International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

International Journal of Solids and Structures

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijsolstr

Elliptical and circular FRP-confined concrete sections: A Mohr–Coulomb

analytical model
Domingo A. Moran, Chris P. Pantelides ⇑
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA

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

Article history: An analytical stress–strain model is developed for predicting the compressive behavior of elliptical and
Received 27 April 2011 circular fiber reinforced polymer (FRP)-confined concrete members. The model is based on a diagonal
Received in revised form 7 December 2011 Poisson’s ratio formulation expressed as a function of the mechanical properties of the unconfined con-
Available online 3 January 2012
crete and confining FRP jacket, the geometry of the concrete section, and the extent of internal damage in
the confined concrete core. A Mohr–Coulomb yield criterion is introduced for analysis of the compressive
Keywords: behavior of confined concrete. Equilibrium and strain compatibility are used to obtain the ultimate com-
Column
pressive strength and strain of elliptical and circular FRP-confined concrete sections as a function of the
Concrete
Dilation
effective confining stiffness of the FRP jacket. A simplified expression is derived for the FRP reinforcement
Ductility ratio which precludes strain softening in elliptical and circular FRP-confined concrete sections.
Fiber reinforced polymer composites Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Rehabilitation
Retrofit
Stress–strain

1. Introduction shape-modifying elliptical FRP jackets. Campione and Cuchiara

FRP composite jackets have been used for the seismic retrofit of
existing reinforced concrete columns (Saadatmanesh et al., 1994;
Seible et al., 1995, 1997; Xiao and Ma, 1997; Pantelides et al., 1999,
2001, 2004, 2008; Pessiki et al., 2001; Pantelides and Gergely, 2002;
Chun and Park, 2002, among others). Despite successful application
of FRP jacketing systems for columns, research into the constitutive
relationships governing the compressive and dilation behavior of
FRP-confined concrete is under continuous development.
Several studies including those of Lam and Teng (2003a,b),
Chaallal et al. (2003), Rochette and Labosièrre (2000), Carey
(2002), Pessiki et al. (2001), Demers et al. (1996), Restrepo and
deVino (1996), and Mirmiran (1997) have demonstrated that the
compressive behavior of elliptical, square, and rectangular concrete
sections encased in continuous FRP jackets is different from circular
FRP-confined concrete (FCC) sections. Recently, Yan (2005) and
Teng and Lam (2002) have demonstrated that, depending on the
transverse stiffness of the FRP jacket and section aspect ratio, ellip-
tical concrete sections encased in continuous FRP jackets behave
somewhat similar to circular FCC sections. Yan (2005) and Yan
and Pantelides (2006) have demonstrated that the strength and
ductility of rectangular sections can increase if confined by
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 801 585 3991; fax: +1 801 585 5477.
E-mail addresses: dmoran@reaveley.com (D.A. Moran), c.pantelides@utah.edu
(C.P. Pantelides).
(2007) have developed relationships for strength and strain
capacity of fiber reinforced polymer-confined concrete in elliptical
columns. El-Gawady et al. (2009) demonstrated that shape modify-
ing elliptical FRP jackets within the plastic hinge region of rectangu-
lar reinforced concrete (RC) columns can improve the ductility of RC
columns with deficient lap splices.
Understanding the compressive and dilation behavior of FRP-
confined concrete (FCC) sections requires a model based on first
principles. In the present paper, experimental results are used to
validate the applicability of the analytical model rather than to cal-
ibrate the model to fit experimental results. A Mohr–Coulomb
model for concrete and an analytical dilation model are introduced.
The analytical model includes only one parameter which is based
on experimental results, the FRP jacket stiffness dependent asymp-
totic plastic dilation rate, that determines the effects that the con-
crete material properties, the FRP jacket stiffness properties, and
cross-sectional geometry have on the axial strain-induced dilation
of the confined concrete core.
2. Mechanical properties of elliptical FRP-confined concrete
sections
Consider an elliptical FRP-confined concrete (FCC) section
(Fig. 1) having a short dimension Bc = 2bc, a long dimension Hc = 2hc
with an unconfined compressive strength fco and corresponding
strain eco, an initial secant Poisson’s ratio mci, and a concrete axial

0020-7683/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2011.12.012
882 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898

(a) (b)
Fig. 1. Section geometry: (a) elliptical FRP-confined concrete section and (b) circular FRP-confined concrete section.

modulus of elasticity Eci, confined by a continuous thin FRP jacket and remolding of the concrete’s internal structure), at a given axial
of thickness tj, where hc P bc  tj, with an average tangent trans- compressive strainec, the confining FRP jacket and confined con-
verse modulus of elasticity of the FRP jacket Ej. The mechanical crete core experience a transverse dilation strain ej, at a tangential
properties of the FRP jacket, include the effective transverse stiff- angle hb, determined by the intersection of the normal to the main
ness (Eje)B, the effective confining stiffness (Cje)sh, and the normal- section diagonal Dc with the tangent to the cross section along the
ized effective confining stiffness (Kje)sh, defined as: FRP jacket. As a result of this axial strain-induced diagonal dilation,
  ej, the confined concrete along the main core diagonal Dsh (Figs. 2
ðC je Þsh 2ke Ej t j
ðK je Þsh ¼ ; ðC je Þsh ¼ C sh ðEje ÞB ; ðEje ÞB ¼ ð1Þ and 3(a)), experiences the following effective diagonal confining
fco Hc rde and shearing sde stresses (Moran and Pantelides, 2009, 2010):
2 3
pffiffiffi
ash Pj ð1 þ ash Þ 6 3ðcsh Þ2 7 a 1 rde ¼  2ðEje ÞB ej cosðhb Þ sinðhd Þ; sde ¼ rde tanðhb Þ ð4Þ
C sh ¼ ¼ 41 þ ffi5; csh ¼ sh
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð2Þ pffiffiffi
pH c 2
10 þ 4  3ðc Þ 2 ash þ 1 2
sh
Dsh ¼ Hc cscðhd Þ; hb ¼ 2hd  90 ð5Þ
H h 2
ash ¼ c ¼ c ¼ tanhd ð3Þ For the FCC sections shown in Fig. 3(b) and (c), the major r1e
Bc bc
and intermediate r2e effective stresses at a given axial strain-in-
where ke = confining efficiency of FRP jacket; for continuous ellipti- duced dilation strain ej (tension considered positive) are given by:
cal and circular FRP jackets ke = 1.0. The jacket confinement ratio  
coefficient is Csh; the perimeter coefficient is csh; the section aspect tanðhb Þ
r1e ¼ rde 1  ; r2e ¼ rde ½1 þ ash tanðhb Þ ð6Þ
ratio is ash where ash P 1.0; the jacket circumference is Pj; and the ash
angle of inclination is hd, as shown in Fig. 1; these are the geometric The previous relationship yields the following transverse stress
properties of the FCC section. A circular FCC section is a special case ratio, which can also be obtained using equilibrium analysis:
of an elliptical FCC section with ash = 1.0, as shown in Fig. 1.
r2e
ar ¼ ¼ tan2 ðhd Þ ¼ ðash Þ2 ð7Þ
r1e
3. Diagonal equilibrium and strain compatibility

3.1. Diagonal equilibrium 3.2. Strain compatibility

Consider an elliptical and circular FCC section (Fig. 2), subjected Analytical strain compatibility relationships are introduced
to an axial compressive strain ec and resultant axial compressive from the dilation behavior of circular and elliptical concrete col-
stress fc. Due to axial strain-induced damage (i.e. Poisson’s effects umns confined by FRP jackets, using diagonal equilibrium of FCC
sections (Moran and Pantelides, 2007, 2009, 2010). An elliptical
FCC section is shown in Fig. 4(a). A portion of the elliptical FRP
jacket at a given diagonal angle hi is shown in Fig. 4(b) from which
the following equilibrium relationships along the y and x direction
and rotational equilibrium with respect to point O are found:
 
a2sh
ðfB Þh hh  Ej tj ðej Þh cosðhj Þh ¼ 0; ðhj Þh ¼ tan1 ð8Þ
tanðhi Þ
Ej tj ðej Þh sinðhj Þh þ ðfH Þh ðbc  bh Þ  Ej t j eH ¼ 0 ð9Þ
1 1
Ej tj eH ðbc  bh Þ  ðfH Þh ðbc  bh Þ2  ðfB Þh ðhh Þ2 ¼ 0 ð10Þ
2 2 sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Hc 1
hh ¼ ðRj Þh sinðhi Þ; bh ¼ ðRj Þh cosðhi Þ; ðRj Þh ¼ ð11Þ
2 a2 cos2 ðhi Þ þ sin2 ðhi Þ
sh

4ðRj Þ3h 2
ðUj Þh ¼ ½a4sh cos2 ðhi Þ þ sin ðhi Þ3=2 ð12Þ
ðash Hc Þ2
(a) (b)
where eB and eH are the average strains in the FRP jacket along the
Fig. 2. Diagonal effective confining and shearing stresses: (a) elliptical FRP- minor and major axis of the elliptical FCC section; (ej)h is the tan-
confined section and (b) circular FRP-confined concrete section. gential jacket strain in the elliptical FRP jacket at a given angle hi
 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898 883

(a)

(b) (c)
Fig. 3. Elliptical FRP-confined concrete: (a) confined core geometry, (b) equilibrium of vertical wedge, and (c) equilibrium of horizontal wedge.

(a) (b)

(c)
Fig. 4. Elliptical FRP-confined concrete section: (a) section geometry, (b) equilibrium, and (c) plot of tangential jacket strain ratio (ae)h versus diagonal angle (hi).

and corresponding jacket tangent angle (hj)h of Eq. (8); (fB)h and (fH)h
are the average confining stress in the concrete core along the min-
or and major jacket dimensions, respectively, at a given angle hi; hh
and bh are the major and minor core dimensions at a given angle hi.
The elliptical radius at a given angle hi is (Rj)h; it has a minimum
value of (Rj)h = bc when hi = 0° and a maximum value of (Rj)h = hc
when hi = 90°; (Uj)h is the radius of curvature of the elliptical FRP
jacket at a given angle hi.
Eqs. (8)–(12) yield the following tangential jacket strain ratio
(ae)h of the elliptical FCC section at a given diagonal angle hi:
884 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898

sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
eH 3 ash H c
4.1. Diagonal dilation model
ðae Þh ¼ ¼ ð13Þ
ðej Þh 2ðUj Þh
The following incremental damage-based diagonal dilation
The transverse strain ratio of Eq. (13) is plotted in Fig. 4(c) for FCC model is introduced which captures the effects that concrete
sections of various aspect ratios. The transverse strain ratio (ae)h mechanical properties, FRP jacket shape and stiffness, and damage
along the perimeter of the elliptical FRP jacket increases nonlinearly in the FCC core have on the diagonal dilation behavior of the FCC
as the section aspect ratio ash increases. The FRP transverse strain section (Moran, 2011):
ratio ae = eH/eB determined using hi = 90° in Eq. (13), the diagonal   nc =ðnc 1Þ 
jacket strain ratio aj = ej/eB determined using hi = hd in Eq. (13),   l0jo ljp 1 þ ðnc  1Þ U eecoc
ej
and transverse stress ratio ar = fH/fB = r2e/r1e determined using ðmj Þi ¼  ¼   nc =ðnc 1Þ  ;
ec
the equilibrium relationships of Eqs. (8)–(12), with hi = 0° in Eq. i
ljp þ l0jo 1 þ ðnc  1Þ U eecoc
(8) and hi = 90° in Eq. (9), are given by:
pffiffiffi ðluc  ljo Þ
e e 2 nc ¼ ð16Þ
ae ¼ H ¼ ash ; aj ¼ j ¼ secðhd Þ ð14Þ ljo ð2luc  1Þ
eB eB 2
f r ljo ljp ðmj Þi1
ar ¼ H ¼ 2e ¼ ash ae ¼ ðash Þ2 ð15Þ l0jo ¼ for ljp > ljo ; U ¼ ð17Þ
fB r1e ljp  ljo apk ðmj Þpk
The transverse stress ratio ar of Eq. (15) determined using Eqs. (8)–
(14) yields the same results as the stress ratio ar of Eq. (7) deter-  " #
ðec Þpk cv ol ljp  ðmj Þpk
mined using the diagonal equilibrium analysis of Eqs. (4)–(6). These apk ¼ ¼ uv ol ;
eco 1  cv ol ðmj Þpk
equilibrium, stress and strain relationships also apply to square sec-  
tions confined by shape-modifying circular FRP jackets (Yan, 2005; ej nc ljo ljp
ðmj Þpk ¼  ¼ ð18Þ
Yan et al., 2006), including rectangular sections confined by shape- ec pk ljp þ ljo ðnc  1Þ
modifying elliptical FRP jackets (Yan, 2005; Yan et al., 2006).
2   3ðnc 1Þ=nc
aj ðnc  1Þ 1c cv ol
4. Dilation behavior of FRP-confined concrete sections cv ol ¼ ; uv ol ¼ 4l   v ol
5 ð19Þ
ljp ð1 þ ae Þ jp 1cv ol
l 1  jo c v ol
As the axial strains in the FRP-confined section increase, the
transverse strains increase at a faster rate than those predicted where the terms of the dilation model are plotted in Fig. 5(a). The
by the theory of elasticity. Thus, as the dilation due to internal subscript irepresents the ith increment of the axial strain and the
microcracking or void compaction of the concrete core increases subscript (i  1) represents the previous increment in axial strain;
(i.e., increase in damage) so does the jacket diagonal secant Pois- nc is a constant curvature coefficient that defines the shape of the
son’s ratio mj of the elliptical (and circular) FCC section. The com- dilation curve which depends on the initial Poisson’s ratio or dila-
pressive stress–strain behavior of elliptical FRP-confined concrete tion rate of the unconfined concrete material lci = mci, where
can be described by considering the variation of the diagonal Pois- 0.15 6 mci 6 0.25, and the plastic dilation rate of unconfined con-
son’s ratio mj, and the diagonal dilation rate (tangent Poisson’s ra- crete luc; ljo and l0jo are the initial and effective initial dilation rate
tio) lj, as the axial compressive strain ec, and resultant expansive of the FCC section, respectively, where ljo ffi mci. Also, U is a damage
strains, ej, eB, and eH, progress. coefficient that accounts for damage of the concrete’s internal struc-
Various researchers have introduced dilation models to de- ture; (mj)pk is the peak diagonal Poisson’s ratio evaluated at the peak
scribe the dilation behavior of FRP-confined concrete subjected to axial (ec)pk and diagonal (ej)pk strain; apk is the peak axial strain ra-
equibiaxial confinement. These include Spoelstra and Monti tio; eco is the peak compressive strain of unconfined concrete; cvol
(1999), Saenz (2004), Saenz and Pantelides (2007), and Lee and and uvol are FRP jacket shape and stiffness-dependent volumetric
Hegemier (2009) who used the axial strain dependent dilation dilation parameters.
model introduced by Pantazopoulou and Mills (1995) to describe As shown in Fig. 5(a), this dilation model considers that at low
the dilation behavior of circular FCC sections; Marques et al. axial and transverse dilation strain mj = ljo, whereas at very high
(2004) improved upon the Spoelstra and Monti (1999) model and axial compressive strains and corresponding diagonal strains the
used the Pantazopoulou and Mills (1995) model to describe the Poisson’s ratio approaches an asymptotic value of mj ffi ljp as the
dilation of circular and square FCC sections; Cui (2009) and Cui FRP jacket becomes effective in curtailing the lateral dilation of
and Sheikh (2010) used an empirical Imran and Pantazopoulou the FCC core, while ljp is the asymptotic plastic dilation rate. Plas-
(1996) model that was calibrated using actively confined concrete tic stress–strain behavior is assumed to occur at any axial plastic
cylinders. Mirmiran and Shahawy (1996, 1997a,b) and Saaman compressive strain ec = ecp and corresponding plastic diagonal
(1997) introduced empirical FRP jacket stiffness dependent dila- expansive strain ej = ejp, where ejo < ejp 6 eju. In addition, ejo is the
tion rate models for circular FCC sections; Fam and Rizkalla transverse strain corresponding to the peak unconfined concrete
(2001), Fujikake et al. (2004), Montoya et al. (2006), Binici and axial strain eco; ecu and eju are the ultimate axial strain and diagonal
Mosalam (2007), and Teng et al. (2007) introduced empirical lat- jacket strain at failure of the confining FRP jacket, respectively.
eral confining pressure-dependent dilation models; Xiao and Wu Using the initial Poisson’s ratio mci of the unconfined concrete
(2000), Xiao and Wu (2003) introduced an empirical FRP jacket core the following expression is proposed for the plastic dilation
stiffness-dependent bilinear dilation model for circular FCC sec- rate ljp of the FCC section:
tions; Carey (2002) introduced an empirical tri-linear dilation  
@ ej ðl  mci Þ
model for circular and square FCC sections; Monti and Nistico ljp ¼   mci þ h uc i2 ð20Þ
@ ec K
(2007) introduced an empirical volumetric strain-dependent dila- p 1 þ ðK jeÞ
je ref
tion model. Due to the empirical nature of many dilation models,
their applicability to sections other than FCC cylinders is limited, As shown in Fig. 5(b), the plastic dilation rate ljp decreases nonlin-
since they were calibrated to fit experimental results of either ac- early as the FRP jacket stiffness Kje increases, and approaches the ini-
tively confined or FCC cylinders. tial elastic Poisson’s ratio mci as the passive confinement provided by
 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898 885

 " #
ljp  ljo
eco
(a) ðec Þv ol ¼ ; ðej Þv ol ¼ ljp cv ol ðec Þv ol ð21Þ
ljp þ ljo ðnc  1Þ
1  cv ol
 
1 þ ae
ev ¼ ec þ eH þ eB ffi ej þ ec ð22Þ
aj
When cvol P 1.0 (i.e., when volumetric expansion is precluded)
both the volumetric dilation parameter uvol of Eq. (19) and the
peak strain ratio apk of Eq. (18) are undefined. As a result, when
cvol P 1.0, uvol and apk can be evaluated by setting
0.95 6 cvol 6 0.99 without significant loss in accuracy. For uncon-
fined concrete cylinders the dilation model predicts that volumet-
ric expansion initiates (i.e., ev = 0) when ec = (ec)vol ffi eco which is in
agreement with Pantazopoulou and Mills (1995) and Pantazopou-
lou (1995). The volumetric strain evol curves predicted by the dila-
tion model of Eqs. (16)–(20) for the circular FCC sections
considered are plotted in Fig. 6(c). As shown in this figure, the dila-
(b) tion model predicts that volumetric expansion of the FCC core is
delayed (i.e., (ec)vol > eco) as the FRP jacket stiffness increases and
can be prevented as the FRP jacket stiffness becomes significantly
large (i.e., when cvol  1.0).
The analytical dilation rate lj = (dej/d ec) of the FCC section can
be found by taking the derivative of the diagonal secant Poisson’s
ratio mj of Eq. (16), with respect to the diagonal jacket strain ej,
where:
 
@ ej
ðlj Þi ¼ 
@ ec i
  nc =ðnc 1Þ 2
ljp l0jo ðncc  1Þ 1 þ ðnc  1Þ U eecoc
¼   nc =ðnc 1Þ    nc =ðnc 1Þ 2
ljp 1  U eecoc þ l0jo ðnc  1Þ 1 þ ðnc  1Þ U eecoc

Fig. 5. Plot of (a) typical axial strain (ec) versus diagonal strain (ej) curve; and (b)
asymptotic plastic dilation rate (ljp) versus normalized effective jacket stiffness
(Kje) of FRP-confined concrete.
the FRP-jacket becomes large. The data in Fig. 5(b) represent 132
tests for which both radial and axial strain data are available. This
behavior is approximated herein using ljp of Eq. (20), where luc
and (Kje )ref are the dilation rate of unconfined concrete and the ref-
erence FRP jacket stiffness, respectively. These terms are determined
from analysis of the dilation behavior of FRP-confined concrete cyl-
inder tests, which yield luc = 1.40 and (Kje)ref = 35.0. The plastic dila-
tion rate ljp of Eq. (20) is the only parameter in the proposed dilation
model of Eqs. (16)–(19) that was calibrated based on experimental
tests of FCC cylinders. The predicted dilation curves of circular FRP
jacket sections, for which ash = aj = ae = Csh = 1.0, are shown in
Fig. 6. For these predictions the following was assumed mci = 0.20,
ke = 1.0, Ej = 275.0 GPa, Eci = 85.0 GPa, and Hc = 460 mm in the pro-
posed dilation model; the FRP jacket was assumed to have varying
stiffness values where Kje = 0, 10, 20, 30, and 40.
The Poisson’s ratio and diagonal strain versus axial strain curves
predicted by the dilation model of Eqs. (16)–(20) of circular FCC
sections are plotted in Fig. 6(a) and (b), respectively. The volumet-
ric dilation parameter cvol of Eq. (19) predicts whether volumetric
expansion of the FCC core occurs at high axial compressive strains
(when volumetric strain ev is positive). When cvol P 1.0 the dila-
tion model predicts that the FRP jacket has sufficient lateral stiff-
ness to curtail the lateral dilation of the FCC core and preclude
its volumetric expansion at high axial compressive strains, (i.e., if
ev 6 0); when cvol < 1.0 the model predicts that the FRP jacket has
inadequate stiffness to inhibit the volumetric expansion of the
FCC core (i.e., evol > 0), which is predicted to occur when the axial
compressive strain ec and corresponding jacket diagonal strain ej
exceed:
ð23Þ
The above diagonal dilation rate model predicts that the maxi-
mum diagonal jacket dilation rate (lj)max of the FCC section can be
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
found when Uec =eco ¼ 1 þ nc is substituted into Eq. (23). The dila-
tion rate curves predicted by the dilation model of Eqs. (16)–(23) of
circular FCC sections are plotted in Fig. 6(d). The model predicts
that as the stiffness of the FRP jacket increases the FRP jacket be-
comes more effective in curtailing the dilation of the confined con-
crete core.
The dilation behavior predicted by the dilation model shown in
Fig. 6 has also been observed in concrete cylinder tests performed
by Mirmiran and Shahawy (1997a,b), Saaman (1997), Xiao and Wu
(2000); Xiao and Wu (2003), Carey (2002), Saenz (2004), Teng and
Lam (2004), Yan (2005), Wu et al. (2006), Teng et al. (2007), Tamuzs
et al. (2007), Cui (2009), among others; and in compressive tests of
shape-modified elliptical FCC sections performed by Yan (2005).
The key features of the proposed dilation model of Eqs. (16)–
(23) is that the dilation behavior of the FCC section depends on
the lateral kinematic restraint provided by the restraining FRP
jacket ((Eje)B and Kje), the FRP jacket shape (ash, ae, aj), the extent
of axial strain-induced damage in the FCC section, and the proper-
ties of the unconfined concrete core (Eci, mci, and luc).
4.2. Effective diagonal strain
When results from experiments are not available, the average
effective diagonal strain in the elliptical FRP jacket (ej)eff and corre-
sponding available axial strain (ec)eff can be determined as follows:
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 þ ðash Þ2
ðej Þeff ¼ ke ksh fu ;e 
e ¼ efu  3re ; ksh ¼
fu ð24Þ
2ðash Þ2
where efu is the adjusted failure strain of FRP tensile coupon tests,
and re is the standard deviation of the failure strain efu of FRP ten-
sile coupon tests. The three times standard deviation of efu in Eq.
886 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898

