See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/259158659

Behavior and modeling of confined concrete cylinders in axial compression

using FRP rings

Article in Composites Part B Engineering · March 2014

DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.10.031

CITATIONS READS

24 208

4 authors, including:

Eunsoo Choi Inkyu Rhee

Hongik University Chonnam National University
230 PUBLICATIONS 4,276 CITATIONS 46 PUBLICATIONS 603 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Kang Hee Lee

Andong National University
126 PUBLICATIONS 424 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Eunsoo Choi on 30 May 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Composites: Part B 58 (2014) 175–184

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

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

Behavior and modeling of confined concrete cylinders in axial

compression using FRP rings
Eunsoo Choi a,⇑, Joo-Woo Kim b, Inkyu Rhee c, Joo-Won Kang d
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Hongik University, Seoul 121-791, Republic of Korea
b
Department of Architecture Engineering, Semyung University, Jecheon, Republic of Korea
c
Department of Civil Engineering, Chonnam National University, Gwangju 500-757, Republic of Korea
d
School of Architecture, Yeungnam University, Gyeongsan, Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study suggests a secondary dense lateral reinforcement for reinforced concrete (RC) columns that are
Received 24 September 2012 located between the primary lateral reinforcement and concrete surface, which are used to delay the
Received in revised form 8 September 2013 buckling of longitudinal reinforcement and increase the ductility of RC columns. ‘Dense’ means that
Accepted 25 October 2013
the spacing of the lateral reinforcement is smaller than the maximum gravel size. This study conducted
Available online 7 November 2013
axial compressive tests on concrete cylinders confined by dense reinforcement in order to improve the
effectiveness of the dense lateral reinforcement. FRP (Fiber Reinforced Polymer) rings were used for
Keywords:
the reinforcement since they are corrosion resistant. The dense reinforcing method with FRP rings can
A. Glass fibers
B. Fracture
successfully increase the peak strength of the concrete and the failure strain. The stress–strain curves
B. Strength of the confined concrete became almost bilinear with hardening behavior, which were similar to that
C. Analytical modeling of the concrete confined by the jackets of FRP sheets. This study also provides models of stress–strain
Concrete confinement in an axial direction and lateral strain. Based on the models, this study analyzes the confining effective-
ness of the FRP rings on concrete.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction reinforcement between concrete surface and longitudinal reinforc-

Previous researchers on concrete understood that lateral active
confining pressure on concrete increased the peak strength and
ductile behavior of concrete [17]. After that, they also found that
lateral reinforcement in reinforced concrete (RC) columns provided
passive confining pressure on concrete, which also increased the
peak strength and ductile behavior of concrete [18]. Thus, seismic
codes for RC columns require more lateral reinforcement than con-
ventional codes for critical regions, such as the plastic regions of RC
columns, and past earthquakes have indicated that inadequate lat-
eral reinforcement was one of the main causes of bridge failure
[5,16,9]. The increased peak strength of the concrete has contrib-
uted to the increase in the flexural strength of the RC columns.
However, in the seismic performance of RC columns, the ductile
behavior of RC columns is more critical than flexural strength be-
cause the prevention of collapse is required. RC columns during
earthquakes have begun to collapse from taking off the cover
concrete of the columns and then longitudinal reinforcing bars
were exposed and not protected. Thus, secondary dense lateral
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 2 320 3060; fax: +82 0 332 1244.
E-mail addresses: eunsoochoi@hongik.ac.kr (E. Choi), jw_kim@semyung.ac.kr
(J.-W. Kim), rheei@jnu.ac.kr (I. Rhee), kangj@yumail.ac.kr (J.-W. Kang).
ing bars is required to protect the RC columns from seismic attacks.
Karayannis et al. [10] indicated that RC columns with dense
lateral reinforcement showed more flexural strength and displace-
ment ductility than RC columns with normal lateral reinforcement.
However, dense lateral reinforcement may segregate the materials,
and thus, the spacing of the lateral reinforcing bars is regulated for
a certain value in order to prevent the blocking of the concrete flow
[1]. It is well known that external jackets of steel or FRP
(Fiber-Reinforced Plastic or Polymer) increase the displacement
ductility as well as peak flexural strength of RC columns
[13,7,15,2]. The external jackets provide external confining pres-
sure on the cover concrete and push it inside against the bulging
of longitudinal bars. However, external jackets are available, not
for new construction, but for retrofitting existing structures. If a
layer of secondary lateral reinforcement, as shown in Fig. 1, pro-
tects the cover concrete from spalling off, the cover concrete can
delay the buckling of longitudinal bars and increase displacement
ductility. The secondary lateral reinforcement for new construction
should be embedded in the concrete and be located between the
concrete surface and longitudinal bars. In addition, the secondary
lateral reinforcement should be placed densely in order to provide
effective confinement on the concrete. The thickness of the cover
concrete for the dense lateral reinforcement should be less than

