Engineering Structures 174 (2018) 701–711

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

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

Behavior of slender UHPC columns under eccentric loading T

⁎
Chung-Chan Hung , Fuo-Yao Hu, Cheng-Hao Yen
Department of Civil Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, No. 1, University Rd, Tainan City 701, Taiwan

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The behavior of slender ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC) columns under eccentric loading was in-
High-strength concrete vestigated in this study. Eight slender UHPC columns were tested, with the major experimental variables being
Slender columns the amounts of confinement steel and steel fibers. The behavior of the columns was evaluated using various
Strengthening performance measures, including the failure pattern, load–deflection relationship, ductility, steel reinforcement
Steel fibers
strain, and axial load–moment interaction diagram. Results showed that the inclusion of steel fibers with a
volume fraction of 0.75% or more effectively restrained spalling and crushing of the slender UHPC columns. In
particular, the inclusion of a 1.5% volume fraction of steel fibers was able to compensate a 70% reduction in the
confinement steel while still promoting the ductility of the slender columns under eccentric loading.
Furthermore, analytical studies were conducted to estimate the crushing strain of the UHPC material in the
outermost fiber of the column section under a combined flexural and axial action. The applicability of an
analytical procedure and the current design codes for evaluating the total moment demand of the slender UHPC
columns under the influence of the P-Delta effect were also evaluated.

1. Introduction
Ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC) is an emerging cement-
based composite that has an ultra-high compressive strength [1–4]. The
ultra-high strength of UHPC is derived from a tailored mixing design,
which has a high cementitious material content and an optimized
gradation of granular materials with no or minimal coarse aggregate.
When UHPC is reinforced with short, discontinuous fibers, it gains a
strain-hardening behavior under uniaxial tension, and features a da-
mage pattern of closely spaced narrow cracks [5] due to the bridging
effect of the fibers. The inclusion of fibers also provides a confining
effect that enables UHPC to exhibit a substantially higher compression
ductility and strength retention when compared to conventional high-
strength concrete materials. Due to the appealing properties, the
number of studies on UHPC has been increasing exponentially in recent
years. The primary research areas of UHPC can be generally categorized
into material design and properties [5–9], structural behavior
[4,10–16], development of innovative composites [17–20], and struc-
tural retrofitting and strengthening [21–25].
Abdulkareem et al. [6] developed a new mixture of UHPC with
improved sustainability. The early age properties of the developed
UHPC were studied. It was found that the use of chemical activator of
potassium hydroxide in UHPC with a high content of blast furnace slag
caused slag’s dissolution and reaction, which increased the compressive
strength at early ages. Yang et al. [4] studied the bending behavior of
UHPC structural beams. The study showed that the steel fiber-re-
inforced UHPC beams exhibited ductile behavior with a ductility index
ranging between 1.60 and 3.75. Liu et al. [13,14] investigated the re-
sponses of UHPC subjected to impacts and blasts. It was found that the
UHPC column preserved more than 70% of its loading capacity after
35 kg TNT detonation, while the high strength concrete column only
maintained 40% loading capacity after 8 kg TNT detonation.
Yoo et al. [16] studied the flexural behavior of UHPC beams re-
inforced with glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) rebar and hybrid
reinforcements. It was found that both AFGC/SETRA [26] and JSCE
[27] recommendations were appropriate for predicting the mo-
ment–curvature response of UHPC beams with GFRP rebar and hybrid
reinforcements. Hung and Chueh [17] studied the cyclic flexural per-
formance of UHPC structural beams reinforced with high-strength steel
rebar. Their results showed that the addition of steel fibers substantially
enhanced the damage tolerance ability of the high-strength beams, even
when the fibers were used only in the top and bottom sections of the
beam. Hung et al. [18] experimentally investigated the seismic beha-
vior of squat UHPC shear walls. It was found that the brittle shear-
critical behavior of the squat UHPC wall was transformed into ductile
flexural-dominant behavior via the inclusion of steel fibers with a vo-
lume fraction of 1.5%. The proposed advanced concrete members not
only took advantage of the ultra-high mechanical properties of high-