1.00 0.012
Kje=10 Kje=30
Kje=20

Secant Poisson Ratio

0.80 Kje=40
Kje=0 0.009 Kje=10

Diagonal Strain
Kje=20
0.60
Kje=30
Kje=40 0.006
0.40

0.003
0.20
Kje=0
0.00 0.000
-0.020 -0.010 0.000 0.010 0.020 0.030 0.000 0.006 0.012 0.018 0.024 0.030
Diagonal Strain Axial Strain Axial Strain

(a) (b)

0.012 2.50
Kje=0
Kje=10 2.00
0.008
Volumetric Strain

Dilation Rate
1.50
Kje=20
0.004
Kje=10 1.00
Kje=0 Kje=20
Kje=30
0.000 Kje=30 Kje=40 0.50
-0.020 -0.010 0.000 0.010 0.020 0.030
Kje=40 0.00
-0.004 -0.020 -0.010 0.000 0.010 0.020 0.030
Diagonal Strain Axial Strain Diagonal Strain Axial Strain
(c) (d)
Fig. 6. Plot of predicted (a) secant Poisson’s ratio (mj) curves; (b) diagonal strain (ej) versus axial strain (ec) curves; (c) volumetric dilation curves; and (d) dilation rate (lj)
curves.

(24), accounts for quality control differences between flat coupons the following experimentally determined confinement effective-
and in situ jackets, misalignment or damage to jacket fibers during ness kcc:
layup, and uneven tension during layup, among other factors. The
fcc
jacket strain efficiency ke in Eq. (24) accounts for the detrimental kcc ¼  ð26Þ
fco
effects of combined axial shortening and transverse dilation in an
FCC section, and stress and strain concentrations at the jacket-to- where fco and fcc are the peak compressive strength of the uncon-
concrete interface due to bond and micro/macrocracking pof
ffiffiffi the con- fined and confined concrete core, respectively. The increase in com-
fined core; the range for ke is 0.50 6 ke 6 1.0, and ke ¼ 3=3 is rec- pressive strength of the actively or passively confined concrete is
ommended. The strain compatibility term ksh in Eq. (24) accounts typically assumed to be governed by the following Richart et al.
for shape effects. An estimate of the effective axial stress (fc)eff in (1928) relationship:
the circular or elliptical FCC section can be found using an incre-
kcc ¼ 1 þ k1 wr ð27Þ
mental Popovics-based stress–strain model (Moran, 2011), and by
finding the effective axial strain (ec)eff at the effective diagonal jack- where wr = fr/fco is the average confinement stress ratio and k1 is a
et strain (ej)eff of Eq. (24); (ec)eff can be found by substituting (ej)eff/ constant confinement effectiveness coefficient. However, this is not
(ej)pk in lieu of U ec/eco in the dilation model of Eqs. (16)–(20), where in agreement with experimental evidence for FRP confined con-
(ej)pk is determined using Eqs. (18) and (19), and setting crete. As shown in Fig. 7(a) and (b), k1 is a transverse stress-depen-
(ec)eff = (ej)eff/mj, or it can be approximated using the following dent coefficient that decreases nonlinearly as wr increases.
expression: Several researchers, including Mirmiran and Shahawy (1997a,b),
" # Kono et al. (1998), Saaman et al. (1998), Miyauchi et al. (1997),
ljp  ljo ðej Þeff Spoelstra and Monti (1999), Toutanji (1999), Saafi et al. (1999), Xiao
ðec Þeff  eco  ð25Þ and Wu (2000), Xiao and Wu (2003), Lam and Teng (2003a), Shehata
ljp þ ljo ðnc  1Þ ljp
et al. (2002), Moran and Pantelides (2002b, 2005), Campione and
Miraglia (2003), Mathys et al. (2005), Wu et al. (2006), Wu and
Wang (2009), Teng et al. (2009), Lee and Hegemier (2009),
5. Confinement effectiveness of confined concrete Cui (2009), Cui and Sheikh (2010), among others, have introduced
empirical Richart et al. (1928) type models for FCC sections with
In the analysis of circular or elliptical FCC sections, it is assumed empirical curve-fitting parameters that were calibrated based on
that the increase in strength due to active or passive confinement FCC cylinder test results to account for the nonlinearity of the con-
provided by the transverse reinforcement or jacket is governed by finement effectiveness coefficient k1, as observed in Fig. 7(a) and (b).
 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898 887

This can limit the applicability and effectiveness of the confinement and transverse deformation of the concrete core and the lateral re-
models to circular FCC sections. straint provided by the confining FRP jacket.
In this paper, a soil mechanics approach is taken in which an The following generalized two-parameter Triaxial Extended
analytical failure criterion for actively and passively confined con- Mohr–Coulomb (TEMC)-type failure criterion for concrete, with
crete is introduced. This model captures the nonlinear relationship the smooth deviatoric section of Fig. 8 is introduced (Moran,
between k1 and wr at low confinement levels in actively confined 2011). The behavior of concrete in uniaxial tension, uniaxial com-
concrete and at low axial and transverse strains in passively FRP- pression, and triaxial compression is governed by the uniaxial ten-
confined concrete. The essentially linear relationship at high active sile strength fto, the uniaxial compressive strength fco, and the angle
and passive confinement is also captured. The compressive and of internal friction /c of the concrete material, as follows:
dilation behavior of FRP-confined concrete depends on the
mechanical properties of the concrete material (fco, fto) and FRP cf q þ bf n  1 ¼ 0 ð28Þ
jacket (Kje, Cje, (Eje)B), and the geometry of the FCC section pffiffiffi!  pffiffiffi! 
6 3  sinð/c Þ f ¼ b 2 3 sinð/c Þ
(ash, hd, hB, ke, ae, aj, Csh). cf ¼ rðh;eÞcf ; b f ð29Þ
6 1  sinð/c Þ 3 1 þ sinð/c Þ
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
5.1. Confinement effectiveness of confined concrete: a soil mechanics 1 1 1 þ sin/c fto
bf ¼ k1 wt ; cf ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ; k1 ¼ ; wt ¼ ð30Þ
approach fto fco k1 wt 1  sin/c fco
qt 3  sinð/c Þ ½4ð1  eÞðcos h  1Þ þ 1cos h
A mechanics-based stress–strain model, applicable to elliptical e¼ ¼ ; rðh; eÞ ¼ ð31Þ
qc 3 þ sinð/c Þ e þ cos h  1
and circular FCC sections is introduced. This model requires an 0 1
pffiffiffi
analytical yield surface or failure envelope that defines the confine- I1 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1 1 B3 3J 3 C
ment effectiveness, kcc of Eqs. (26) and (27), of active or passively q ¼ pffiffiffi ; n ¼ 2J2 ; h ¼ cos @ qffiffiffiffi A ð32Þ
3 3
confined concrete in a triaxial compression state of stress. The geo- 2 J3 2

metric and mechanical properties of FRP-jacketed sections, trans- r1 þ r2 þ r3

I1 ¼ ; I2 ¼ ðr1 r2 þ r2 r3 þ r3 r1 Þ; I3 ¼ r1 r2 r3 ð33Þ
verse and diagonal equilibrium relationships, and strain 3
2 3
compatibility relationships are included in the development of a ðI1 Þ I1 I2 2ðI1 Þ
smooth Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion for FCC sections. Confined J2 ¼ þ I2 ; J 3 ¼ I 3 þ þ ð34Þ
3 3 27
concrete is treated as an isotropic, homogenous Mohr–Coulomb
frictional–cohesive granular material with some interparticle where c f ; b and cf are material parameters that measure the
f ; b f
attraction or cohesion provided by the binding cement. Concrete cohesive and frictional strength of concrete; these parameters
is assumed to exhibit similar compressive and dilation behavior depend on the concrete’s unconfined compressive strength fco and
as that of granular cemented soils, i.e., soils that exhibit a uniaxial tensile strength fto or tensile stress ratio wt, where 0.03 6 wt 6 0.12;
tensile capacity. The response of concrete to applied axial stresses e defines the eccentricity or out-of-roundness of the deviatoric trace
and strains depends on the resistance provided by aggregate slid- where 0.50 6 e 6 1.0 (Menetrey, 1994); r(h, e) is a radial function
ing, shifting, rolling, and crushing that develops during the axial (Papanikolopoulos and Papadrakakis, 2006) that describes the

10 15
Analytical Analytical
8 12
Imran (fco= 21.2 MPa ) Imran (fco= 73.4 MPa)
6 9
k1 k1
4 6