1359-8368/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.10.031
176 E. Choi et al. / Composites: Part B 58 (2014) 175–184
(a) Cross-sectional view
(b) Side view
Fig. 1. Schematic drawing of secondary lateral reinforcement for RC columns.
that required by code, so corrosion-protective material is required.
This study suggested a dense lateral reinforcing method using FRP
rings and investigated the effectiveness of the method through
experimental tests on concrete cylinders with axial compressive
loadings.
2. Specimens and test set-up
The FRP rings were made from a FRP tube with an outside diam-
eter of 140 mm and a thickness of 7.5 mm. The FRP tube was rein-
forced by glass fibers placed in only a lateral direction since only a
lateral confining capacity was required. Each ring was cut from the
tube by a saw with 5 mm width. This study used two types of spec-
imens with varied pitches of lateral reinforcement. The pitches of
FRP rings were 20 and 30 mm with a distance of 30 mm from the
top and bottom of a specimen. Thus, 13 and 9 FRP rings were used
for a 20 mm and 30 mm pitch specimen, respectively, and the vol-
umetric ratios for the two types of specimens were 0.0233 and
0.0156, respectively. The outside diameter of FRP rings was less
than that of the concrete cylinder by 10 mm and, thus, a 5 mm cov-
er concrete existed. Fig. 2 demonstrates the procedure to prepare a
specimen. The FRP rings were supported by three wood posts and
placed in a mold. A total of six specimens were prepared for each
type: three for the monotonic loading test and the other three
for the cyclic loading test. In addition, three plain concrete cylin-
ders were prepared for reference.
This study conducted split disk tests of FRP rings in order to ob-
tain the mechanical properties of the ring, as shown in Fig. 3. Two
strain gages were attached on the right and left side of the FRP rings
with 45° aimed to the splitting line. In the test, the FRP rings had a
20 mm width for convenience in order to bond gages on the ring.
The stress–strain curves are demonstrated in Fig. 4, and specific val-
ues are arranged in Table 1. The FRP rings showed linear elastic
behavior in the stress–strain relationship up to the failure point,
and the responses from the left and right side showed a similar
trend. The average young’s modulus and ultimate stress and strain
of the six values were 43.6 GPa, 565.6 MPa and 0.0132, respectively.
This study measured axial deformation and lateral bulging dur-
ing a compressive test, as shown in Fig. 5(a). An extensometer was
installed in the middle of a specimen in order to measure axial
deformation and three displacement transducers were placed be-
tween the two sole plates located at the top and bottom of the
specimen as a supplementary measure. Also, another extensome-
ter was equipped to measure the lateral bulging deformation.
The monotonic and cyclic loading tests were conducted with dis-
placement control increasing the displacement of 1.0 and
2.0 mm/min, respectively.
3. Test results of concrete cylinders and discussion
3.1. Axial stress–strain relationship and failure mode
The cyclic behavior of FRP-ring confined concrete will be dis-
cussed later and, thus, only the results of the cyclic stress–strain
curves were used in this study. Fig. 6 shows the stress–strain
curves of unconfined and confined cylinders with variation in the
FRP rings’ pitch and Table 2 demonstrates the peak strengths and
the corresponding strains of the concrete cylinders. (In the table,
‘PL’, ‘M’, and ‘C’ represent plain, monotonic, and cyclic, respec-
tively.) The stress–strain relationship of concrete confined by FRP
rings showed typical bilinear behavior, which was the same as
those of concrete externally confined by FRP sheets or tubes. The
FRP ring jackets with 20 mm pitch increased the peak strength
2.29 times for monotonic and cyclic loading compared to the plain
concrete. For the pitch of 30 mm, increments of 1.69 and
1.80 times in peak strength were obtained for monotonic and cyc-
lic loading, respectively. In addition, the failure strains of confined
concrete increased at a minimum of 15 times. Thus, the FRP rings
embedded in concrete increased the peak strength and failure
strain effectively and demonstrated its applicability for seismic
protection.
The failure procedure of the confined concrete is shown in
Fig. 5(b–d). Initial cracking in the middle of the specimen devel-
oped in a lateral direction with increasing compressive loading be-
yond the peak strength of plain concrete. Then, the cracking
propagated outside, and the cover concrete was peeled off. Finally,
the cover concrete was spalled off, and the FRP rings were frac-
tured. The concrete inside the fractured rings were crushed. How-
ever, the other part of concrete confined by the FRP rings remained
safely as shown in Fig. 5(d).
3.2. Confining effect
The FRP rings around concrete provided passive confining pres-
sure and increased the peak strength of concrete. Richart et al. [17]
suggested a simple relationship between the confining pressure
and peak strength, as follows:
fcc0 fl
¼ 1:0 þ k1 0 ð1aÞ
fco0 fco
 E. Choi et al. / Composites: Part B 58 (2014) 175–184
Fig. 2. Manufacturing process of concrete cylinders confined by FRP rings.
Fig. 3. Split disk test of FRP rings: (a) a FRP ring with strain gages; (b) test set-up and (c) a fractured FRP ring.
2Afyh
fl ¼
sD
where fcc0 and fco0 are the peak strength of confined and unconfined
concrete, fl is the maximum confining pressure, and k1 is the con-
finement effectiveness coefficient. fyh and A are the ultimate stress
and cross-sectional area of the FRP ring, while D and s are the diam-
eter between the FRP ring centers and the pitch of FRP rings. Man-
der et al. [14] indicated that the effective lateral confining pressure
for the perimeter spiral or hoop should be considered as follows:
fl0 ¼ fl ke
1  s0 =2D
ke ¼
1  qcc
where fl0 ¼ effective confining pressure, ke = effective confinement
coefficient, s0 = clear spacing between rings and qcc = longitudinal
reinforcement ratio, which is zero in this study. The effective con-
finement coefficient is 1.0 for the continuous full external jackets,
but smaller than 1.0 for the tie or spiral reinforcement. The average
ultimate stress of the FRP ring was 656.6 MPa and, thus, the values
of fl and ke were 16.3 and 10.9 MPa and were 0.9434 and 0.9056 for
177
the 20 mm and 30 mm pitch, respectively. Fig. 7 shows the result of
ð1bÞ
linear regression for Eq. (1a). The k1 with a constraint of 1.0 inter-
section on the y axis was estimated as 1.904, which was smaller
than 2.0 proposed by Lam and Teng [11] for design use. However,
the estimated value by Lam and Teng [11] from the data of concrete
was confined by external continuous FRP jackets, which was differ-
ent from this study. The FRP rings did not cover the entire concrete
surface like steel reinforcing bars and, thus, a relatively small con-
fining pressure appeared in the absence of FRP rings. The small va-
lue of k1 means that the confining effect is relatively small at the
ð2aÞ same confinement ratio. Thus, the FRP rings showed a smaller con-
fining effect than the external continuous FRP jacket.
ð2bÞ
4. Models for axial and lateral strain versus axial stress
4.1. Model for axial stress–strain curves
As Spoelstra and Monti [21] explained, the axial behavior of
concrete confined by FRP composites is bilinear, which differs from
that confined by steel jackets. Youssef et al. [25] explained that the
first portion of the bilinear behavior traced that of unconfined
178 E. Choi et al. / Composites: Part B 58 (2014) 175–184