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: cchung@mail.ncku.edu.tw (C.-C. Hung).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.07.088
Received 16 March 2018; Received in revised form 26 July 2018; Accepted 29 July 2018
0141-0296/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
C.-C. Hung et al.
strength steel and UHPC materials, but also resolved the concern of the
potential premature failure for high-strength reinforcement and con-
crete. Ferrier et al. [19,20] studied the behavior of UHPC elements
reinforced with FRP bars. This new type of UHPC elements was de-
signed to be lightweight and to be able to sustain large force demands.
Palacios et al. [10] studied the cyclic behavior of a steel-reinforced
column with the plastic hinge region fabricated using UHPC. Their
experimental results showed that the use of UHPC completely changed
the typical failure mode of the concrete columns as it improved con-
finement and prevented concrete crushing. Hor et al. [22] experimen-
tally studied the behavior of reinforced concrete slabs strengthened
with UHPC. It was found that the UHPC overlay delayed the develop-
ment of shear cracking. Ricker et al. [24] investigated the punching
strength of flat plates reinforced with UHPC and double-headed studs.
The test results showed that the slabs including a UHPC element had
significantly higher strength capacity compared to the counterparts
without UHPC. Lampropoulos et al. [25] studied the efficiency of using
UHPC to strengthen existing reinforced concrete beams. It was de-
monstrated that the beams strengthened with three UHPC side jackets
exhibited satisfactory structural performance.
While benefits in terms of design and performance can be foreseen
when using UHPC to replace conventional concrete materials in steel-
reinforced structural members, the behavior of steel-reinforced UHPC
members has yet to be fully understood. For example, although it
permits a considerable reduction in the cross-sectional dimensions of
concrete columns, the increased slenderness effect could adversely in-
fluence the behavior of the columns. The non-negligible slender effect
will magnify the deflection and moment demand of the slender UHPC
columns due to its interaction with the axial load, i.e., the P-Delta ef-
fect, which may cause the slender UHPC columns to have a reduced
load-resistant capacity.
In response, the present study investigated the behavior of steel-
reinforced slender UHPC columns under eccentric loading. The influ-
ence of various design variables on the performance of the columns was
examined, including the (1) stirrup spacing, (2) crossties, and (3)
amount of short discontinuous fibers. In addition to the experimental
study, the applicability of current design practices and an analytical
method for estimating the total moment demand of slender UHPC
columns with non-negligible P-Delta effects were evaluated.
2. Column specimens
Eight slender UHPC column members were fabricated and tested in
this study. The geometries of the members were identical, as shown in
Fig. 1. Each column member had a test region with dimensions of
200 mm × 200 mm × 1200 mm, as well as enlarged cross-sections at
the two ends to limit the damage to the test region during the test.
2.1. Materials
The mix proportions of the UHPC material are summarized in
Table 1. The components included Type I ordinary Portland cement,
silica fume, silica sand (with particle sizes ranging between 0.1 mm and
0.3 mm), quartz powder, water, polycarboxylate-based superplasticizer,
and high-strength hooked steel fibers. The UHPC material contained
either a 0%, 0.75%, or 1.5% volume fraction (Vf ) of steel fibers. The
employed steel fibers had a length of 30 mm, a diameter of 0.38 mm, an
elastic modulus of 201 GPa, and a nominal yield strength of 3070 MPa.
The UHPC materials had a designed 28-day compressive strength of
120 MPa. As such, due to the capacity limit of the hydraulic actuator for
eccentric loading, the columns were tested on the 21st day.
The columns were reinforced with D10 and D16 steel bars that had a
nominal yield strength of 420 MPa. The actual tensile properties of the
steel reinforcements, which were obtained using direct tensile tests, are
summarized in Table 2.
702
Engineering Structures 174 (2018) 701–711
2.2. Column design
The major design variables of the column members included (1) the
amount of steel fibers and (2) the transverse reinforcement. The spacing
of the transverse reinforcement was s = h/4 or h/2 (i.e., 50 mm or
100 mm), where h is the minimum cross-sectional dimension of the
column (200 mm). Two transverse reinforcement configurations were
used in the columns. The first configuration was a D10(#3) perimeter
hoop without any crossties. The other configuration was a D10(#3)
perimeter hoop with a D10(#3) crosstie having 135-degree seismic
hooks each way, which allowed every longitudinal steel bar around the
perimeter of the column core to be laterally supported by either the
corner of a hoop or a seismic hook, as required by ACI 318 [28] for fc′
larger than 68 MPa. The notations and reinforcement details of the
column members are summarized in Table 3. The numbers following
“H” and “T” are the spacings of the perimeter hoops and crossties, re-
spectively, except where a “0” is used to represent none. The number
following “F” denotes the volume fraction of the steel fibers. For ex-
ample, “H5T0-F150” denotes a column having 5 mm-spaced perimeter
hoops, without crossties, and having steel fibers with a 1.5% volume
fraction. The H5T5-F0 column, which was designed to conform to ACI
318 [28], was the control specimen in this study.
3. Test instrumentation and load protocol
3.1. Tensile and compressive tests for UHPC
The compressive strength, fc′, of the UHPC materials was obtained
using compressive tests on 75 mm × 150 mm cylinder specimens. The
compressive tests were conducted according to ASTM C39. The tensile
behavior of the UHPC materials was identified by performing direct
tensile tests on dog-bone specimens, the configuration, dimensions, and
test setup of which are presented in Fig. 2. During the tensile test, the
magnitude of the applied force was measured using a load cell directly
connected to the actuator. The elongation of the specimen within a
gauge length of 160 mm was monitored using two linear variable dis-
placement transducers (LVDTs) mounted on either side of the specimen.
Although such an LVDT setup, which has been widely adopted by other
studies due to its efficiency, generally captures the elongation of spe-
cimens with reasonable accuracy, it should be noted that the accuracy
of the measurement can be further enhanced by using two additional
LVDTs on the other two faces of the specimen. This is because the use of
four LVDTs addresses the deformation state of the entire cross section,
including the behavior of out-of-plane bending. Both the compressive
and tensile tests were performed using a displacement control proce-
dure with a loading rate of 0.01 mm/s to simulate the quasi-static
loading condition. For each batch of UHPC material used for casting the
column members, three compressive specimens and three tensile spe-
cimens were fabricated and tested. The material tests were performed
within 24 h before or after testing the corresponding column member.
The average of the three test results was employed as the representative
material property.
3.2. Eccentric loading tests
The columns were tested under eccentric axial loading. The test
setup is shown in Fig. 1(b). The two ends of each column member were
pin-linked to steel connecters fixed to a strong floor and a hydraulic
actuator, respectively. The pin connections allowed free rotation in the
test plane of the column while constraining the degrees of freedom
associated with translations. The erected column member, which had a
kℓ
slender ratio of r u = 40 , was categorized as a slender column according
to ACI 318 [28]. Moreover, the experimental test was designed for the
columns to show a tensile-controlled failure pattern under a combined
axial and bending action. This was achieved by applying an axial force
with an eccentricity of 260 mm, which was larger than the eccentricity
C.-C. Hung et al. Engineering Structures 174 (2018) 701–711

Fig. 1. Design of the eccentrically loaded columns.