2 3

0 0
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
ψr ψr

(a) (b)
60 60
Analytical Analytical

50 Imran ( fco=28.6 MPa ) 50 Imran ( fco= 47.4 MPa )

φc φc
40 40

30 30
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
ψr 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
ψr
(c) (d)
Fig. 7. Analytical comparisons to experiments by Imran (1994): (a) and (b) confinement effectiveness coefficient k1; (c) and (d) internal friction angle /c versus transverse
confinement stress ratio wr of actively confined concrete.
888 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898
(a)
Fig. 8. Failure criterion: (a) typical triaxial failure surface of concrete in principal stress space; (b) deviatoric plane or section; and (c) deviatoric stress projections of the
proposed TEMC criterion for concrete.
shape of the deviatoric trace and the radial distance from the hydro-
stat; q, n, and h are the Haigh–Westergaard coordinates; qt and qc
are the tensile and compressive meridians; r1, r2, and r3 are the
major, intermediate and minor principal stresses, respectively;
and I1, J2, and J3 are stress invariants.
For a given axial strain ec and resultant jacket diagonal strain ej
in a circular or elliptical FCC section, the transverse major principal
r1 = r1e, and intermediate r2 = r2e confining stresses provided by
the FRP jacket are determined using Eq. (6). The minor r3 = fcc prin-
cipal stress in the FCC core is found iteratively using the TEMC
model of Eqs. (28)–(34). For FCC sections, the triaxial compression
case of r1 > r2 > r3 corresponds to rectangular and elliptical FCC
sections with an aspect ratio greater than unity ash > 1.0.
As shown in Eq. (31), the eccentricity e is a function of the resul-
tant friction angle /c, which as demonstrated in Fig. 7(c) and (d)
decreases nonlinearly as the absolute transverse confining stress
jr1j = jfrj = jr1ej increases. As /c decreases, eccentricity e increases,
and the deviatoric section, whose shape is determined using the
radial function r(h, e) of Eq. (31), expands from triangular to
rounded triangular shapes as the compressive hydrostatic stress
in the confined concrete decreases, as shown in Fig. 8(c).
5.2. Equibiaxially confined concrete
For equibiaxially confined concrete for which r2 = r1 = fr, and
r3 = fcc the TEMC model of Eqs. (28)–(34) reduces to the following
Mohr–Coulomb relationship:
bf r1  cf r3  1 ¼ 0
The Richart et al. (1928) failure criterion of Eq. (27) is a special
case of the above Mohr–Coulomb yield criterion of Eq. (35) for
which cf = 1/fco and k1 = bf/cf = 4.10. A constant confinement effec-
tiveness coefficient k1 at all levels of confinement as assumed by
(b)
(c)
Richart et al. (1928) is not supported by experimental data, as
shown in Fig. 7(a) and (b). A constant k1 also implies a uniform an-
gle of internal friction /c of the confined concrete material from Eq.
(30), which as shown in Fig. 7(c) and (d) decreases nonlinearly as
w1 = wr = r1/fco increases.
This decrease in both k1 and /c is attributed herein to remolding
of the concrete’s internal structure resulting from axial strain-in-
duced damage (dilation), that initiates internal crack growth,
aggregate crushing and shifting, void compaction and nucleation,
and decohesion (loss of adhesion provided by the binding cement
paste) as the concrete essentially degrades to that of its constituent
granular materials (sand and gravel). From Fig. 7(c) and (d) it can
be observed that the angle of internal friction /c of the concrete
core is a nonlinear stress-path dependent material property that
depends on the magnitude of the applied stresses. This is modeled
herein using the following major principal stress-dependent
degrading friction angle model (Moran and Pantelides, 2009,
2010; Moran, 2011), in which the angle of internal friction /c of
the concrete material is separated into two distinct components:
(1) a constant basic angle of internal friction of dry /b or wet con-
crete /be, considered stress-path independent material constants,
and (2) a stress-dependent dilatancy angle /dil, where:
/c ¼ /be þ /dil ð36Þ
The basic angle of internal friction of the concrete core /be of Eq.
(36) represents the residual angle of shearing resistance of the
rock-like concrete material, which is mobilized at very high strains
ð35Þ in which the behavior of the confined concrete core is mostly gov-
erned by friction and aggregate particle breakage at existing micro-
and macro-crack interfaces. Also, /be is the effective basic angle of
internal friction, including excess pore water pressure effects.
At high levels of axial and transverse deformations, the confined
concrete material is expected to behave similar to sandy and
 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898
− σ3
Minor Principal
Stress
− (σ 3 )i
σ 3 = f co
− (σ 1 ) i
σ1 − fto = Major Principal Stress
(a)
Fig. 9. Failure envelope and angle of internal friction: (a) typical failure envelope of a frictional–cohesive material in the major and minor principal stress region; and
(b) angle of internal friction versus major principal stress ratio, including geometry.
gravelly soils subjected to very large confining stresses. Maksimovic
(1989, 1996) has shown that for coarse granular soils like limestone
sand /b ffi 36°; 32.7° 6 /b 6 34° for crushed basalt; /b  32.7° for
gravel; /b  36.4° for sand and gravelly soil; and /b  37.8° for very
dense sand. This would indicate that the type of coarse aggregate
used, the aggregate size and gradation, and gravel-to-sand ratio
can have a significant influence on the basic angle of internal friction
/b of normal weight normal-strength dry concrete. The basic angle
of internal friction /b of normal weight normal-strength dry
concrete is expected to range between 33° 6 /b 6 38°, with an aver-
age value of (/b)avg ffi 35°, which is used herein.
The angle /dil in Eq. (36) represents the effects of dilatancy of
confined concrete as damage of the core is dominated by a combi-
nation of internal micro-crack growth at the paste-aggregate inter-
face, macro-crack growth through the aggregate, fine and coarse
aggregate crushing and rolling, and de-cohesion of the bond pro-
vided by the binding cement paste.
The curvature of the failure envelope of confined concrete, as
shown in Fig. 9(a), is attributed to remolding of the concrete’s
internal structure as the axial strain-induced damage progresses.
This increase in internal damage contributes to an apparent degra-
dation of the angle of internal friction /c of the concrete and resul-
tant confinement effectiveness coefficient k1, as evidenced in Fig. 7.
At low and moderate levels of active confinement, w1=wr 6 0.40,
/dil represents the effects of dilatancy as damage of the confined
concrete is dominated by a combination of internal micro-crack
growth at the paste-aggregate interface, macro-crack growth
through the aggregate, fine and coarse aggregate crushing and roll-
ing, and de-cohesion provided by the cement paste (Imran, 1994;
Sfer et al., 2002). At high confinement levels, w1 = wr > 0.40, /dil
represents the effect of alterations in the concrete’s structure that
is dominated by collapse and compaction of the pore structure of
the concrete and friction at the crack interfaces (Imran, 1994;
Imran and Pantazopoulou, 1996; Sfer et al., 2002).
For passively confined concrete, /dil represents the effects of alter-
ations to the concrete’s internal structure (de-cohesion and internal
cracking) due to axial strain-induced damage, which depends on
the lateral kinematic restraint provided by the confining element,
be it closely spaced transverse steel reinforcement or a steel jacket
(Pantazopoulou, 1995) or an FRP jacket (Moran and Pantelides,
2002a,b, 2005; Yan and Pantelides, 2006; Saenz and Pantelides,
2007; Moran, 2011). The angle of internal friction of the concrete core
/c in Eq. (36), be it active or passively confined, is assumed to be gov-
erned by the following degrading friction angle model (Fig. 9(b)):
 
/t  /be /t  /u
/dil ¼  ; u/ ¼ ; in Fig. 10, the TEMC model also predicts that at a given stress ratio
1 þ u/ 1 þ ww1t /u  /be
pffiffiffiffiffi
/u ¼ /t  2 tan1 wt
889
φc
φt
Friction Angle
φu
φt − φb
φ c = φb + φ dil
φb
ψ 1 = −ψt
− σ1 ψ1
ψ 1 = 0 Major Principal Stress Ratio
(b)
 
1 ðk1 Þbe  1
/be ¼ sin ; ðk1 Þbe ¼ nPW þ ð1  nPW Þðk1 Þb ð38Þ
ðk1 Þbe þ 1
As shown in Fig. 9(b), /u is the angle of friction of unconfined con-
crete; and /t is the tensile angle or angle of separation of the con-
crete material, where /t = 90°; u/ is a friction angle ratio which
ensures the model passes through /u when r1 = r2 = 0 (i.e., uncon-
fined concrete); (k1)be and (k1)b are the basic confinement effective-
ness of highly confined wet and dry concrete, evaluated at /be and
/b, respectively; nPW is the pore water pressure parameter of the
concrete, where 0 6 nPW < 1.0, and is analogous to the degree of sat-
uration; nPW depends on the water–cement ratio and ranges be-
tween 0.03 6 nPW < 0.20 for dry to partially saturated concrete,
including sections confined by bonded FRP jackets (BFCC). For satu-
rated concrete or concrete that is not allowed to dry to its natural
water content, such as submerged concrete, wet or steam-cured
concrete, cast-in-place FRP jacketed sections [i.e., concrete filled
FRP tubes (CFFT)] or concrete exposed to high humidity environ-
ments, nPW can range between 0.20 < nPW < 0.70. Thus for concrete
having a basic angle of friction in the range 33° 6 /b 6 38°, (k1)be
can range between 1.72 6 (k1)be 6 4.20 (i.e., 15.3° 6 /be 6 37.5°),
with the lower values corresponding to the high values of nPW, as
seen from Eq. (38). The detrimental effects that excess pore water
trapped within the pores of the concrete material has on compres-
sive behavior are incorporated. For BFCC sections an average value
of nPW = 5.0% is recommended (i.e., /be = 34.1°) and a value of
nPW = 50.0% (i.e., /be = 23.7°) is recommended for CFFT sections
not allowed to dry.
The solid curves in Fig. 7 are the predicted values of k1 and /c,
respectively, determined using the degrading friction angle model
of Eqs. 37 and 38 and k1 of Eq. (30), and the average basic angle of
internal friction of /b = (/b)avg = 35°. These figures show that the
friction angle model can accurately predict degradation of the an-
gle of shearing resistance /c of normal weight normal-strength
confined dry concrete.
The confinement effectiveness of confined concrete kcc pre-
dicted by the proposed TEMC model is plotted as solid curves in
Fig. 10 versus the intermediate principal stress ratio w2 = r2/fco,
for concrete subjected to various transverse stress ratios ar = r2/
r1 of ar = 1.0, 1.50, 2.0, and 2.50, having a basic friction angle
/be = 23.0° of saturated concrete, and /be = 38.0° of dry concrete.
From these figures it can be observed that the TEMC model pre-
dicts that at a given stress ratio w2, the confinement effectiveness
kcc decreases as the transverse stress ratio ar increases. As shown
w2 and transverse stress ratio ar the confinement effectiveness kcc
decreases as the basic friction angle of concrete /be decreases; this
ð37Þ
indicates that the presence of excess pore water pressure within
890 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898

5.0 7.0

Confinement Effectiveness
Confinement Effectiveness
6.0
4.0
5.0

3.0 4.0

3.0
2.0
2.0

1.0 1.0
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00
Intermediate Principal Stress Ratio Intermediate Principal Stress Ratio

(a) (b)
Fig. 10. Plot of confinement effectiveness kcc versus intermediate principal stress ratio w2 of FCC sections having various transverse stress ratios ar of concrete having an
effective basic angle of friction /be of: (a) /be = 23.0° and (b) /be = 38.0°.