600 700
(a) FRP 20mm -1 (b) FRP 20mm -2
500 600

500
Stress (MPa)

400

Stress (MPa)
400
300
300
200
200

100 Left 100 Left

Right Right
0 0
0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 0.016
Strain (m/m) Strain (m/m)

600
(c) FRP 20mm -3
500

400
Stress (MPa)

300

200

100 Left
Right
0
0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014
Strain (m/m)

Fig. 4. Stress–strain curves of split disk tests of FRP rings.

the transition zone is far from the intersection point of the two
Table 1 lines. Therefore, the model follows the first line at first and then
Results of split disk tests. goes up to the second line through the transition curve between
Specimen Side Young’s Ultimate Ultimate strain the two lines.
modulus (GPa) stress (MPa) (1  102) The first slope E1 for confined concrete did not differ from that
FRP 20 mm1 Left 46.2 565.9 1.23 of the unconfined concrete, as shown in Fig. 6. The confinement of
Right 42.3 565.9 1.33 the FRP composite is a kind of passive confinement and, thus, usu-
FRP20 mm2 Left 39.9 571.4 1.44 ally activated after the peak strength of the unconfined strength
Right 44.0 596.4 1.40 since the lateral expansion increases abruptly after the peak
FRP 20 mm3 Left 45.2 547.0 1.21 strength. Before the peak strength, the lateral expansion is propor-
Right 44.3 547.0 1.29 tional to the axial deformation with Poisson’s ratio and, in this
Average 43.6 565.6 1.32 range, the lateral expansion is too small to activate the FRP con-
finement. Therefore, the first slope depends only on concrete. Tout-
anji and Saafi [22] adopted the formula from the study of Wee et al.
[23] that used 1/3 power of peak strength. However, the formula
concrete up to the jacket’s activation and then the behavior be- was for high-strength concrete, and the 1/3 power was not gener-
came ascend or descend. Thus, researchers on FRP jackets have ally used. Thus, this study followed the study of Samaan et al. [20]
adapted the four-parameter relationship of Richard and Abbott and adopted the secant modulus proposed by Ahmad and Shah [4].
[19] to predict the bilinear behavior of FRP-confined concrete in qffiffiffiffi
an axial direction [20,22]. The formula is given in: E1 ¼ 3950 fc0 ½MPa ð4Þ
 