Table 1 Table 3
Mix proportions of UHPC (proportion by weight except for fibers). Reinforcement details of the slender UHPC columns.
Type I Silica Silica sand Quartz Water and Fiber (by Column Steel reinforcement Vf (%)
Portland fume powder superplasticizer volume)
cement Longitudinal Transverse

1 0.22 0.5 0.39 0.28 0%, 0.75% Rebar ρl (%) Hoop Crosstie ρt (%)
or 1.5%
H5T0-F0 8-D16 4.0 D10@50 mm None 1.8 0
H5T0-F150 D10@50 mm None 1.8 1.5
H5T5-F0 D10@50 mm D10@50 mm 2.7 0
Table 2
H5T5-F75 D10@50 mm D10@50 mm 2.7 0.75
Tensile properties of steel bars.
H10T0-F0 D10@ None 0.9 0
Size/ Yield strain Yield strength Ultimate Elongation (%) 100 mm
diameter (MPa) strength (MPa) H10T0-F150 D10@ None 0.9 1.5
100 mm
D10 (#3) 0.0025 459 612 11.0 H10T10-F0 D10@ D10@ 1.3 0
D16 (#5) 0.0022 439 630 13.6 100 mm 100 mm
H10T10- D10@ D10@ 1.3 1.5
F150 100 mm 100 mm

corresponding to the tension-controlled limit of the columns (140 mm).

During the test, an eccentric compressive load was monotonically
applied to the column using a hydraulic actuator with a loading capa-
city of 5000 kN at a rate of 0.01 mm/s. The magnitude of the applied
vertical force was measured using a load cell connected to the actuator.
The test was forced to terminate when the applied load decreased to
less than 60% of the peak strength of the column. In order to monitor
the deformation of the columns, an Optotrak Certus optical measure-
ment system, consisting of markers and optical cameras, was employed.
An array of Optotrak markers in grids of 70 mm × 200 mm was at-
tached to one side of the column, as illustrated in Fig. 3.
The deflection, second-order bending moment demand, and average
axial strain of the tested columns were determined using the monitored
positions of the Optotrak markers. The deflection of the column was
obtained by taking the maximum value of the average lateral dis-
placements of the three Optotrak markers in each row of the grid. The
second-order bending moment demand was determined as the product
of the computed deflection multiplied by the corresponding axial force.
The average axial strain of the column was evaluated as
3
∑i = 1 ΔLi /(3L0, i ) , where ΔLi represents the change in the initial length of
Note: ρl and ρt are the reinforcement ratios in the longitudinal and transverse
directions, respectively, and Vf is the volume fraction of steel fibers in the
column.
the column’s test region L0, i for the ith column of the grid.
The strains of the steel reinforcements during the tests were mon-
itored using a dense array of strain gauges. Three sets of strain gauges
spaced every 300 mm in the longitudinal direction were deployed
within the mid-height region of each column. For every set of strain
gauges, if the specified steel reinforcement was present, one strain
gauge was attached to the perimeter hoops in each direction, one strain
gauge was attached to the crosstie in the deflection direction of the
column, and two strain gauges were attached to the longitudinal re-
inforcement.
4. Evaluation of the experimental results
4.1. Mechanical properties of the UHPC materials
The tensile and compressive properties of the UHPC materials are

703
C.-C. Hung et al.
Fig. 2. Dog-bone specimens.
Fig. 3. Locations of the installed Optotrak markers.
summarized in Table 4. Meanwhile, Fig. 4 shows the representative
uniaxial tensile stress-strain curves of the UHPC materials with varying
amounts of steel fibers. It can be seen that the inclusion of steel fibers
enabled the UHPC material to exhibit tensile strain-hardening behavior,
followed by gradual softening. This tensile strain-hardening behavior
provides evidence of the potent bridging effect provided by the fibers
that enabled the internal force to be transferred across the cracks to
704
Engineering Structures 174 (2018) 701–711
undamaged regions. In particular, the peak tensile strength, peak ten-
sile strain (i.e., the strain at the peak tensile strength), and ultimate
tensile strain were all increased along with Vf . On the other hand, the
inclusion of steel fibers had no observable influence on the compressive
strength of the UHPC material, which showed an average compressive
strength of about 103 MPa at an age of 21 days.
4.2. Damage patterns and load-displacement responses of the columns
The failure patterns of the tested columns are shown in Fig. 5, while
the relationship concerning axial load versus lateral displacement for
each column, together with the result for the control specimen, are
presented in Fig. 6. The columns without fibers had a similar damage
pattern before their peak strength was reached, namely, minor concrete
spalling, multiple fine horizontal cracks, and an obvious localized
horizontal crack. Although the difference in the transverse reinforce-
ment layout had only a minor influence in the behavior of the slender
UHPC columns before the peak strength was reached, its impact on the
post-peak behavior was notable. For the H5T0-F0 and H10T0-F0 spe-
cimens with no crossties, as soon as their peak strength was reached, a
large region of concrete crushed and spalled in the compressive side of
the column under the combined flexural and axial action, causing their
strength to drop dramatically (as can be seen in Fig. 6(a) and (b)). It is
worth noting that the spalling of the concrete cover caused the axial
stiffness center of the column to shift away from the loading center.
This consequently magnified the 2nd-order bending-moment demand of
the column, and thus caused the columns to fail. Notably, the H10T0-F0
specimen, which had a stirrup spacing twice as wide as that of the
H5T0-F0 sample, failed immediately after the peak strength was
reached. In contrast, the brittle post-peak behavior was greatly im-
proved by the crossties, even for the case of the H10T10-F0 specimen
C.-C. Hung et al. Engineering Structures 174 (2018) 701–711

Table 4
Tensile and compressive properties of the UHPC materials.
Column type fc′ (MPa) ftc (MPa) εtc (%) ftp (MPa) εtp (%) ftu (MPa) εtu (%)

H5T0-F0 100 1.3 0.001 1.3 0.001 1.3 0.001

H5T0-F150 105 6.9 0.04 9.2 0.072 2.2 0.24
H5T5-F0 106 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
H5T5-F75 105 3.5 0.025 5.1 0.073 2.2 0.28
H10T0-F0 103 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
H10T0-F150 101 5.2 0.018 7.1 0.077 2.3 0.28
H10T10-F0 101 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
H10T10-F150 104 4.1 0.009 6.7 0.04 2.4 0.27

Note: ftc is the tensile cracking strength, εtc is the tensile cracking strain, ftp is the peak tensile strength, εtp is the peak tensile strain, ftu is the ultimate tensile strength,
and εtu is the ultimate tensile strain.