the concrete’s internal structure has a detrimental effect on the failure tends to occur at diagonal FRP jacket failure strains eju, that
strength enhancement (i.e. kcc) due to confinement. may be below the rupture strain of FRP composite tensile coupons
The TEMC model of Eqs. (28)–(34), including the degrading fric- efu. The premature failure of the FRP jacket is a result of the inter-
tion angle model of Eqs. (36)–(38), applies to plain normal-weight action between axial shortening and lateral dilation which can in-
normal-strength concrete in triaxial compression, uniaxial tension duce a biaxial state of stress and strain in the FRP jacket, in
and uniaxial compression state of stress for which r1e P r2e P addition to stress concentrations at the jacket-to-concrete inter-
r3 = fcc with w1 P wt. The TEMC model is used for analysis and face and at the jacket corners as dilation of the FRP-confined
modeling of the behavior of axially loaded elliptical and circular concrete core progresses.
FCC sections; as a result of the geometry and elastic properties of
the confining FRP jacket, the FCC core is in a triaxial compression 6. Comparison of analytical model with experimental results
state of stress that results from the axial strain-induced dilation
of the concrete core. The results from the analytical Mohr–Coulomb-based analytical
stress–strain model are compared to tests of circular and elliptical
5.3. Stress–strain model FCC sections in compression performed by several investigators.
For the analysis the following was assumed in the proposed model.
The typical axial compressive stress–strain behavior, shown in In the dilation model of Eqs. (16)–(20), apk of Eq. (18) and uvol of Eq.
Fig. 11, for elliptical FRP-confined concrete members, having the (19) were evaluated using cvol of Eq. (19) when volumetric expansion
geometry of Fig. 1, can be modeled using an incremental Popovics is predicted to occur ( i.e., when cvol < 1.0); otherwise apk and uvol
(1973) fractional model for normal strength normal-weight were evaluated using cvol = 0.95. In the TEMC model of Eqs 28–34
FRP-confined and unconfined concrete that describes the axial and the degrading friction angle model of Eqs. (36)–(38) it was
stress–strain behavior of FCC sections subjected to monotonically assumed that wt = fto/fco = 0.10, /u = 54.90°, /b = 35°, nPW = 5.0%
increasing axial stress or strain (Moran, 2011). Depending on the (i.e.,/be = 34.1°) for bonded and nPW = 50.0% (i.e., /be = 23.7°) for non-
stiffness of the FRP jacket and section geometry, the proposed bonded FRP jacketed sections. The additional experimental data used
stress–strain model can capture the strain hardening behavior of in the comparisons are listed in Tables 1 and 2. In addition, the stress–
moderate to high stiffness and/or low aspect ratio FCC sections strain data points shown in stress–strain plots with a black solid circle
shown in Fig. 11(a), as well as the strain softening behavior of symbol are the predicted effective axial stress (fc)eff and strain (ec)eff of
low effective stiffness and/or high aspect ratio circular or elliptical Eq. (25) evaluated at the effective jacket strain (ej)eff of Eq. (24) deter-
FCC sections shown in Fig. 11(b). mined using the adjusted failure strain efu listed in Table 2.
In an FRP-confined concrete member, compressive failure oc- The predicted and experimental stress–strain curve (Fig. 12(a)),
curs simultaneously with failure of the FRP jacket, be it failure transverse strain–axial strain curve (Fig. 12(b)), volumetric strain
due to rupture, delamination, lap failure, or shear failure. This curve (Fig. 12(c)) and Poisson’s ratio curve (Fig. 12(d)) are shown

2.50 1.20
Normalized Axial Stress

Normalized Axial Stress

Plastic Region
2.00
0.90
1.50
0.60
1.00 Plastic Region
0.50 0.30

0.00 0.00
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0
Normalized Axial Strain Normalized Axial Strain
(a) (b)
Fig. 11. Normalized axial stress versus normalized axial strain curves: (a) strain-hardening behavior and (b) strain-softening compressive behavior.
 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898 891

Table 1
Adopted tests for model comparisons.

Test series Specimen information

Specimen ID Hc Bc (mm) fco (MPa) Ej (GPa) tj (mm) Jacket material Construction
1 Tamuzs et al. (2007) 60-45-7 150 150 47.6 77.3 0.66 CFRP Bonded
2 Abdollahi et al. (2007) F2 150 150 25.1 26.5 0.51 GFRP Bonded
F4 1.02
F5 1.52
3 Cui (2009) L1C1B 152 152 48.1 84.6 1.0 CFRP Bonded
L1C2B 2.0
L1C3B 3.0
L2G1B 47.6 26.9 1.25 GFRP
L2G2B 2.50
L3G3B 3.75
4 Wu and Xiao (2000) L1-1P-3 152 152 33.7 105 0.38 CFRP Bonded
M1-2P-2 43.8 0.76
H1-3P-2 55.2 1.14
5 Saaman (1997) DC-11 152 152 32.0 37.2 1.45 GFRP Unbonded
DC-21 40.3 2.21
DC-31 40.7 2.9
6 Teng and Lam, 2002 Series II 47.1a 0.165 CFRP Bonded
a/b = 1.0 151.6 151.6 (35.3b)
a/b = 5/4 168.4 131.6
Series V 45.8a 0.220
a/b = 1.0 152.3 152.3 (34.4b)
a/b = 5/4 168.2 131.9
a/b = 5/3 194.8 115
7 Yan (2005) S-CT-F 406.4 406.4 15.2 86.8 1.93 CFRP Shape modified
R3-CT-F 746.1 381
S-GT-F 406.4 406.4 16.9 9.75 GFRP
R3-GT-F 739 311.2
a
Cube strength fcu.
b
Assumed strength fco = 0.75fcu.

Table 2
Adopted tests for model comparisons: modeling information and results.

Specimen ID mci eco (mm/mm) efu (mm/mm) (ej)eff (mm/mm) (ej)uexp (mm/mm) (ec)eff (mm/mm) (ec)uexp (mm/mm) ðec Þeff
ðec Þuexp

60-45-7 0.194 0.00227 0.0125 0.0072 N/A 0.0178 0.0200 0.890

F2 0.20a 0.0020a 0.0221 0.0128 N/A 0.0115 0.0125 0.92
F4 0.0137 0.0200 0.69
F5 0.0180 0.0275 0.66
L1C1B 0.20a 0.00222 0.0100 0.00577 N/A 0.0106 0.0150 0.72
L1C2B 0.0151 0.0266 0.57
L1C3B 0.0192 0.0309 0.62
L2G1B 0.0230 0.0133 0.0147 0.0115 1.28
L2G2B 0.0204 0.0221 0.92
L3G3B 0.0258 0.0280 0.92
L1-1P-3 0.18 0.0020a 0.0150 0.00866 0.00838 0.0118 0.0120 0.98
M1-2P-2 0.00997 0.0141 0.0138 1.02
H1-3P-2 0.00854 0.0146 0.0145 1.00
DC-11 0.20a 0.0020a 0.0265 0.0153 0.0190 0.0249 0.0340 0.73
DC-21 0.0146 0.0336 0.0380 0.88
DC-31 0.0130 0.0408 0.0420 0.97
Series II 0.20a 0.0020a 0.0138
a/b = 1.0 N/Ab 0.00469 N/Ab 0.0065 N/Ab
a/b = 5/4 0.00697 0.00641c 0.0094 0.0093 1.01
Series V
a/b = 1.0 0.00796 0.0100 0.0123 0.0154 0.80
a/b = 5/4 0.00643 0.0069c 0.0103 0.0112 0.92
a/b = 5/3 N/Ab 0.0042c N/Ab 0.0051 N/Ab
S-CT-F 0.20a 0.0020 N/Ad N/Ad N/Ad N/Ad 0.0120 N/Ad
R3-CT-F 0.0090
S-GT-F 0.0190
R3-GT-F 0.0102
a
Assumed.
b
FRP jacket failed prematurely.
c
For elliptical sections (ej)uexp = (eH)uexp is shown.
d
Shape-modified sections not considered.
892 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898

for Carbon FRP-confined concrete cylinder tests performed by Xiao compared. These concrete cylinders were confined by FRP jackets
and Wu (2000); it can be observed that the proposed dilation and having similar stiffness, specimen M1-2P-2 has an effective stiff-
stress–strain models capture accurately the transverse dilation and ness Kje = 22.5, and specimen H1-3P-2 has Kje = 26.8.
stress–strain behavior. In Fig. 16 the results from the analytical model are compared to
In Fig. 13(a) the predicted stress–strain curve is compared to concrete filled Glass FRP tube (GFFT) tests performed by Saaman
Carbon FRP-confined concrete cylinder tests performed by Tamuzs (1997) of specimens confined by low (DC-11), moderate (DC-21),
et al. (2007); in Fig. 13(b) the predicted stress–strain curve is com- and high stiffness (DC-31) unbonded Glass FRP jackets.
pared to Glass FRP-confined concrete cylinder tests performed by In Fig. 17, the analytical and experimental axial stress ratio
Abdollahi et al. (2007). In Fig. 14, the predicted stress–strain curve kc = fc/fco versus diagonal and axial strain curves of FRP-confined
is compared to Carbon (Fig. 14(a)) and Glass (Fig. 14(b)) FCC concrete cylinder specimen M1-2P-2 tested by Wu and Xiao
cylinder tests performed by Cui (2009). (2000) [also shown in Fig. 15] is compared to the analytical and
In Fig. 15(a), the experimental and analytical stress–strain experimental curves of the FRP-confined concrete cylinder speci-
curves are compared to the predicted curves of FCC cylinder tests men DC-11 tested by Saaman (1997) (also shown in Fig. 16) con-
performed by Wu and Xiao (2000) with low (L1-1P-3), medium fined by a cast-in-place (unbonded) (CFFT) FRP tube. These
(M1-2P-2) and high strength (H1-3P-2) concrete. In Fig. 15(b) ana- concrete cylinders were confined by FRP jackets with essentially
lytical and experimental axial stress ratio kc = fc/fco versus diagonal identical stiffness; specimen M1-2P-2 has an effective stiffness
and axial strain curves of medium (M1-2P-2) and high strength ofKje = 22.5, and specimen DC-11 Kje = 22.1. The figure demon-
(H1-3P-2) concrete confined with similar FRP jacket stiffness are strates that the proposed model accurately captures the effects of

120 0.016

Transverse Strain (mm/mm)

Axial Stress (MPa)

90 0.012

60
0.008
H1-3p-2 Exp.
30 H1-3P-2 Exp.
H1-3P-2 Ana. 0.004
H1-3P-2 Ana.
0
-0.010 0.000 0.010 0.020 0
Transverse Axial 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010
Strain(mm/mm) Axial Strain (mm/mm)

0.003 0.80

Poisson's Ratio
0.002 0.60
Volumetric Strain
(mm/mm)

0.001 0.40

0.000 H1-3P-2 Exp.

0.20
-0.010 0.000 0.010 0.020 H1-3P-2 Ana.
H1-3P-2 Exp. -0.001
0.00
H1-3P-2 Ana. -0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02
-0.002
Transverse Axial Transverse Axial
Strain (mm/mm) Strain (mm/mm)

Fig. 12. Comparison with tests of Carbon FRP-confined concrete cylinder performed by Xiao and Wu (2000): (a) stress–strain, (b) transverse strain–axial strain, (c) volumetric
strain, and (d) Poisson’s ratio.

150 90
Axial Stress (Mpa)
Axial Stress (Mpa)

100 60
F2-Exp.
F2-Ana.
50 Exp. 60-45-7 30 F4-Exp.
Ana. 60-45-7 F4-Ana.
F5- Exp.
F5-Ana.
0 0
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025 0.000 0.010 0.020 0.030
Axial Strain (mm/mm) Axial Strain (mm/mm)
(a) (b)
Fig. 13. Comparison with tests of concrete cylinders confined by: (a) Carbon (Tamuzs et al., 2007) and (b) Glass (Abdollahi et al., 2007) FRP jackets.
 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898 893

200 120

Axial Stress (MPa)

Axial Stress (MPa)
150
80

L1C1B Exp. L2G1B Exp.

100 L2G1B
L1C1B Ana.
L2G2B Exp.
L1C2B Exp. 40
L2G2B Ana.
50 L1C2B Ana.
L1G3B Exp.
L1C3B Exp. L2G3B Ana.
L1C3B Ana.
0 0
0.000 0.010 0.020 0.030 0.040 0.000 0.010 0.020 0.030
Axial strain (mm/mm) Axial strain (mm/mm)

(a) (b)
Fig. 14. Comparison with tests of concrete cylinders confined by: (a) Carbon FRP and (b) Glass FRP jackets performed by Cui (2009).