E1 ec 1 After the peak strength of concrete was reached, the lateral
fc ¼ þ 1 E2 ec ð3aÞ
W W bulging of concrete was restrained only by the FRP-rings’ confine-
ment. Thus, the second slope E2 is a function of the stiffness of the
  n 1=n confining jacket. Also, Samaan et al. included the effect of the
E1  E2 ec
W¼ 1þ ð3bÞ unconfined peak strength of concrete. This was improved to repre-
fo
sent the experimental results precisely. Thus, this study modified
where fc and ec are the axial stress and strain of concrete, respec- the equation used by Samaan et al. as follows:
tively, E1 and E2 are the first and second slope, fo is the reference Ej Aj
plastic stress at the intercept of the second slope with the stress E2 ¼ 245:61fc00:2 þ 1:3456 ½MPa ð5Þ
sD
axis, and n is a curve-shaped parameter controlling the curvature
in the transition zone. Fig. 8 demonstrates the parameters of the where Ej and Aj are the elastic modulus in a hoop direction and
formula. In the figure, if the value of n is large, the bilinear model cross-sectional area of the FRP rings. Samaan et al. also indicated
curve is close to the two separated lines. Otherwise, if the n is small, that the intercept stress fo is a function of the strength of
 E. Choi et al. / Composites: Part B 58 (2014) 175–184 179

Fig. 5. Test set-up and failure mode: (a) test set-up; (b) initial cracking at middle; (c) peel off the outside concrete; (d) completely failed specimen.

Table 2
Peak strengths and the corresponding strains.
60 (a) Monotonic - 20mm
0
Confinement Specimens fco ; fcc0 eco, ecc Average
2
50 (MPa) (1  10 )
Unconfined PL-1 23.4 0.237 0
fco ¼ 23:0 MPa
Stress (MPa)

40 PL-2 21.0 0.174 eco ¼ 0:200  102

PL-3 24.7 0.188
Confined (Pitch = 20 mm) M20-1 51.7 4.322 0
30 fcc ¼ 52:6 MPa
M20-2 54.4 4.989 ecc ¼ 4:398  102
20 PL-1 M20-3 51.6 3.882
C20-1 56.2 3.829 0
M20-1 fcc ¼ 52:8 MPa
C20-2 48.9 3.052 ecc ¼ 3:584  102
10 M20-2
C20-3 53.4 3.869
M20-3
Confined (Pitch = 30 mm) M30-1 38.3 2.649 0
fcc ¼ 38:9 MPa
0
M30-2 37.2 2.718 ecc ¼ 3:007  102
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
M30-3 41.2 3.654
Axial strain (m/m) C30-1 41.2 2.987 0
fcc ¼ 41:3 MPa
C30-2 41.6 2.911 ecc ¼ 2:841  102
50
C30-3 41.2 2.624
(b) Monotonic - 30mm
40
Stress (MPa)

30 3.0
Strength Ratio (fcc '/fco ')

2.5
20
2.0
PL-1
10 M30-1
1.5
M30-2
M30-3 1.0
0
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 y = 1.904x + 1
0.5 2
Axial strain (m/m) R = 0.8788
0.0
Fig. 6. Stress–strain curves of the confined concrete cylinders. 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Confinement Ratio (f l /fco')

Fig. 7. Analysis of the confining effect of FRP rings.

unconfined concrete and the confining pressure. The intercept
stress fo was modified from the equation of Samaan et al. as follows:

fo ¼ 0:11964fc0 þ 0:89385f l þ 13:484½MPa ð6Þ 0

fcu  fo
ecu ¼ ð7Þ
E2
To determine the ultimate point of the model, the ultimate
0 The calculated ultimate strains were 0.0377 and 0.0310 for the
stress fcu was calculated from Eq. (1a), and the values were 51.5
and 42.0 MPa for the 20 mm and 30 mm pitch specimens, 20 mm and 30 mm pitch specimens, respectively. The estimated
respectively. The ultimate strain ecu was determined from the values of the ultimate stresses and strains agreed well with the
geometry of the bilinear curves as: average values in Table 2. However, the ultimate strain of the
180 E. Choi et al. / Composites: Part B 58 (2014) 175–184

data. However, in this study, the lateral dilation was measured at

60 (a) Monotonic -20mm the surface of the cover concrete and, thus, the measured lateral
dilation did not reflect exactly that of the core concrete confined
50
by the FRP rings since the dilation increased abruptly after the
cracking of the cover concrete. Therefore, this study used an indirect
Stress (MPa)