Fig. 4. Tensile stress-strain curves of the UHPC materials.
(Fig. 6(c)), which had the large stirrup spacing of h/2. This outcome is
likely because the enhanced confinement due to the crossties resulted in
greater restraint in the dilatation of the concrete core under axial
loading, thereby postponing major concrete spalling. Accordingly, the
close stirrup spacing of h/4 and the presence of crossties enabled the
control specimen H5T5-F0 to have a strength plateau sustaining the
peak strength until significant concrete crushing and spalling occurred.
In comparison with the control specimen H5T5-F0, incorporation of
the steel fibers in the H5T5-F75 specimen (Vf = 0.75%) provided robust
bridging effects that reduced the width of the flexural cracks. It also
greatly reduced the spalling area of the column, as can be seen in
Fig. 5(e), due to the additional confinement for both the concrete core
and cover provided by the fibers. For comparison purposes, the spalling
area of each column was estimated and normalized with that of the
control specimen H5T5-F0. The total spalling area of the column was
estimated by summing the spalling area of each grid that was drawn on
the surface of the column before the test. In particular, three levels, i.e.,
0% for no spalling, 50% for partial spalling, and 100% for total spalling,
were used to quantify the spalling area of each grid. The calculated
results illustrated in Fig. 7 imply that the inclusion of even a small
amount of steel fibers, e.g. the H5T5-F75 (Vf = 0.75%) sample, could
reduce the spalling area by as much as 74% when compared with the
control specimen H5T5-F0. This enabled the H5T5-F75 sample to have
a more ductile post-peak behavior than the control specimen H5T5-F0,
as can be seen in Fig. 6(g). Nevertheless, the strength of H5T5-F75 still
dropped suddenly by about 20% at the peak strength due to the con-
crete failure in the compressive side of the combined flexural and axial
action at the critical section of the column, as can be seen in Fig. 6(g).
At the end of the test, fiber fracture and pullout could be observed
within the major horizontal flexural crack in the H5T5-F75 specimen.
Fig. 6(d)–(f) shows that the load-displacement curves for the col-
umns with Vf = 1.5% exhibited ductile post-peak behavior and a gra-
dually softening strength. In addition, with a fiber content of
Vf = 1.5%, concrete spalling and crushing throughout the test was ef-
fectively restrained, even in the case of the H10T0-F150 specimen with
no crossties and a transverse reinforcement ratio a mere one third that
of the control specimen. The sudden loss in strength observed for the
columns with Vf = 0 and 0.75% was successfully prevented for those
with Vf = 1.5%. Moreover, the addition of crossties appeared to have
little influence on the post-peak behavior for the columns with fibers,
whereas it enhanced the strength-retention ability for those without
fibers. It is also worth noting that although the H5T0-F150 specimen
had no crossties, the inclusion of fibers (Vf = 1.5%) enabled it to have a
2nd peak strength greater than the 1st peak strength.

5. Discussion

Fig. 5. Failure patterns of the columns. The eccentrically loaded behavior of the slender UHPC columns was
further investigated using various performance measures, including the
deflection, steel reinforcement strain, UHPC crushing strain, ductility,
axial load–moment interaction diagram, and the total moment demand.

705
C.-C. Hung et al.
Fig. 6. Axial load versus lateral displacement curves of the columns.
Fig. 7. Comparison of spalling areas.
The results are summarized in Table 5 and explained in detail in the
following.
5.1. Lateral displacement
The ratios of the lateral displacements at peak strength and at
failure (hereafter termed peak and ultimate lateral displacements, re-
spectively) for each column to those of the control specimen H5T5-F0
are plotted in Fig. 8. It can be seen in Fig. 8(b) that the addition of
crossties or a closer stirrup spacing generally increased the ultimate
lateral displacement of the slender UHPC column regardless of the
presence of steel fibers. This is because such modifications enhanced
706
Engineering Structures 174 (2018) 701–711
the confinement on the concrete core, thus postponing the concrete
compression failure under the combined axial and flexural action. On
the other hand, Fig. 8(a) implies that increasing the transverse steel
reinforcement had little effect on the peak lateral displacement of the
column. This can be attributed to either the addition of crossties or a
closer stirrup spacing having tangential influence in the crushing or
spalling strain of the concrete cover that governed the magnitude of the
peak lateral displacement of the column.
The results in Fig. 8 also indicate that the inclusion of fibers in the
slender UHPC column led to greater peak and ultimate lateral dis-
placements. This is primarily because the inclusion of fibers improved
the brittle nature and enhanced the ductility of the UHPC material in
compression, thus postponing and restraining failure in both the con-
crete cover and core in the flexural compression side. Notably, even
when only a small amount of fibers, Vf = 0.75%, were added in the
H5T5-F75 specimen, the peak and ultimate displacements were in-
creased considerably by 14% and 65%, respectively, as compared with
the control specimen H5T5-F0. In addition, a greater inclusion of fibers,
namely Vf = 1.5% in the H10T0-F150 specimen (s = h/2 and
ρt = 0.89), successfully compensated a 70% reduction in the confine-
ment steel while still promoting the structural performance, when
compared with the control specimen H5T5-F0 (s = h/4 and ρt = 2.67)
that had reinforcement details conforming to ACI 318 [28]. More spe-
cifically, the steel fibers enabled the H10T0-F150 sample to have peak
and ultimate lateral displacements greater than those of the control
specimen H5T5-F0 by 4% and 51%, respectively. Overall, the fiber-
reinforced slender UHPC columns had ultimate lateral displacements
that were greater than that of the control specimen H5T5-F0 by
47%–97%.
C.-C. Hung et al. Engineering Structures 174 (2018) 701–711