100.0
120.0

Axial Stress (MPa) 80.0

Axial Stress (MPa)

90.0
60.0

60.0
DC-11 40.0
DC-11 Ana
H1-3P-2 Exp.
H1-3P-2 Ana. DC-21
30.0 DC-21 Ana.
M1-2P-2 Exp. 20.0
M1-2P-2 Ana. DC-31
L1-1P-3 Exp. DC-31 Ana.
L1-1P-3 Ana.
0.0 0.0
-0.030 -0.015 0.000 0.015 0.030 0.045
-0.015 -0.010 -0.005 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020
Transverse Strain Axial Strain Transverse Strain Axial Strain
(mm/mm) (mm/mm)

(a) Fig. 16. Comparison with tests of concrete cylinders confined by: low stiffness (DC-
11), moderate stiffness (DC-21), and high stiffness (DC-31) unbonded (CFFT) Glass
FRP jackets performed by Saaman (1997).
2.5
.

2.0
Axial Stress Ratio

As can be observed from Figs. 13–17, a conservative estimate of

` H1-3P-2 Ana.
-0.015 -0.010 -0.005 0.000 0.005
Transverse Strain Axial Strain
(mm/mm)
(b)
Fig. 15. Comparison with FCC concrete cylinder tests performed by Wu and Xiao
(2000): (a) low, medium and high strength concrete; and (b) medium and high
strength concrete cylinders confined with similar stiffness FRP jackets.
the FRP jacket construction (bonded or unbonded), and the influ-
ence of the basic friction angle (/be) on the slope of the plastic por-
tion of the stress–strain curve.
From Figs. 12–17 it can be observed that the Mohr–Coulomb
model can capture accurately the compressive stress–strain behav-
ior of circular FRP jacketed concrete sections. The model can accu-
rately predict the effects of FRP jacket stiffness (Fig. 13(b), 14–16),
FRP jacket construction, bonded (Figs. 13–15) or unbonded CFFT
(Figs. 16 and 17), and concrete compressive strength (Fig. 15(a))
on the compressive behavior of circular FCC sections.
1.5 the compressive behavior of circular FCC sections can be obtained
using the predicted effective axial stress (fc)eff and strain (ec)eff
H1-3P-2 Exp. 1.0 (shown as solid circles in these figures), evaluated at the effective
jacket strain (ej)eff of Eq. (24), also refer to Table 2.
M1-2P-2 Exp.
0.5 In Figs. 18–20, the analytical model is compared to results ob-
M1-2P-2 Ana. tained from circular and elliptical columns with various section as-
0.0
pect ratios from tests by Teng and Lam (2002). As can be observed
0.010 0.015 0.020 from these figures, excluding the FCC sections that failed prema-
turely, ( i.e., series II of Fig 18(a) for ash = 1.0 and series V of
Fig. 20 for ash = 1.67), a conservative estimate of the compressive
behavior of circular and elliptical FCC sections can be obtained
using the predicted effective axial stress (fc)eff and strain (ec)eff
(shown as solid circles in Fig. 18(b) and Fig. 19), evaluated at the
effective jacket strain (ej)eff of Eq. (24), also refer to Table 2.
In Fig. 21(a) and (b), the model is compared to results obtained
from shape-modified concrete column specimens tested by Yan
(2005) and Yan et al. (2006); S-CT-F and S-GT-F are square columns
modified into circular; and R3-CT-F and R3-GT-F are rectangular
columns with an aspect ratio ash = 3.10 shape modified with an
elliptical jacket having as aspect ratio of ash = 2.0 and ash = 2.40,
respectively.
This indicates that the proposed model can accurately capture
the influence that the FRP jacket stiffness Kje, the concrete strength
fco, the FRP jacket shape, and section geometry (i.e., ash), and FRP
jacket construction (bonded (BFCC) or unbonded (CFFT)) have on
the axial strain-induced dilation and compressive stress–strain
behavior of circular and elliptical FCC sections.
894 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898

2.00 60

45

Axial Stress Ratio

Axial Stress (MPa)

1.50

30
1.00
DC-11
15
DC-11 Ana.
M1-2P-2 0.50
M1-2P-2 Ana. 0
-0.010 -0.005 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015
0.00
Transverse Strain Axial Strain
-0.030 -0.015 0.000 0.015 0.030 0.045 (mm/mm)
Transverse Strain Axial Strain
(a)
(mm/mm)
60
Fig. 17. Analytical and experimental stress–strain curves of concrete cylinders
confined by similar stiffness: cast- in-place FRP tube DC-11 (Saaman, 1997) and
bonded M1-2P-2 FRP jacket (Wu and Xiao, 2000).

Axial Stress (MPa)

45

60 30
Axial Stress (MPa)

45 15

30 0
-0.010 -0.005 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015
Transverse Strain Axial Strain
Exp. Circular (mm/mm)
Ana. Circular 15
(b)
0 Fig. 19. Comparison with tests of elliptical FCC sections with ash = 1.25: (a) series II
and (b) series V performed by Teng and Lam (2002).
-0.006 -0.003 0 0.003 0.006 0.009
Transverse Strain Axial Strain
(mm/mm)
(a) 50

80
40

Axial Stress (MPa)

Axial Stress (MPa)

60 30

20
40

10
Exp. Circular
20
Ana. Circular
0
-0.006 -0.004 -0.002 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006
0 Transverse Strain Axial Strain
-0.012 -0.006 0.000 0.006 0.012 0.018 (mm/mm)
Transverse Strain Axial Strain Fig. 20. Comparison with tests of elliptical FCC sections with ash = 1.67 of series V
(mm/mm) performed by Teng and Lam (2002).

(b)
Fig. 18. Comparison with tests of circular FCC sections: (a) series II and (b) series V
performed by Teng and Lam (2002).
7. Suppression of softening
In the analysis of FCC sections several authors have recom-
mended an amount of confinement provided by the FRP jacket re-
quired to suppress or prevent strain softening stress–strain
behavior. For circular FCC sections Lam and Teng (2003a) and
Spoelstra and Monti (1999) recommend a minimum confinement
stress ratio of wr = rr/fco = 0.07, whereas Csuka and Kollar
(2010) recommend wr = rr/fco = 0.083. For circular and square
FCC sections Mirmiran et al. (2000) recommend a modified con-
finement stress ratio (MCR) wr = (2r/D)rr/fco = 0.15, where r and
D are the radius (the corner radius of square FCC sections) and in-
side dimension of the FRP section. For circular and rectangular FCC
sections Wu et al. (2006), Wu et al. (2007) recommend a minimum
 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898 895

50 50

Axial Stress (MPa)

Axial Stress (MPa)

40 40

30 30

20 Exp. S-CT-F 20 Exp. S-GT-F

Ana. S-CT-F Ana. S-GT-F
10 Exp. R3-CT-F 10 Exp. R3-GT-F
Ana. R3-CT-F Ana. R3-GT-F
0 0
0 0.004 0.008 0.012 0.016 0 0.004 0.008 0.012 0.016 0.02
Axial Strain (mm/mm) Axial Strain (mm/mm)

(a) (b)
Fig. 21. Comparison with tests of square and rectangular sections confined by: (a) Carbon FRP and (b) Glass FRP shape modifying elliptical FRP jackets performed by Yan
(2005).

FRP jacket modulus-dependent

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi confinement stress ratio of From comparisons with tests, the axial strain and axial stress at
wr ¼ rr =fco ¼ 0:13 250=Ej ðGPaÞ 6 0:13. For circular and ellipti- failure increase with increasing FRP jacket thickness tj or stiffness
cal FCC sections, Teng and Lam (2002) recommend a minimum Kje. Strain energy absorption capacity increases proportionally with
confinement stress ratio equal to wr = (ash)2rr/fco = 0.11. For cir- an increase in jacket stiffness, especially in FCC sections exhibiting
cular, elliptical and shape modified sections Yan et al. (2006) and a bilinear strain-hardening compressive stress–strain behavior
Yan and Pantelides (2006) recommend a minimum confinement (Figs. 13–17). An increase in section aspect ratio has an opposite ef-
stress ratio of wr = rr/fco = 0.20. These recommendations did not fect as can be observed in Figs. 18 and 19. To predict when strain-
consider the fact that concrete is a restraint sensitive material hardening behavior occurs in FCC sections, one must consider the
whose dilation and compressive behavior depend on FRP jacket influence of the FRP jacket shape on its ability to restrain axial
stiffness rather than on confining stress. As a result, no consider- strain-induced damage of the confined concrete core, in addition
ation was given to the effects of FRP jacket geometry and stiffness to unconfined concrete strength and FRP jacket stiffness.
on the compressive behavior of FCC sections. A parametric study was performed using the proposed Mohr–
For circular FCC sections Xiao and Wu (2003) and Cui (2009) Coulomb damage-based model to determine the required volumet-
consider that the FRP jacket stiffness (Kje or Cje) required to sup- ric ratio (qj)SH and confining stiffness (Kje)SH of elliptical FRP jackets
press strain-softening behavior depends solely on the unconfined with varying aspect ratios (1.0 6 ash 6 2.0), below which strain-
concrete compressive strength fco; the effects of FRP jacket shape softening behavior can occur in partially saturated normal weight
and transverse modulus Ej on the jacket’s ability to control normal-strength concrete (17.0 MPa 6 fco 6 70.0 MPa) having an
strain-softening behavior were not considered. Xiao and Wu initial Poisson’s ratio of mci = 0.20, and a pore water pressure
(2003) indicate that bilinear strain hardening behavior occurs parameter of nPW = 5.0%. The strain-hardening volumetric ratio
when Kje P 0.30fco. Cui (2009) indicates that bilinear strain harden- (qj)SH of FCC sections with varying aspect ratios and peak uncon-
ing behavior occurs when Kje > 2.6 105(fco)3; below this value, a fined compressive strengths is plotted in Fig. 22(a) for Ej = 82.7 G-
localized strain softening behavior with an ascending plastic Pa. A conservative estimate of (qj)SH for circular and elliptical FCC
stress–strain behavior occurs, provided that wr > rr/fco = 0.08, sections (i.e., 1.0 < ash 6 2.0) can be found using:
otherwise strain softening behavior occurs.    
Lee and Hegemier (2009) indicate that a bilinear strain harden- 4ðtj ÞSH fco
ðqj ÞSH ¼ C sh ¼ kSH ; kSH ¼ 3½1 þ ðash Þ2 2 ð39Þ
ing response of circular FCC sections occurs when the jacket volu- Hc Ej
metric ratio exceeds Kje > 16, strain softening–hardening behavior
occurs when 4 < Kje < 16, otherwise strain softening response oc- where Csh is given in Eq. (2). The solid lines shown in Fig. 22(a) are
curs. Although Lee and Hegemier (2009) consider the effects that the predicted analytical (qj)SH values, whereas the dotted lines are
the unconfined concrete compressive strength fco and the FRP the empirical predictions of Eq. (39). This figure shows that (qj)SH
transverse stiffness Cje have on the FRP jacket’s ability to control increases nonlinearly as both the unconfined concrete compressive
strain-softening behavior, they do not consider shape effects. strength fco and section aspect ratio ash = Hc/Bc increase. This trend