40 Plain method to develop a model of lateral strain.

M20-1 The first slope E1r was estimated using the Poisson’s ratio as
30
M20-2 indicated by Ahmad [3]:
M20-3
20
E1 E1
E2 E1r ¼ ð9Þ
10 m
Model
0
where m is the Poisson’s ratio of concrete with a range from 0.15 to
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
0.22 [6]. This study used 0.15 as the ratio. The remaining parame-
Axial strain (m/m)
ters were determined using the ultimate condition and the charac-
teristics of concrete behavior confined by FRP materials. The
50
ultimate lateral strain showed the relationship to be the same as
(b) Monotonic - 30mm
Eq. (7) in the axial direction:
40

fcc0  for
eru ¼ ð10Þ
Stress (MPa)

30
20
10
0 zone can be used to estimate the value for. In the radial direction,
0.00 0.01 0.02
Axial strain (m/m)
Fig. 8. Comparison of the model with the test results.
20 mm pitch specimens and the ultimate stress of the 30 mm pitch
specimen deviated from the average value by 14% and 8.0%, respec-
tively. Fig. 8 compares the models to the experimental data and
shows the two linear lines of E1 and E2. The modified model in this
study coincided well with the experimental curves for the 20 mm
pitch specimens. However, the model for the 30 mm pitch speci-
men was smaller in the transition region and larger at around
the ultimate condition than the experimental curves. Originally,
the model was applied for understanding the behavior of concrete
confined by continuous FRP jackets. In this study, the FRP ring rein-
forcement was discrete and, thus, the concrete between the FRP
rings was bulged differently from the concrete under the FRP ring.
Thus, it appears that the volumetric ratio of the FRP rings and the
spacing between the FRP rings affect the coincidence of the model.
Plain E2r
M30-1
M30-2 where fcc0 is determined from the model of axial stress–strain and eru
M30-3 is equal to the ultimate strain of FRP rings, which is shown in Fig. 4
E1 with an average of 0.0132.
E2 Since the transition zones develop at the same stress level in the
axial and lateral direction, the stress at the center of the transition
Model
0.03 0.04 the first slope E1r is very large, relatively, and the transition zone
is very small compared to that of the axial behavior curve. The ex-
treme case shows fully bilinear behavior. Therefore, the intercept
of the second slope E2r is nearly equal to the stress at the center
of the transition zone. The estimated values of for were 27 and
23 MPa for the 20 mm and 30 mm pitch specimen, respectively. Fi-
nally, the second slope E2r was calculated from Eq. (10) and the
curve-shape parameter used the same value in the axial direction.
Fig. 9 shows the estimated lateral strain versus axial stress com-
pared to the measured curves. The peak strengths of the measured
curves in the lateral direction were much smaller than the values
of measured curves in the axial direction. This indicates that the
measured lateral dilation increased quickly, regardless of the incre-
ment in the axial stress. The models followed the measured curves
in the initial zone before reaching the peak strength of the uncon-
fined concrete since the cover concrete was not cracked in the
zone. However, after the peak strength, the model got larger than
the measured curves by increasing the lateral strain.
Stress (MPa)