Table 5
Summary of experimental results of the slender columns.
Column Ppeak (kN) Mpeak (kN-m) δpeak (mm) δult (mm) Ductility ratio epeak (mm) ′
εcrush εcrush εcrush
′ Manalytic MACI
εcrush Mpeak Mpeak

(a) Columns without fibers

H5T0-F0 206 61.0 37 72 0.71 297 0.0023 0.0023 0.99 1.00 1.02
H5T5-F0 245 74.8 46 100 1.00 306 0.0026 0.0025 1.03 1.00 1.01
H10T0-F0 239 72.2 41 50 0.45 301 0.0025 0.0028 0.90 1.01 1.03
H10T10-F0 243 72.4 38 73 0.97 298 0.0024 0.0022 1.07 1.02 1.04
MEAN 233 70.1 40 74 0.78 300 0.0025 0.0025 0.99 1.01 1.02
(b) Columns with fibers
H5T5-F75 284 88.7 52 165 2.22 312 0.0032 0.0035 0.92 1.00 1.02
H5T0-F150 256 83.6 67 148 2.57 327 0.0042 0.0041 1.01 0.94 0.96
H10T0-F150 274 84.2 44 152 2.35 307 0.0035 0.0034 1.02 1.01 1.03
H10T10-F150 243 76.6 56 197 2.64 316 0.0034 0.0032 1.06 0.97 0.99
MEAN 264 83.3 55 165 2.45 315 0.0036 0.0036 1.00 0.98 1.00

Note: Ppeak and Mpeak are the peak axial strength and moment, respectively; δpeak is the peak lateral displacement corresponding to Ppeak ; δult is the ultimate lateral
′ are the crushing strains of the UHPC material at the outermost fiber of the column
displacement; epeak is the eccentricity measured at the peak strength; εcrush and εcrush
section estimated based on the NDI data and the measured longitudinal reinforcement strains, respectively; and, MACI and Manalytic are the predicted total moment
demands at the peak strength according to ACI 318 [12] and the analytical approach, respectively.

5.2. Steel reinforcement strains ′

The test results showed that the transverse reinforcement for all
columns remained elastic (with a strain demand less than 0.0004) and
the hooks did not open during the tests. Given the small strain demand
in the stirrups, the influence of the transverse reinforcement and Vf on
the stirrup strain demand was not observable for the tested columns.
Figs. 9 and 10 show the relationships between the strain demand in the
longitudinal reinforcement versus the applied axial load. It can be seen
in Fig. 9 that the compression longitudinal reinforcement remained
elastic for all columns. On the other hand, Fig. 10 shows that the ten-
sion longitudinal reinforcement yielded with a strain demand of be-
tween 0.005 and 0.007, implying that all columns failed in the tension-
controlled failure mode under the combined axial and flexural action. It
is worth mentioning that the tension-controlled failure pattern is the
preferred design for RC columns since warning of failure by excessive
deflection and cracking may be expected. Major design codes (for ex-
ample, ACI 318-14 [28]) defines a column section as tension-controlled,
if the net tensile strain in the extreme tension reinforcement is greater
than or equal to 0.005 at nominal strength.
results for each column were denoted as εcrush and are summarized in
Table 5. Accuracy of the computed crushing strains was verified by an
alternative approach that estimated the crushing strain by extrapolating
the average strains of the two vertical NDI markers closest to the critical
section. The crushing strains estimated based on the NDI measurements
were denoted as εcrush and are summarized in Table 5. It can be seen in
ε′
Table 5 that the average values of crush are 0.99 and 1.00 for the col-
εcrush
umns without and with fibers, respectively, suggesting the validity of
the estimated crushing strains. The results show that the inclusion of
steel fibers in the slender UHPC columns increased the average crushing
strain from 0.0025 to 0.0036 with a magnification of 44%. Even when
only a small amount of fibers Vf = 0.75% were added in the column,
the average crushing strain estimated by the two methods could reach
0.0034. The increased concrete crushing strain not only provides evi-
dence of the improved brittle nature of the concrete at the material
level, but also led to a more ductile performance of the slender column
at the structural level.
5.4. Ductility

The ductility performance of each column was quantified as the area

5.3. Crushing strains
By assuming that the cross-sectional plane of the column remained
plane during the test, the crushing strain at the outermost fiber in the
compression side of the column at peak strength could be estimated via
extrapolation using the measured reinforcement strains. The computed
under the axial load- axial strain curve, with the axial strength of the
column normalized to unity to eliminate the influence of variation in
the strengths of the columns. For comparison purposes, the ratios of the
calculated ductility of each column to that of the control specimen
H5T5-F0, termed the ductility ratio hereafter, were computed and are
illustrated in Fig. 11. For the columns without fibers, it can be seen that

Fig. 8. Comparison of the lateral displacements.