0.08 2.00
70 MPa
70 MPa Eq. 39
Jacket Volumetric Ratio

Type A
Axial Stress Ratio

41 MPa 1.50
0.06 Type B
41 MPa Eq. 39
17 MPa
17 Mpa Eq. 39 1.00
Type C
0.04
0.50
Unconfined
0.02
0.00
-0.018 -0.012 -0.006 0 0.006 0.012 0.018
0.00
1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 Diagonal Strain Axial Strain
(mm/mm)
Section Aspect Ratio

Fig. 22. Graphs of: (a) strain-hardening jacket volumetric ratio (qj)SH versus aspect ratio (ash) and (b) typical stress–strain behavior of elliptical FRP-confined sections.
896 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898
is in agreement with Cui (2009), Lee and Hegemier (2009), and Cui
and Sheikh (2010), in which they indicate that the amount of FRP
(i.e. qj or tj) required to achieve strain-hardening behavior increases
as the unconfined concrete compressive strength fco increases, and
it decreases as the FRP jacket transverse modulus Ej increases.
One of the advantages of the proposed relationship is that it in-
cludes the effects of the geometry of the elliptical FRP jacket (i.e.,
ash) on its effectiveness in suppressing strain-softening behavior.
As the FRP jacket volumetric ratio qj or jacket stiffness Kje increase,
the FRP jacket becomes more effective in controlling, delaying, or
preventing the axial–strain-induced volumetric expansion and
uncontrolled dilation the concrete core could experience as ec ? eco
(refer to Fig. 6).
Typical axial stress versus axial and diagonal strain curves are
plotted in Fig. 22(b). A bilinear strain hardening ‘‘Type A’’ stress–
strain behavior occurs when qj/(qj)SH > 2.0, a strain-hardening
curve with a localized strain softening ‘‘Type B’’ stress–strain
behavior can occur when 1.0 < qj/(qj)SH < 2.0, otherwise a strain
softening ‘‘Type C’’ stress–strain compressive behavior occurs.
Substituting (qj)SH of Eq. (39) into Kje of Eq. (1), yields the fol-
lowing strain-hardening FRP jacket stiffness (Kje)SH:
kSH
ðK je ÞSH ¼
2 compressive stress; and (e) it includes the weakening influence
This indicates that the FRP jacket stiffness (Kje) required to suppress
strain-softening behavior in circular or elliptical FCC sections de-
pends on the geometry of the elliptical FRP jacket. For circular sec-
tions (i.e., when ash = 1.0) Eq. (40) predicts that for normal-strength
concrete with 17.0 MPa 6 fco 6 70.0 MPa, strain softening behavior
can occur when the FRP jacket stiffness Kje = 6.0, which is 50% larger
than Kje = 4.0 predicted by Lee and Hegemier (2009) for cirular FCC
sections (excluding FRP jacket shape effects).
From Eq. (39), the following FRP jacket thickness (tj)SH is re-
quired to suppress strain-softening behavior in FCC sections:
   crete sections was found to depend on the unconfined concrete
fco Hc kSH
ðtj ÞSH ¼
Ej 4C sh
where Csh is given in Eq. (2) and kSH is given in Eq. (39). The previous
relationships indicate that the effectiveness of FRP jackets in sup-
pressing strain-softening stress–strain behavior in FCC sections de-
pends significantly on the mechanical properties of the concrete
(fco), FRP jacket elastic modulus (Ej), and geometry of the FCC sec-
tion (Hc, Bc).
8. Conclusions
A unified theoretical mechanics-based stress–strain model was
developed that describes the compressive and dilation behavior of
elliptical and circular FRP-confined concrete sections using the
concepts of diagonal dilation and equilibrium of FRP-confined con-
crete and a two parameter Mohr–Coulomb-type failure envelope.
The general concepts of elasticity, damage mechanics, and plastic-
ity theory are included in a stress–strain model that considers the
macrostructural effects of increase in internal damage and benefi-
cial effects of the kinematic restraint and confinement provided by
the elastic FRP jacket.
Unlike existing FRP confinement models, the present model
uses the fact that the axial strain-induced dilation behavior of
FRP-confined concrete is variable and depends on the lateral kine-
matic restraint provided by the FRP jacket, rather than on the pas-
sive confining pressure. The dilation and axial compressive
behavior of circular and elliptical FRP-confined concrete sections,
as well as shape-modified square/rectangular cross sections into
circular/elliptical FRP-confined sections, was found to depend on:
(a) the FRP jacket shape, (b) the aspect ratio and angle of
inclination of the cross section’s main diagonal, (c) the FRP jacket
stiffness, and (d) the mechanical properties of unconfined concrete
and FRP jacket. The stress–strain and dilation model includes only
one general parameter determined from a large database of exper-
imental results, the FRP jacket stiffness-dependent plastic dilation
rate, which measures the FRP jacket’s ability to control the axial
strain-induced dilation of the confined concrete core.
A Mohr–Coulomb criterion was introduced to describe the in-
crease in compressive strength of the confined concrete core from
the axial strain-induced dilation and resultant passive confining
pressure provided by the restraining elastic FRP jacket. The
Mohr–Coulomb model includes only one general parameter deter-
mined from analysis of actively confined concrete cylinders tests,
the basic angle of friction of normal weight normal-strength dry
concrete, which represents the residual angle of shearing resis-
tance of concrete at very high strains in which its behavior is
mostly governed by friction and aggregate particle breakage at
existing micro- and macro-crack interfaces. This Mohr–Coulomb
model satisfies the following conditions: (a) it passes through the
point of uniaxial compression; (b) it passes through the point of
uniaxial tension; (c) it describes the typical nonlinear failure enve-
lope of concrete in a triaxial compression state of stress; (d) it in-
ð40Þ cludes the concrete’s sensitivity to the intermediate principal
that excess pore water has on the confined concrete compressive
strength.
Analysis of the dilation behavior of circular and elliptical FRP-
confined concrete sections shows that at very low jacket stiffness,
the jacket is not effective in providing adequate lateral restraint
against unstable crack growth. The effectiveness of the FRP jacket
in curtailing this unstable crack growth increases as the jacket
stiffness increases, due to an increase in lateral restraint provided
by the jacket. The FRP jacket reinforcement ratio required to pre-
clude strain-softening in elliptical and circular FRP-confined con-
compressive strength, the FRP jacket transverse modulus and the
ð41Þ
column cross-section aspect ratio.
The proposed model for FRP confined concrete presented herein
can be implemented into a spreadsheet, finite element or other
computer language program for analysis of FRP-confined concrete
members. Experimental results of elliptical and circular FRP-con-
fined concrete sections were used to validate the applicability of
the analytical model rather than to calibrate the model to fit exper-
imental results. Comparisons with experimental results for ellipti-
cal and circular FCC sections indicate excellent agreement.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge financial support from
the US National Science Foundation and the Utah Department of
Transportation.
References
Abdollahi, B., Bahhshi, M., Motavalli, M., Shekarchi, M., 2007. The experimental
modeling of GFRP confined concrete cylinders subjected to axial loads. In:
Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Fiber Reinforced Polymer
Reinforcement for Concrete Structures (FRPRCS-8), University of Patras, Greece.
Binici, B., Mosalam, K., 2007. Analysis of reinforced concrete columns retrofitted
with fiber reinforced polymer lamina. Composites, Part B: Engineering 38 (2),
265–276.
Campione, G., Cuchiara, C., 2007. Strength and strain capacity of fiber reinforced
polymer-confined concrete in elliptical columns. In: Proceedings of the 8th
International Symposium on Fiber Reinforced Polymer Reinforcement for
Concrete Structures (FRPRCS-8), University of Patras, Greece.
Campione, G., Miraglia, N., 2003. Strength and strain capacities of concrete
compression members reinforced with FRP. Cement Concrete Composites 25,
31–41.
 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898
Carey, S.A., 2002. Behavior of variably confined concrete. Honors College Thesis,
University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
Chaallal, O., Hassan, M., Shahawy, M., 2003. Confinement model for axially loaded
short rectangular columns strengthened with fiber reinforced polymer
wrapping. ACI Structural Journal 100 (2), 215–221.
Chun, S.S., Park, H.C., 2002. Load carrying capacity and ductility of RC columns
confined by carbon fiber reinforced polymer. In: Proceedings of the 3th
International Symposium on Non-metallic (FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete
Structures (FRPRCS-3), Sapporo, Japan.
Csuka, B., Kollar, L.P., 2010. FRP-confined circular concrete columns subjected to
concentric loading. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, 1–17.
Cui, C., 2009. Behaviour of normal and high strength concrete confined with fibre
reinforced polymers (FRP). Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Toronto, Ontario,
Canada.
Cui, C., Sheikh, S.A., 2010. Analytical model for circular normal- and high-strength
concrete columns Confined with FRP. Journal of Composites for Construction 14
(5), 562–572.
Demers, M., Hebert, D., Labosièrre, P., Neale, K.W., 1996. The strengthening of
structural concrete with an aramid woven fibre/epoxy resin composite. In:
Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Advanced Composite
Materials in Bridges and Structures (ACMBS-II), CSCE, Montreal, Canada, pp.
435–442.
El-Gawady, M., Endeshaw, M., McLean, D., Sack, R., 2009. Retrofitting of rectangular
columns with deficient lap splices. Journal of Composites for Construction 14
(1), 22–35.
Fam, A.Z., Rizkalla, S.H., 2001. Confinement model for axially loaded concrete
confined by circular fiber-reinforced polymer tubes. ACI Structural Journal 98
(4), 451–461.
Fujikake, K., Mindess, S., Xu, H., 2004. Analytical model for concrete confined with
reinforced polymer composite. Journal of Composites for Construction 8 (4),
341–351.
Imran, I., 1994. Applications of non-associated plasticity in modelling the
mechanical response of concrete. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Toronto,
Ontario, Canada.
Imran, I., Pantazopoulou, S.J., 1996. Experimental study of plain concrete under
triaxial stress. ACI Materials Journal 93 (6), 589–601.
Kono, S., Inazumi, M., Kanu, T., 1998. Evaluation of confining effects of CFRP sheets
on reinforced concrete members. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International
Conference of Composites in Infrastructure (ICCI-98), Tucson, AZ, USA, pp. 888–
901.
Lam, L., Teng, J.G., 2003a. Design-oriented stress–strain model for FRP-confined
concrete. Construction and Building Materials 17 (6), 471–489.
Lam, L., Teng, J.G., 2003b. Design-oriented stress–strain model for FRP-confined
concrete in rectangular columns. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites
22 (13), 1149–1186.
Lee, C.H., Hegemier, G.A., 2009. Model of FRP-confined concrete cylinders in
compression. Journal of Composites for Construction 13 (5), 442–454.
Maksimovic, M., 1989. Nonlinear failure envelopes for soils. Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering 115 (4), 581–586.
Maksimovic, M., 1996. A family of nonlinear failure envelopes for non-cemented