50
4.2. Model of lateral strains

40
The model in Eq. (3) is applicable to the axial stress–lateral
strain curve because the behavior is also bilinear and the transition
zone develops at the same axial stress level. Thus, the model of lat- 30
eral strain versus axial stress can be written as: Plain
  Test-20
E1r ecr 1 20
Model-20
fc ¼ þ 1 E2r ecr ð8aÞ
Wr Wr Test-30
10 Model-30
  n 1=nr
E  E2r ecr r
Wr ¼ 1 þ 1r ð8bÞ Lateral strain (εr) Axial strain (εa)
for 0
-0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
where subscript r represents the lateral (radial) direction. The
parameters in the model should be determined from the measured Fig. 9. Model of axial and lateral strain versus axial stress.
 E. Choi et al. / Composites: Part B 58 (2014) 175–184
4.3. Relationship between confining pressure and confinement
effectiveness
The composite behavior between the FRP rings and the core
concrete in a lateral direction was assumed. Then, the confining
pressure on the concrete core can be expressed as a function of lat-
eral (radial) strain:
2Ej A
fr ðer Þ ¼  er ¼ C j er
sD
In Quadrant II of Fig. 10, the difference between the stress of the
unconfined and confined concrete is confinement effectiveness
Dfconf as a function of lateral strain, which is shown in Quadrant
III. The confinement effectiveness was zero in the initial zone.
The beginning strains of the confinement effectiveness ranged
from 0 to 2.68  104 or 5.16  104 for the 20 mm and 30 mm
pitch specimen, respectively. The confinement effectiveness
showed a linear relationship with overall lateral strain. However,
they showed nonlinear behavior in the beginning and became sta-
bilized after the lateral strain corresponded to the peak strength of
Fig. 10. Analysis of confinement effectiveness: (a) 20 mm pitch specimen and (b) 30 mm pitch specimen.
181
the unconfined concrete, 1.41  103. For the 30 mm pitch speci-
men, nonlinear behavior was not nearly observed. In that case,
the intercept for was equal to the peak strength of the unconfined
concrete and, thus, the transition zone of the model approximately
corresponded with that of the lateral strain curve for the uncon-
fined concrete. However, for the 20 mm pitch specimen, the for
was larger than the peak strength of the unconfined concrete and
the transition zones of the two curves did not overlap. Thus, the
confinement effectiveness appeared early and showed nonlinear
ð11Þ
behavior in the beginning. Consequently, the nonlinear behavior
of confinement effectiveness in the beginning depends on the con-
fining pressure and peak strength of unconfined concrete, which
agreed with Eq. (5).
The confinement effectiveness coefficient k1 in Eq. (1) was esti-
mated from the maximum values of fr and Dfconf at the ultimate
condition, which are shown in Table 3, and the results of k1 were
2.47 and 3.05 for the 20 mm and 30 mm pitch specimen, respec-
tively. The estimated values of k1 were different from the k1 of
1.773 estimated previously using Eq. (1). In addition, the 20 mm
and 30 mm pitch specimen showed different values of k1. This
182 E. Choi et al. / Composites: Part B 58 (2014) 175–184
Table 3
Estimation of confinement effectiveness coefficient.
Specimen Using maximum values Using slopes
fru (MPa) Dfconf (MPa) k1 fr (MPa) Dfconf (MPa)
20 mm pt 16.3 40.2 2.47 1238.6 3111.7
30 mm pt 10.9 33.2 3.05 825.8 2618.3
means that k1 is not constant and Eq. (1) may be not valid. Thus,
Samaan et al. [20] suggested that k1 was a function of the confining
pressure as follows:
k1 ¼ 6:0fl0:3
The calculated values of k1 using the above equation were 2.60 and
2.93 at the ultimate condition for the 20 mm and 30 mm pitch spec-
imen, respectively, and the differences from the values of k1 that
were previously calculated were 5.3% and 3.9%. In Eq. (12), k1 can
be described as a function of lateral strain er, and Fig. 11 compares
the estimated k1 from the fr and Dfconf to the calculated k1 using Eq.
(11). In this case, the value of k1 for each state of lateral confining
pressure fr can be evaluated. The estimated k1 from the curves of
the 20 mm pitch specimen went up in the beginning and, after
the peak, converged to a constant value. However, the calculated
k1 showed a very high value in the beginning and converged to a
constant in degradation without a peak. Thus, the estimated k1
showed the same shape of the calculated k1, except for the begin-
ning zone. The estimated k1 from the curves of the 30 mm pitch
specimen were almost constant, except for the beginning zone.
The trend of the k1 was totally different from that of the calculated
one. At the ultimate condition, however, the estimated k1 almost
corresponded with the calculated one. The peak shape of the k1
for the 20 mm pitch specimen was due to the initial nonlinear
behavior of the confinement effectiveness that influenced the rate
of for to the fc0 . Thus, it appears that, by increasing the rate of for to
fc0 , the nonlinearity of the curve of Dfconf increases, and the trend
of k1 is similar to that of Eq. (12).
4.4. Relationship between axial and lateral strain
It is well understood that the axial strain–lateral (or hoop)
strain relationship of confined concrete is the key parameter con-
trolling the effectiveness of FRP confinement [24] and thus, this