707
C.-C. Hung et al. Engineering Structures 174 (2018) 701–711

Fig. 9. Relationships between axial load and compressive strain demand in the longitudinal reinforcement.

the control specimen, i.e., H5T5-F0, showed the highest ductility value,
which was 41%, 122%, and 3% greater than those of the H5T0-F0,
H10T0-F0, and H10T10-F0 specimens, respectively. It is found that the
inclusion of crossties had a major impact on the ductility performance
of the slender UHPC columns without fibers. In particular, although the
H10T10-F0 sample had a stirrup spacing twice as wide as that of the
control specimen H5T5-F0, it had a similar ductility value.
The inclusion of steel fibers in the slender UHPC columns sig-
nificantly enhanced the ductility of the column by more than twofold,
as evidenced by the effective restraint on concrete spalling and
crushing. Notably, even the addition of only a small amount of fibers,
i.e., Vf = 0.75%, in the column also greatly enhanced the ductility ratio
by 2.2 times. The enhancement on the ductility due to the increasing
transverse reinforcement ratio and addition of crossties could also be
observed for the columns with fibers. It is worth mentioning that al-
though the H10T0-F150 specimen (s = h/2 and ρt = 0.89) had a stirrup Fig. 11. Comparison of the ductility ratios.
spacing twice as wide as that of the control specimen H5T5-F0 (s = h/4
and ρt = 2.67) and its crossties were removed, it nevertheless exhibited setup can be found in Section 3.2. For comparison purposes, the ideal
a ductility value 235% greater than the control specimen H5T5-F0. loading path corresponding to a constant eccentricity of e = 260 mm
Overall, the test results in this study imply that the inclusion of fibers was also plotted in the figure. It can be seen that the actual loading
with a Vf greater than 0.75% was able to replace up to 70% of the code- paths for all columns were initially linear, closely matching the ideal
required confinement steel for slender UHPC columns without com- path with e = 260 mm. As the axial load demand for the columns
promising the structural performance of the column under the com- continued to increase, the actual loading paths gradually “softened”
bined axial and flexural action. due to the progressively magnified P-Delta effect. For the columns
without fibers, column failure occurred when the actual loading path
just reached or was still some distance away from the failure envelope,
5.5. Axial load–moment interaction diagrams of the columns
except for the control specimen H5T5-F0. This implies that the close
stirrups and the inclusion of crossties in the control specimen H5T5-F0,
In Fig. 12, the axial load–moment interaction diagrams (commonly
as stipulated by ACI 318, was able to ensure the stability of the column,
termed P-M diagrams) show the actual loading paths of the tested
preventing premature failure due to the combined factors of extreme
slender columns in conjunction with the failure envelopes calculated
brittleness at the material level and the P-Delta effect at the structural
according to ACI 318 [28]. The moment demands of the columns during
level. It is worth noting that the H5T0-F0 specimen in Fig. 12(a), which
the tests were calculated as Mexp = (einitial + δult ) × Pmeasure , where
einitial = 260mm is the initial eccentricity, δult is the measured deflection, had reinforcement details conforming to the versions of ACI 318 earlier
and Pmeasure is the measured axial force. Details of the measurement than 2014, showed a premature failure pattern before its loading path

Fig. 10. Relationships between axial load and tensile strain demand in the longitudinal reinforcement.

708
C.-C. Hung et al. Engineering Structures 174 (2018) 701–711

Fig. 12. Axial load–moment interaction diagrams of the columns.

reached the failure envelope. This result highlights the necessity for all Cm
δ= ⩾ 1.0
longitudinal reinforcements to be laterally supported by seismic hooks 1−P /0.75Pc (2)
or perimeter hoops for high-strength concrete columns with
fc′ > 68 MPa, as per the latest version of ACI 318 [28]. For the columns M1
Cm = 0.6−0.4
with fibers, failure occurred after the loading path was beyond the M2 (3)
failure envelope. Their damage control ability due to the inclusion of
fibers endowed them with enhanced stability at both the material and π (EI )eff
Pc =
structural levels, thus effectively preventing premature failure. (k ℓu)2 (4)

where δ is the moment magnifier, which is a function of the axial load,

5.6. Moment demand
A first-order moment in a column is obtained based on an elastic
analysis that excludes the internal force effects resulting from deflec-
tions. A second-order analysis is distinguished from the first-order
analysis in that it satisfies the equations of equilibrium using the de-
formed geometry of the column. In cases when second-order effects in
the columns are critical, it is necessary to consider the slenderness ef-
fects, and so the columns must be designed based on the forces de-
termined from second-order analyses. ACI 318 [28] suggests an ap-
proximate design procedure that uses the moment magnifier method to
account for slenderness effects. In this method, the moment used for the
design of columns, Mc , is the first-order moment, M2 , amplified for the
effects of member curvature, as follows:
Mc = δM2 (1)
P , and the critical buckling load Pc for a column; Cm is the correction
factor for the moment diagram; k is the effective length factor of the
column; ℓu is the unsupported length of the column; (EI )eff is the ef-
fective flexural stiffness of the column; M1 and M2 correspond to the end
moments of the column with the lesser and greater absolute values,
respectively; and, M1/ M2 is negative if the column is bent in a single
curvature, and positive if bent in a double curvature.
As an alternative method, the total moment demand for a slender
column under a specified axial load, P , can also be analytically ex-
pressed, as in Eq. (5), from the perspective of the mechanics of mate-
rials.
Pδ0
Mc = M2 + Pδ ′ = M0 +
1−P / Pc (5)
where δ ′ is the total deflection, i.e., the second-order deflection; and, δ0
is the first-order deflection under the action of the end moment, M2 , and
M0 (ℓu2 )
can be expressed as δ0 = 8(EI )eff
. The equation is derived based on the