soils and rock discontinuities. Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 1,
Paper 1996-07. <http://www.ejge.com/1996/JourTOC1.htm> (accessed
01.11.05).
Marques, S.P.C., Marques, D.C.S.C., daSilva, J.L., Cavalcante, M.A.A., 2004. Model for
analysis of concrete confined by fiber-reinforced polymer. Journal of
Composites for Construction 8 (4), 332–340.
Mathys, S., Toutanji, H., Audenert, K., Taerwe, L., 2005. Axial load behavior of large
scale columns confined with fiber-reinforced polymer composites. ACI
Structural Journal 102 (2), 258–267.
Menetrey, P., 1994. Numerical analysis of punching failure in reinforced concrete
structures. Ph.D. Dissertation, Eccole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne,
Laussane, Switzerland.
Mirmiran, A., 1997. Analytical and experimental investigation of reinforced
concrete encased in fiberglass tubular jackets and use of fiber jackets for pile
splicing. Final Report, Contract No. B-9135, Florida Department of
Transportation, Tallahassee, FL.
Mirmiran, A., Shahawy, M., 1996. A new concrete–filled hollow FRP composite
column. Composites, Part B: Engineering 27B, 263–268.
Mirmiran, A., Shahawy, M., 1997a. Behavior of concrete columns confined by fiber
composites. Journal of Structural Engineering 123 (5), 583–590.
Mirmiran, A., Shahawy, M., 1997b. Dilation characteristics of confined concrete.
Mechanics of Cohesive–Frictional Materials 2 (3), 237–249.
Mirmiran, A., Zager, K., Yuan, W., 2000. Nonlinear finite element modeling of
concrete confined by fiber composites. Finite Element Analysis and Design 35,
79–96.
Miyauchi, K., Nishibayashi, S., Inoue, S., 1997. Estimation of strengthening effects
with carbon fiber sheet for concrete column. In: Proceedings of the 3rd
International Symposium on Non-Metallic (FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete
Structures (FRPRCS-3), Sapporo, Japan, pp. 217–223.
Monti, G., Nistico, N., 2007. Modeling of square and rectangular concrete columns
confined by CFRP. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Fiber
Reinforced Polymer Reinforcement for Concrete Structures (FRPRCS-8),
University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
Montoya, E., Vecchio, F.J., Sheikh, S.A., 2006. Compression field modeling of confined
concrete: constitutive models. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering 18 (4),
510–517.
897
Moran, D.A., 2011. Unified model for concrete columns confined by fiber reinforced
plastic jackets with practical applications. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Utah,
Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Moran, D.A., Pantelides, C.P., 2002a. Variable strain ductility ratio of fiber-reinforced
polymer-confined concrete. Journal of Composites for Construction 6 (4), 224–
232.
Moran, D.A., Pantelides, C.P., 2002b. Stress–strain model for fiber-reinforced
polymer-confined concrete. Journal of Composites for Construction 6 (4),
233–240.
Moran, D.A., Pantelides, C.P., 2005. Damage based stress–strain model for
fiber-reinforced polymer confined concrete. ACI Structural Journal 102 (1),
54–61.
Moran, D.A., Pantelides, C.P., 2007. Diagonal stress–strain model for FRP-confined
rectangular concrete columns. In: Proceedings of the 8th International
Symposium on Fiber Reinforced Polymer Reinforcement for Concrete
Structures (FRPRCS-8), University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
Moran, D.A., Pantelides, C.P., 2009. Mohr–Coulomb model for concrete sections of
various shapes confined by FRP jackets. In: Proceedings of the 9th International
Symposium on Fiber Reinforced Polymer Reinforcement for Concrete Structures
(FRPRCS-9), University of Adelaide, Sydney, Australia.
Moran, D.A., Pantelides, C.P., 2010. Concrete sections confined by FRP jackets: a soil
mechanics approach. In: Proceedings of the 9th HSTAM Int. Congress on
Mechanics, University of Cyprus, Limassol, Cyprus.
Pantazopoulou, S.J., 1995. Role of expansion on mechanical behavior of concrete.
Journal of Structural Engineering 121 (12), 1795–1805.
Pantazopoulou, S.J., Mills, R.H., 1995. Microstructural aspects of the mechanical
response of plain concrete. ACI Materials Journal 92 (6), 605–616.
Pantelides, C.P., Gergely, J., Reaveley, L.D., Volnyy, V.A., 1999. Retrofit of RC bridge
pier with CFRP advanced composites. Journal of Structural Engineering 125
(10), 1094–1099.
Pantelides, C.P., Gergely, J., Reaveley, L.D., 2001. In-situ verification of rehabilitation
and repair of reinforced concrete bridge bents under simulated seismic loads.
Earthquake Spectra 17 (3), 507–530.
Pantelides, C.P., Gergely, J., 2002. Carbon-fiber-reinforced polymer seismic retrofit
of RC bridge bent: design and in-situ validation. Journal of Composites for
Construction 6 (1), 52–60.
Pantelides, C.P., Alameddine, F., Sardo, T., Imbsen, R., 2004. Seismic retrofit of State
Street Bridge on Interstate 80. Journal of Bridge Engineering 9 (4), 333–342.
Pantelides, C.P., Okahashi, Y., Reaveley, L.D., 2008. Seismic rehabilitation of
reinforced concrete interior beam-column joints with FRP composites. Journal
of Composites for Construction 12 (4), 435–445.
Papanikolopoulos, K.E., Papadrakakis, M., 2006. On the shape of the deviatoric trace
of yield and failure surfaces of geomaterials. In: Proceedings of the Conference
on Computational Modelling of Concrete Structures EURO-C-2006, Mayrhofen,
Tyrol, Austria, pp. 405–410.
Pessiki, S., Harries, K.A., Kestner, J.T., Sause, R., Ricles, J.M., 2001. Axial behavior of
reinforced concrete columns confined with FRP jackets. Journal of Composites
for Construction 5 (4), 237–245.
Popovics, S., 1973. A numerical approach to the complete stress–strain curve of
concrete. Cement Concrete Research 3 (5), 583–599.
Restrepo, J., deVino, B., 1996. Enhancement of axial load-capacity of reinforced
concrete columns by means of fiberglass–epoxy jackets. In: Proceedings of the
2nd International Conference on Advanced Composite Materials in Bridges and
Structures (ACMBS-II), CSCE, Montreal, Canada, pp. 547–690.
Richart, F.E., Brandtzaeg, A., Brown, R.L., 1928. A study of Failure of Concrete under
Combined Compressive Stresses. Engineering Experimental Station Bulletin No.
185, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USA.
Rochette, P., Labosièrre, P., 2000. Axial testing of rectangular column models
confined with composites. Journal of Composites for Construction 4 (3), 129–
136.
Saadatmanesh, H., Ehsani, M.R., Li, M.W., 1994. Strength and ductility of concrete
columns externally reinforced with fiber composite straps. ACI Structural
Journal 91 (4), 434–447.
Saafi, M., Toutanji, H., Li, Z., 1999. Behavior of concrete columns confined with fiber
reinforced polymer tubes. ACI Materials Journal 96 (4), 500–509.
Saaman, M.S., 1997. An analytical and experimental investigation of concrete-filled
fiber reinforced plastic (FRP) tubes. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Central
Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.
Saaman, M., Mirmiran, A., Shahawy, M., 1998. Model of concrete confined by fiber
composites. Journal of Structural Engineering 124 (9), 1025–1031.
Saenz, N., 2004. Durability and design of fiber reinforced polymer composites for
concrete confinement. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT,
USA.
Saenz, N., Pantelides, C.P., 2007. Strain based confinement model for FRP-confined
concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering 133 (6), 825–833.
Seible, F., Priestley, M.J.N., Innamorato, D., 1995. Earthquake retrofit of bridge
columns with continuous carbon fiber jackets. Vol. II: Design Guidelines.
Advanced Composite Technology Transfer Consortium, Report No. ACCTT-95/
08, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Seible, F., Priestley, M.J.N., Hegemier, G.A., Innamorato, D., 1997. Seismic retrofit of
RC columns with continuous carbon fiber jackets. Journal of Composites for
Construction 1 (2), 52–62.
Sfer, D., Carol, I., Getta, R., Etse, G., 2002. Study of the behavior of concrete under
triaxial compression. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 128 (2), 156–163.
Shehata, I.A.E.M., Carneiro, L.A.V., Shehata, L.C.D., 2002. Strength of short concrete
columns confined with CFRP sheet. Materials and Structures 35, 50–58.
898 D.A. Moran, C.P. Pantelides / International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (2012) 881–898
Spoelstra, M.R., Monti, G., 1999. FRP-confined concrete model. Journal of
Composites for Construction 3 (3), 143–150.
Tamuzs, V., Tepfers, R., Valdmanis, V., Sparnins, E., Zile, E., Ladnova, O., 2007. Tests
and prediction of the mechanical behavior of cylindrical concrete specimens
confined by composite wrapping. In: Proceedings of the 8th International
Symposium on Fiber Reinforced Polymer Reinforcement for Concrete Structures
(FRPRCS-8), University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
Teng, J.G., Lam, L., 2002. Compressive behavior of carbon fiber reinforced polymer-
confined concrete in elliptical columns. Journal of Structural Engineering 128
(12), 1535–1543.
Teng, J.G., Lam, L., 2004. Behavior and modeling of fiber reinforced polymer-
confined concrete. Journal of Structural Engineering 130 (11), 1713–1723.
Teng, J.G., Huang, Y.L., Lam, L., Ye, L.P., 2007. Theoretical model for fiber-
reinforced polymer-confined concrete. Journal of Composites for Construction 11
(2), 201–210.
Teng, J.G., Jiang, T., Lam, L., Luo, Y.Z., 2009. Refinement of a design-oriented stress–
strain model for FRP-confined concrete. Journal of Composites for Construction
13 (4), 269–278.
Toutanji, H.A., 1999. Stress–strain characteristics of concrete columns externally
confined with advanced fiber composite sheets. ACI Materials Journal 96 (3),
397–404.
Wu, G., Lu, Z.T., Wu, Z.S., 2006. Strength and ductility of concrete cylinders confined
with FRP composites. Construction and Building Materials 20 (2006), 134–148.
Wu, G., Lu, Z.T., Wu, Z.S., 2007. Design-oriented stress–strain model for concrete
prisms confined with FRP composites. Construction and Building Materials 21
(2007), 1107–1121.
Wu, Y., Wang, L., 2009. Unified strength model for square and circular concrete
columns confined by FRP jackets. Journal of Structural Engineering 135 (3),
253–261.
Wu, H., Xiao, Y., 2000. Compressive stress strain behavior of concrete confined by
carbon fiber jackets. In: Proceedings of the 6th ASCCS Conference on Steel–
Concrete Composite Structures, Los Angeles, CA, USA, pp. 919–946.
Xiao, Y., Ma, R., 1997. Seismic retrofit of RC circular columns using prefabricated
composite jacketing. Journal of Structural Engineering 123 (10), 1357–1364.
Xiao, Y., Wu, H., 2000. Compressive behavior of concrete confined by carbon fiber
composite jackets. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering 12 (2), 139–146.
Xiao, Y., Wu, H., 2003. Compressive behavior of concrete confined by various types
of FRP composite jackets. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites 22 (13),
1187–1201.
Yan, Z., 2005. Shape modification of rectangular columns confined with FRP
composites. Ph.D. Dissertation, University Of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Yan, Z., Pantelides, C.P., 2006. Fiber reinforced polymer jacketed and shape modified
compression members: II – model. ACI Structural Journal 103 (6), 894–903.
Yan, Z., Pantelides, C.P., Reaveley, L.D., 2006. Fiber reinforced polymer jacketed and
shape modified compression members: I – experimental behavior. ACI
Structural Journal 103 (6), 885–893.