Fig. 11. Confining effective coefficient with variation of lateral strain.
k1
2.51
3.17
ð12Þ
Fig. 12. Dilation ratios as a function of axial strain.
study looked over the relationship. Fig. 10 in Quadrant IV shows
the relationship between the lateral strain er and axial strain ea,
which is defined by
er ¼ gea ð13Þ
where g is the dilation ratio calculated as a function of the axial
strain. Harries and Kharel [8] explained the variation of the dilation
ratio based on the axial strain, which was divided into three parts.
The first part showed an initial dilation ratio gi, which was Poisson’s
ratio of concrete. In the second part, the dilation ratio increased
with an increasing axial strain and the third part showed the limit-
ing dilation ratio gu. The dividing points were 0:6e0c and 2:0e0c ,
respectively, where e0c is the strain corresponding to the peak stress
fc0 , which is usually accepted as 0.002.
Fig. 12 shows the dilation ratio versus axial strain for the con-
crete confined by the FRP rings. The two rectilinear lines were esti-
mated from the Harries and Kharel’s suggestion. The dilation ratio
started at 0.15, which was the assumed value to develop the lateral
strain model. However, the constant range up to 0:6e0c was not ob-
served, but increased continuously. Also, the second constant
range started from the strain 0.006, which was much larger than
2:0e0c . This was caused by the transition zone of the axial stress–
strain curve being almost completed at the strain 0.006. Thus,
 E. Choi et al. / Composites: Part B 58 (2014) 175–184
Fig. 13. Failures of tested specimens.
the trend of the dilation ratio for the concrete confined by the FRP
rings was much different from that of concrete confined by contin-
uous FRP external jackets. Further study is required to understand
the lateral behavior more precisely since this study used the esti-
mated lateral strain model, not the model developed from the
measured data.
5. Discussion for application
The proposed secondary lateral dense reinforcement should be
placed between the primary lateral reinforcement and concrete
surface. In addition, the dense reinforcement should be placed only
at a critical zone of the plastic hinge of RC columns. In general, the
thickness of cover concrete of RC columns in the field is 100 mm.
The pure spacing between FRP rings should be smaller than the
maximum gravel size. If the pure spacing of FRP rings is larger than
the maximum gravel size, the gravels could come out of the core
part of concrete due to compression and/or bending. Fig. 13 shows
the failure states of the specimens with 20 mm or 30 mm pitch. In
this study, the maximum gravel size was 20 mm. In the case of
20 mm pitch of FRP rings, the pure spacing was 15 mm and thus,
the gravels were kept inside the core part. However, in the case
of 30 mm pitch, the pure spacing was 25 mm, and thus, the gravels
came out of the core part. Therefore, the secondary dense rein-
forcement is required to confine the gravels inside, and therefore
the pure spacing of them should be smaller than the maximum
gravel size.
Lee et al. [12] have conducted experimental tests of RC columns
with FRP rings as secondary lateral reinforcement. The diameter
and height of the columns were 400 mm and 1400 mm, respec-
tively. Experimental results revealed that the columns with FRP
rings exhibited improved ductility and energy dissipation capacity
in comparison with those without the FRP rings. Therefore, it is
proved from the results that the proposed reinforcing method
using FRP rings in this study is applicable for real RC columns.
6. Conclusion remarks
The secondary lateral reinforcement using FRP rings proposed
in this study can be easily applied to the new construction of circu-
lar RC columns. The lateral reinforcement of FRP rings can be
placed only on the required zone and, thus, the material can be
saved. In addition, the FRP rings were corrosion-protective and,
thus, having enough concrete cover was not required. The behavior
of concrete confined by the FRP rings was similar to that of con-
crete confined by continuous external FRP jackets. Thus, the design
183
method for the continuous FRP external jackets can be adopted to
the design of the lateral reinforcement using FRP rings.
The experimental results of axial compressive tests for concrete
confined by the FRP rings have been presented. The FRP rings in-
creased the peak strength and failure strain of concrete, such as
the existing FRP external jackets of FRP sheets or tubes. The esti-
mated confinement effectiveness coefficient of the FRP-ring con-
fined concrete was 1.904, which was close to the 2.0 needed for
the design of external FRP jackets suggested by a previous study,
which considered a lot of suits of experimental data. This study
showed that the stress–strain curves of the FRP-ring confined con-
crete in both the axial and lateral direction, which can be predicted
using the previously developed model for the concrete confined by
FRP external jackets. Consequently, the existing results of concrete
confined by the external FRP jackets can be used to design lateral
FRP-ring reinforcement and predict the behavior of FRP-ring con-
fined concrete.
The confinement effectiveness coefficient was estimated as a