709
C.-C. Hung et al.
assumption that the deflection curve of the column is in the shape of a
half sinusoid. Details of the derivation can be found in [29].
The applicability of the moment magnifier method (Eq. (1)) and the
analytical method (Eq. (5)) for evaluating the total moment demand of
the tested slender UHPC columns at their peak strength was in-
vestigated in this study. The accuracy of the predicted solutions was
quantified using the ratio of the predicted solution to the experimental
M
result, i.e., MACI and analytic ; where MACI and Manalytic are the total mo-
Mpeak Mpeak
ment demands calculated using Eqs. (1) and (5), respectively; while
Mpeak is the total moment demand obtained by the test, which was
calculated as Mpeak = epeak × Ppeak , with epeak and Ppeak being the mea-
sured eccentricity and axial force at the peak axial strength of the
column, respectively. The computed results are presented in Table 5.
The results indicate that the ratios obtained based on the moment
magnifier approach and the analytical approach were between 0.94 and
1.04. While both approaches generated reasonable solutions for the
total moment demands of the slender UHPC columns under the influ-
ence of the P-Delta effect, the moment magnifier method yielded a
moment demand about 2% greater than that of the analytical method.
Nonetheless, it is worth mentioning that the moment magnifier ap-
proach is applicable for general RC columns whereas the analytical
approach is only applicable for simply supported columns with M1/
M2 = −1. It is also interesting to note that the average moment ratio
decreased from a value above 1 for the columns without fibers, to equal
or slightly less than 1 for the columns with fibers. The slight over-
estimation for the total moment demand of the slender UHPC columns
without fibers can be attributed to their extreme brittleness, which
rendered the column vulnerable to premature spalling. As a result, the
slender UHPC columns without fibers had a smaller peak lateral dis-
placement and associated second-order moment. On the other hand, the
inclusion of fibers in the slender UHPC columns effectively enhanced
the deflection ductility of the column (particularly for the columns with
closer stirrups and Vf = 1.5%), leading to a greater second-order mo-
ment demand. The computed moment ratios were found to be the
smallest in the case of the H5T0-F150 specimen, with values of 0.96 and
0.94 for the magnifier approach and analytical approach, respectively.
This can be attributed to the strength-hardening behavior of the H5T0-
F150 specimen, which led to a 2nd peak strength higher than the 1st
peak strength.
6. Conclusions
This study investigated the eccentrically loaded behavior of slender
UHPC columns with a tension-controlled failure pattern. The experi-
mental variables included (1) the stirrup spacing (h/4 or h/2), (2) the
crossties (presence or absence), and (3) the amount of steel fibers
(Vf = 0%, 0.75%, and 1.5%). The test results showed that all slender
UHPC columns without fibers failed with an abrupt loss in strength due
to a large region of concrete spalling and crushing. While a narrower
stirrup spacing appeared to have little effect on the structural perfor-
mance and failure pattern, increasing the confinement of the column
core by installing crossties moderately improved the brittle post-peak
behavior for the columns without fibers. The structural performance of
the slender UHPC columns, in terms of the strength retention and
ductility, was found to be significantly enhanced by the addition of steel
fibers with Vf = 0.75% or more, due to the strengthened confinement
for both the concrete cover and core that effectively postponed and
restrained concrete crushing and spalling.
The other main conclusions of this study are as follows:
(1) Although the inclusion of a small amount of fibers with Vf = 0.75%
effectively restrained concrete spalling and crushing, it was not
sufficient to prevent the abrupt loss in column strength under ec-
centric loads. On the other hand, all the UHPC columns with
Vf = 1.5% showed a ductile post-peak behavior with a gradually
710
Engineering Structures 174 (2018) 701–711
softening strength. In particular, even though the H10T0-F150
specimen (ρt = 0.89%) had no crossties and a stirrup spacing twice
as wide as the control specimen H5T5-F0 (ρt = 2.67%), the inclu-
sion of steel fibers with Vf = 1.5% enabled the H10T0-F150 sample
to have a ductility ratio that was two times greater.
(2) While the variation in the transverse reinforcement configuration
had an insignificant effect, the inclusion of fibers in the slender
UHPC columns led to a considerably greater peak lateral displace-
ment. Despite only a small amount of fibers with Vf = 0.75% being
added in the H5T5-F75 specimen, the peak displacement was in-
creased by 14%, as compared with its counterpart specimen
without fibers. Moreover, the ultimate lateral displacements of the
fiber-reinforced slender UHPC columns were greater than that of
the control specimen H5T5-F0 by 47%–97%.
(3) The inclusion of steel fibers with Vf = 0.75% and 1.5% in the
slender UHPC columns substantially increased the average crushing
strain from 0.0025 to 0.0034 and 0.0036, respectively. Accordingly,
the fibers not only effectively improved the brittle nature of the
UHPC at the material level, but also led to a more ductile flexural
performance of the slender UHPC column at the structural level.
(4) Both the analytical method and ACI-318 magnified approach gen-
erated acceptable estimations for the total moment demand of the
tested slender UHPC columns. The accuracy ratios for the two ap-
proaches were similar, with both being between 0.94 and 1.04.
While the actual total moment demand was slightly overestimated
