition, it
thus Eq. (10b) is reduced into
can be seen that the above model predicted fcc' of column with type A
fcc' fl fl steel with a higher accuracy than that of columns with type B steel (e.g.,
= 1 + 3.3ks + 3.5ks fcc' ,Cal /f cc' ,Exp ) Type A: (fcc' ,Cal /f cc' ,Exp ) Type B = 1.07:0.89 at the group ES-3). It
fco' f co' f co' (11)
indicates that cross sectional area of steel exhibits a certain influence on
Similarly, the ultimate strain of the FRP-confined expansive con- the prediction of the ultimate strength of concrete. It can be explained
crete in a square column can be defined by the integration of passive that with the increase of encased steel section, the concrete could ex-
and active confinement effects with k2 = 12 and k3 = 3.5 as shown in perience better confined confinement. As a result, the specimens with
Eqs. (5) and (9): encased type B steel exhibited a relatively higher capacity and ultimate
0.45
concrete strength.
cu cc fl h, rup Similarly, 23 data points were used for comparisons for the ultimate
= 1 + 1.75 + k2 ks
co co fco' co axial strain of the composite columns. As illustrated in Fig. 15(b), the
fl h, rup
0.45
fl trend line showed that the present model in Eq. (13) was less accurate
= 1.75 + k2 ks + 5k3 ks in predicting the ultimate axial strain, as compared to that for com-
f co' co f co' (12)
pressive strength, as identified elsewhere [26] that it was difficult to
Introducing the coefficients, k2 = 12 and k3 = 3.5, in Eq. (12) yields find a satisfactory model for the ultimate axial strain. The present
model resulted in the higher values for the ultimate axial strain over the
0.45
cu fl h, rup fl experimental data, particularly for one-layer-FRP-confined expansive
= 1.75 + 12ks + 17.5ks
co f co' co f co' (13) concrete specimens. It may be partially due to the fact that one-layer
f cc / f co

/ co
cu
Experimental

Experimental

23 data points 23 data points

Theoretical f cc / f co Theoretical /
cu co

(a) (b)
Fig. 15. Performance of the proposed models for compressive strength and ultimate strain: (a) Compressive strength; (b) Ultimate strain.

10
Q. Cao, et al. Composite Structures 225 (2019) 111106

Table 6
Comparison of theoretical predictions with experimental values.
Specimen '
f co (MPa) fl (MPa) f l (MPa) '
f cc,Exp (MPa) '
f cc,Cal (MPa) f cc' ,Cal /fcc' ,Exp Relative error (%)+

OS-1-1-1 43.51 6.33 0 50.92 59.21 1.16 16.3

OS-1-1-2 43.51 6.33 0 53.60 59.21 1.10 10.5
OS-1-2-1 43.51 6.33 0 – – – –
OS-1-2-2 43.51 6.33 0 54.78 59.21 1.08 8.1
OS-2-1-1 43.51 12.66 0 63.85 74.90 1.17 17.3
OS-2-1-2 43.51 12.66 0 66.34 74.90 1.13 12.9
OS-2-2-1 43.51 12.66 0 73.54 74.90 1.02 1.9
OS-2-2-2 43.51 12.66 0 82.64 74.90 0.91 −9.4
OS-3-1-1 43.51 18.99 0 89.61 90.60 1.01 1.1
OS-3-1-2 43.51 18.99 0 91.66 90.60 0.99 −1.2
OS-3-2-1 43.51 18.99 0 91.59 90.60 0.99 −1.1
OS-3-2-2 43.51 18.99 0 94.01 90.60 0.96 −3.6
ES-1-1-1 36.8 6.33 0.44 52.43 54.03 1.03 2.3
ES-1-1-2 36.8 6.33 0.44 51.35 54.03 1.05 4.5
ES-1-2-1 36.8 6.33 0.44 54.73 54.03 0.99 −2.0
ES-1-2-2 36.8 6.33 0.44 51.44 54.03 1.05 4.3
ES-2-1-1 36.8 12.66 0.76 66.34 70.85 1.07 5.8
ES-2-1-2 36.8 12.66 0.76 64.33 70.85 1.10 9.1
ES-2-2-1 36.8 12.66 0.76 79.20 70.85 0.89 −11.4
ES-2-2-2 36.8 12.66 0.76 70.82 70.85 1.00 −0.9
ES-3-1-1 36.8 18.99 0.93 87.03 87.13 1.00 −0.8
ES-3-1-2 36.8 18.99 0.93 75.70 87.13 1.15 14.0
ES-3-2-1 36.8 18.99 0.93 98.99 87.13 0.88 −12.8
ES-3-2-2 36.8 18.99 0.93 94.78 87.13 0.92 −8.9