function of the lateral strain. In the 20 mm pitch specimen, the
coefficient showed an exponential form with varying lateral pas-
sive confining pressure. However, in the 30 mm pitch specimen,
the coefficient was almost constant with an increase in the lateral
confining pressure. It appears that the function of the confinement
effectiveness coefficient depends on the level of confinement. Fur-
ther studies are necessary to clarify the relationship between the
confinement effectiveness coefficient and level of confinement.
The estimated dilation ratio from the models as a function of the
axial strain showed a similar trend to that of the previous study.
However, the initial constant part, which indicated the Poisson’s
ratio, was not observed. This was a shortcoming of the model
and should be solved through further study. The transition zone
of the dilation ratio in this study was larger than that of the previ-
ous study of Harries and Kharel [8].
The effectiveness of FRP rings for RC columns have already been
proved experimentally. Therefore, the reinforcing method using
FRP rings can be applicable to real RC columns. However, for the
practical use of the proposed method, a designing and installing
method is required in the future.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by the Basic Science Research Pro-
gram through the National Research Foundation of Korea funded
by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (Project
No. 2013-005944).
References
[1] ACI Committee 318. Building code requirements for structural concrete and
commentary (ACI 318M-08). American Concrete Institute; 2008.
[2] Adnan R, Malik R, Foster SJ. Carbon fiber-reinforced polymer confined reactive
powder concrete columns-experimental investigation. ACI Struct J
2010;107(3):263–71.
[3] Ahmad SH. Properties of confined concrete under static and dynamic loads.
PhD thesis. Chicago, Ill: Univ. of Illinois at Chicago Circle; 1981.
[4] Ahmad SH, Shah SP. Stress–strain curves of concrete confined by spiral
reinforcement. ACI Mater J 1982;79(6):484–90.
[5] Buckle IG. The Northridge, California earthquake of January 17, performance of
highway bridges, National Center of Earthquake Engineering Research, State
University of New York at Buffalo, NY, Technical, Report NCEER-94-0008; 1994.
[6] Chen WF. Plasticity in reinforced concrete. New York (NY): McGraw-Hill Inc.;
1982.
[7] Choi E, Park J, Nam TH, Yoon SJ. A new steel jacketing method for RC columns.
Mag Concr Res 2009;61(10):787–96.
[8] Harries KA, Kharel G. Behavior and modeling of concrete subject to variable
confining pressure. ACI Mater J 2002;99(2):180–9.
[9] Hashimoto S, Fujino Y, Abe M. Damage analysis of Hanshin Expressway
Viaducts during 1995 Kobe earthquake. II: Damage mode of single reinforced
concrete piers. ASCE J Bridge Eng 2005;10(1):54–60.
[10] Karayannis CG, Chalioris CE, Sirkelis GM. Local retrofit of exterior RC beam-
column joints using thin RC jackets – an experimental study. Earthquake Eng
Struct Dyn 2008;37:727–46.
184 E. Choi et al. / Composites: Part B 58 (2014) 175–184
[11] Lam L, Teng JG. Strength models for fiber-reinforced plastic-confined concrete.
J Struct Eng 2002;128(5):612–23.
[12] Lee DH, Oh J, Yu WD, Choi E. Seismic performance of RC columns confined by
outside lateral reinforcement. J Korea Soc Civ Eng 2012;32(3):189–96.
[13] Lin ML, Chen PC, Tsai KC, Yu YJ, Liu JG. Seismic steel jacketing of rectangular RC
bridge columns for the mitigation of lap-splice failures. Earthquake Eng Struct
Dyn 2010;39(15):1687–710.
[14] Mander JB, Priestley MJN, Park R. Theoretical stress–strain model for confined
concrete. J Struct Eng 1988;114(8):1804–26.
[15] Pandtelides CP, Duffin JB, Reaveley LD. Seismic strengthening of reinforced
concrete multicolumn bridge piers. Earthquake Eng 2007;23(3):635–64.
[16] Priestley MJN. The Whittier narrows, California earthquake of October 1,
1987-damage to the I-5/I-605 separator. Earthquake Spectra 1988;4(2):
389–405.
[17] Richart FE, Brandtzaeg A, Brown RL. A study of the failure of concrete under
combined compressive stresses. Illinois: University of Illinois Engineering
Experiment Station Bulletin No. 185; 1928.
View publication stats
[18] Richart FE, Brandtzaeg A, Brown RL. The failure of plain and spirally reinforced
concrete in compression. Illinois: University of Illinois Engineering
Experimental Station Bulletin No. 190; 1929.
[19] Richard RM, Abbott BJ. Versatile elastic–plastic stress–strain formula. J Eng
Mech, ASCE 1975;101(4):511–5.
[20] Samaan M, Mirmiran A, Shahawy M. Model of concrete confined by fiber
composites. J Struct Eng, ASCE 1998;124(9):1025–31.
[21] Spoelstra MR, Monti G. FRP-confined concrete model. J Compos Constr, ASCE
1999;3(3):143–50.
[22] Toutanji H, Saafi M. Stress–strain behavior of concrete columns confined with
hybrid composite materials. Mater Struct 2002;35:338–47.
[23] Wee TH, Chin MS, Mansur MA. Stress–strain relationship of high-strength
concrete in compression. ASCE J Mater Civ Eng 1996;8(2):70–7.
[24] Wong YL, Yu T, Teng JG, Dong SL. Behavior of FRP-confined concrete in annular
section columns. Compos Part B: Eng 2008;39:451–66.
[25] Youssef MN, Feng MQ, Mosallam AS. Stress–strain model for concrete confined
by FRP composite. Compos Part B: Eng 2007;38:614–28.