for the columns without fibers, it was mostly slightly under-
estimated for the columns with fibers.
(5) Under the condition that the stirrup spacing was less than h/2 and
the transverse reinforcement ratio was greater than = 0.89%, the
test results suggest that the code-required confinement steel for
slender UHPC columns could be partially reduced via inclusion of
steel hooked fibers with Vf = 1.5%, without compromising the
performance of the column under the combined axial and flexural
action.
Acknowledgements
This study was sponsored in part by the Ministry of Science and
Technology, Taiwan, under Grant No. 104-2628-E-006-002-MY3. The
opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this paper are those of
the authors, and do not necessarily reflect those of the sponsors.
References
[1] Wille K, Naaman AE, El-Tawil S. Optimizing ultra-high performance fiber-re-
inforced concrete. Concr Int 2011;33(9):35–41.
[2] Alkaysi M, El-Tawil S. Effects of variations in the mix constituents of ultra high
performance concrete (UHPC) on cost and performance. Mater Struct
2016;49(10):4185–200.
[3] Fehling E, Schmidt M, Walraven J, Leutbecher T, Fröhlich S. Ultra-high perfor-
mance concrete UHPC: Fundamentals, design, examples. John Wiley & Sons; 2014.
[4] Yang IH, Joh C, Kim BS. Structural behavior of ultra high performance concrete
beams subjected to bending. Eng Struct 2010;32(11):3478–87.
[5] Hassan AMT, Jones SW, Mahmud GH. Experimental test methods to determine the
uniaxial tensile and compressive behaviour of ultra high performance fibre re-
inforced concrete (UHPFRC). Constr Build Mater 2012;37:874–82.
[6] Abdulkareem OM, Fraj AB, Bouasker M, Khelidj A. Mixture design and early age
investigations of more sustainable UHPC. Constr Build Mater 2018;163:235–46.
[7] Wang R, Gao X, Huang H, Han G. Influence of rheological properties of cement
mortar on steel fiber distribution in UHPC. Constr Build Mater 2017;144:65–73.
[8] Alkaysi M, El-Tawil S. Factors affecting bond development between Ultra High
Performance Concrete (UHPC) and steel bar reinforcement. Constr Build Mater
2017;144:412–22.
[9] Meng W, Khayat KH. Improving flexural performance of ultra-high-performance
concrete by rheology control of suspending mortar. Compos B Eng 2017;117:26–34.
[10] Palacios G, Chao SH, Nojavan A, Schultz A. Performance of full-scale ultra-high
performance fiber-reinforced concrete (UHP-FRC) column subjected to extreme
earthquake-type loading. In: HPFRCC-7 Proceedings of the 7th RILEM workshop on
high performance fiber reinforced cement composites, Stuttgart, Germany; 2015.
[11] Shafieifar M, Farzad M, Azizinamini A. A comparison of existing analytical methods
to predict the flexural capacity of Ultra High Performance Concrete (UHPC) beams.
Constr Build Mater 2018;172:10–8.
C.-C. Hung et al.
[12] Hung CC, Hu FY. Behavior of high-strength concrete slender columns strengthened
with steel fibers under concentric axial loading. Constr Build Mater
2018;175:422–33.
[13] Liu J, Wu C, Su Y, Li J, Shao R, Chen G, et al. Experimental and numerical studies of
ultra-high performance concrete targets against high-velocity projectile impacts.
Eng Struct 2018;173:166–79.
[14] Li J, Wu C, Hao H, Liu Z. Post-blast capacity of ultra-high performance concrete
columns. Eng Struct 2017;134:289–302.
[15] Mészöly T, Randl N. Shear behavior of fiber-reinforced ultra-high performance
concrete beams. Eng Struct 2018;168:119–27.
[16] Yoo DY, Banthia N, Yoon YS. Flexural behavior of ultra-high-performance fiber-
reinforced concrete beams reinforced with GFRP and steel rebars. Eng Struct
2016;111:246–62.
[17] Hung C-C, Chueh C-Y. Cyclic behavior of UHPFRC flexural members reinforced with
high-strength steel rebar. Eng Struct 2016;122:108–20.
[18] Hung C-C, Li H, Chen HC. High-strength steel reinforced squat UHPFRC shear walls:
Cyclic behavior and design implications. Eng Struct 2017;141:59–74.
[19] Ferrier E, Agbossou A, Michel L. Mechanical behaviour of ultra-high-performance
fibrous-concrete wood panels reinforced by FRP bars. Compos B Eng
2014;60:663–72.
[20] Ferrier E, Confrere A, Michel L, Chanvillard G, Bernardi S. Shear behaviour of new
beams made of UHPC concrete and FRP rebar. Compos B Eng 2016;90:1–13.
[21] He S, Mosallam AS, Fang Z, Zou C, Feng W, Su J. Experimental study on CFSC
711
Engineering Structures 174 (2018) 701–711
encased shear connectors in steel-concrete composite joints with UHPC grout.
Constr Build Mater 2018;173:638–49.
[22] Hor Y, Teo W, Kazutaka S. Experimental investigation on the behaviour of re-
inforced concrete slabs strengthened with ultra-high performance concrete. Constr
Build Mater 2017;155:463–74.
[23] Tanarslan HM, Alver N, Jahangiri R, Yalçınkaya Ç. Flexural strengthening of RC
beams using UHPFRC laminates: Bonding techniques and rebar addition. Constr
Build Mater 2017;155:45–55.
[24] Ricker M, Häusler F, Randl N. Punching strength of flat plates reinforced with UHPC
and double-headed studs. Eng Struct 2017;136:345–54.
[25] Lampropoulos AP, Paschalis SA, Tsioulou OT, Dritsos SE. Strengthening of re-
inforced concrete beams using ultra high performance fibre reinforced concrete
(UHPFRC). Eng Struct 2016;106:370–84.
[26] AFGC/SETRA. Ultra high performance fibre-reinforced concretes. Interim
Recommendations. Bagneux, France: AFGC Publication; 2000.
[27] JSCE. Recommendations for design and construction of ultra-high strength fiber
reinforced concrete structures (Draft). Tokyo, Japan: Japan Society of Civil
Engineers; 2000.
[28] ACI (American Concrete Institute) Committee 318. ACI 318 Building code re-
quirements for structural concrete (318-14). ACI-318, Farmington Hills, Michigan
2014.
[29] Wight JK. Reinforced concrete: Mechanics and design. 7th ed. Pearson; 2015.