+
Note: relative error = (f cc' ,Cal f cc' ,Exp )/f cc' ,Exp .

FRP wrapping could only provide a light confinement stiffness and
could likely lead to local failure of concrete and associated FRP rupture,
as observed in Fig. 8(a) and (b). Therefore, the experimental ultimate
hoop strain and corresponding axial strain of expansive specimens with
one-layer CFRP was much smaller than those of predicted ones.
strain. A further study is necessary for the more accurate models to
describe the peak strain and ultimate axial strain of confined con-
crete, particularly under different prestress levels.
Acknowledgements

5. Conclusions Authors would like to acknowledge the financial support provided

Based on the results of the present study, the following conclusions
could be drawn:
a) Test results show that controlled expansive concrete could eliminate
the issues associated with concrete shrinkage, and the more im-
portantly, the expansion produces a prestress as active confinement
to concrete core. Similarly, to square columns, prestress was formed
in CFRP and concrete due to the expansion of the concrete and the
confinement of the square CFRP tube. As the number of CFRP layers
increases, prestress in FRP decreases and the prestress in the con-
crete increases.
b) The ultimate load capacity of CSFSCTs is greater than its nominal
load carrying capacity, and its Pu/Po is between 1.14 and 1.86. It
indicates a good confinement effect of CFRP tube on core concrete-
encased-steel. Meanwhile, the ultimate load capacity of the spe-
cimen increases with the number of CFRP layers and steel section. It
can be seen from test results that the ultimate axial strains are far
greater than concrete axial strains, which indicates CSFSCTs show a
very ductile response under axial compression.
c) Test results show that the strength of expansive concrete-CSFSCTs
are higher than those of ordinary concrete specimens. It demon-
strates that the Pu/Po of the expansive concrete-CSFSCTs is
1.03–1.13 times of that of ordinary specimens which shows the
benefit of using expansive concrete. The normalized inflection stress
of expansive concrete-CSFSCTs was shown higher than that of or-
dinary specimens.
d) The present models were formulated to account for active and
passive confinements to concrete strength and ultimate axial strain.
Comparison revealed that the model had a higher accuracy in pre-
dicting confined compressive strength, but less for ultimate axial
by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Under Grants
51421064), the Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Province,
China (Project No. 20170540168), and the Fundamental Research
Funds for the Central Universities (Project No. DUT17JC02).
References
[1] Jesus M, Lobo PS, Faustino P. Design models for circular and square RC columns
confined with GFRP sheets under axial compression. Compos B Eng 2018;141:60–9.
[2] Zhan JD, Wu YJ, Zhou XY, Chen XG. The analysis of prestressed short FRP confined
columns under the action of eccentric load. Appl Mech Mater
2014;496–500:2421–5.
[3] Xiao Y, Wu H. Compressive behavior of concrete confined by carbon fiber composite
jackets. J Mater Civ Eng ASCE 2000;12:139–46.
[4] Berthet JF, Ferrier E, Hamelin P. Compressive behavior of concrete externally
confined by composite jackets. Part A: experimental study. Constr Build Mater
2005;19:223–32.
[5] Lam L, Teng JG. Ultimate condition of fiber reinforced polymer-confined concrete. J
Compos Constr ASCE 2004;8:539–48.
[6] Wang LM, Wu YF. Effect of corner radius on the performance of CFRP-confined
square concrete columns: Test. Eng Struct 2008;30:493–505.
[7] Rochette Pierre, Labossie‘re Pierre. Axial testing of rectangular column models
confined with composites. J Compos Constr ASCE 2000;4:129–36.
[8] Wu G, Wu ZS, Lu ZT. Design-oriented stress–strain model for concrete prisms con-
fined with FRP composites. Constr Build Mater 2007;21:1107–21.
[9] Wu YF, Wang LM. Unified strength model for square and circular concrete columns
confined by external Jacket. J Struct Eng ASCE 2009;135:253–61.
[10] Chen LP, Ozbakkaloglu T. Corner strengthening of square and rectangular concrete-
filled FRP tubes. Eng Struct 2016;117:486–95.
[11] Karimi K, Tait MJ, El-Dakhakhni WW. Testing and modeling of a novel FRP-encased
steel–concrete composite column. Compos Struct 2011;93:1463–73.
[12] Yu T, Lin G, Zhang SS. Compressive behavior of FRP-confined concrete-encased
steel columns. Compos Struct 2016;154:493–506.
[13] Huang L, Yu T, Zhang SS, Wang ZY. FRP-confined concrete-encased cross-shaped
steel columns: concept and behaviour. Eng Struct 2017;152:348–58.
[14] Karimi K, Tait MJ, El-Dakhakhni WW. Analytical modeling and axial load design of
a novel FRP-encased steel–concrete composite column for various slenderness ra-
tios. Eng Struct 2013;46:526–34.

11
Q. Cao, et al.
[15] Huang L, Zhang SS, Yu T. Concrete-encased steel columns confined with large
rupture strain FRP composites: axial compression tests. Australasian Conference on
the Mechanics of Structures and Materials. 2016.
[16] Karimi K, El-Dakhakhni WW, Tait MJ. Performance enhancement of steel columns
using concrete-filled composite jackets. J Perform Constr Facilit ASCE
2011;25:189–201.
[17] Ozbakkaloglu T, Jian CL, Vincent T. FRP-confined concrete in circular sections:
review and assessment of stress–strain models. Eng Struct 2013;49:1068–88.
[18] Mortazavi AA, Pilakoutas K, Son KS. RC column strengthening by lateral pre-ten-
sioning of FRP. Constr Build Mater 2003;17:491–7.
[19] Cao Q, Tao JJ, Ma ZJ, Wu ZM. Axial compressive behavior of CFRP-confined ex-
pansive concrete columns. ACI Struct J 2017;114:475–85.
[20] Cao Q, Li XJ, Zhou JP, Ma ZJ. Expansive concrete confined by CFRP under eccentric
compression. Constr Build Mater 2019;208:113–24.
[21] Vincent T, Ozbakkaloglu T. Compressive behavior of prestressed high-strength
concrete-filled aramid FRP Tube columns: experimental observations. J Compos
Constr ASCE 2015;19:04015003.
[22] Cao Q, Tao JJ, Wu ZM, Ma ZJ. Behavior of FRP-steel confined concrete tubular
12
Composite Structures 225 (2019) 111106
columns made of expansive self-consolidating concrete under axial compression. J
Compos Constr 2017;21:04017037.
[23] Yan Z, Pantelides CP, Reaveley LD. Fiber-reinforced polymer jacketed and shape-
modified compression members: I-Experimental behavior. ACI Struct J
2006;103:885–93.
[24] Yan Z, Pantelides CP, Reaveley LD. Posttensioned FRP composite shells for concrete
confinement. J Compos Constr 2007;11:81–90.
[25] Ozbakkaloglu T, Akin E. Behavior of FRP-confined normal- and high-strength
concrete under cyclic axial compression. J Compos Constr ASCE 2012;16:451–63.
[26] Lam L, Teng JG. Design-oriented stress-strain model for FRP-confined concrete in
rectangular columns. J Reinf Plast Compos 2003;22:1149–86.
[27] Jiang T, Teng JG. Analysis-oriented stress–strain models for FRP–confined concrete.
Eng Struct 2007;29:2968–86.
[28] Richard FE, Brandtazaeg A, Brown RL. A study of failure of concrete under com-
bined compressive stress. Engineering Experiment Station: University of IIIinois,
Urbana; 1928.
[29] Lim JC, Ozbakkaloglu T. Stress–strain model for normal- and light-weight concretes
under uniaxial and triaxial compression. Constr Build Mater 2014;71:492–509.