Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Curvature Ductility of Reinforced Concrete Beam
Curvature Ductility of Reinforced Concrete Beam
net/publication/278786021
CITATIONS READS
16 10,343
2 authors:
All content following this page was uploaded by Monita Olivia on 20 June 2015.
ABSTRACT
The aim of this paper is to examine the influence of three variables on curvature ductility of
reinforced concrete beams. A computer program was developed to predict moment-curvature
and available curvature ductility of reinforced concrete beams with or without axial loads. Ten
beams with different variables were analysed using the program. The variables measured are
concrete strength, amount of longitudinal reinforcement and spacing of transverse
reinforcement. The input consists of beam geometry, material properties and loading. A
confined stress-strain curve for concrete proposed by Saatcioglu and Razvi (1992) is applied in
the program, while, steel stress-strain model is adopted from BS 8110 (British Standard
Institution 1985). Computer analysis indicates that the curvature ductility increases with the
increase of longitudinal reinforcement and concrete strength. On the other hand, the spacing of
transverse reinforcement does not have any significant influence on the curvature ductility.
1. INTRODUCTION
Ductility of reinforced structures is a desirable property where resistance to brittle
failure during flexure is required to ensure structural integrity. Ductile behaviour in a structure
can be achieved through the use of plastic hinges positioned at appropriate locations
throughout the structural frame. These are designed to provide sufficient ductility to resist
structural collapse after the yield strength of the material has been achieved. The available
ductility of plastic hinges in reinforced concrete is determined based on the shape of the
moment-curvature relations.
Ductility may be defined as the ability to undergo deformations without a substantial
reduction in the flexural capacity of the member (Park & Ruitong 1988). According to Xie et
al, (1994), this deformability is influenced by some factors such as the tensile reinforcement
ratio, the amount of longitudinal compressive reinforcement, the amount of lateral tie and the
strength of concrete. The ductility of reinforced concrete section could be expressed in the
form of the curvature ductility (µφ):
φu
µφ =
φy
where φu is the curvature at ultimate when the concrete compression strain reaches a specified
limiting value, φy is the curvature when the tension reinforcement first reaches the yield
strength. The definition of φy shows the influence of the yield strength of reinforcement steel
My = Asfyd''
ε sy fy
φy = =
(1 − k )d E s (1 − k )d
Moment
(M)
First
yielding
First Curvature
cracking (ϕ)
2
Volume 6 No. 1, Oktober 2005 : 1 - 13
A trilinear moment-curvature relationship shown in Figure 1 is defined by the points
of cracking and yielding. Uncracked, cracked and yielded behaviors are depicted by straight
lines. Park & Paulay (1975) found that the curve is linear in its initial stage, and the
relationship between moment M and curvature is given by the classical elastic equation:
EI = MR = M/ϕ
where EI is the flexural rigidity of the section.
Based on the procedures proposed by Park & Ruitong (1988), the moment,
corresponding to the chosen value (εcm) and axial load (P) is obtained by taking moments of
the internal forces.
n m
M = Σ f ci Aci d i + Σ f sj Asj d j
i =1 j =1
where fci is the concrete stress in the i-th layer, fsj is the steel stress in the j-th layer, Aci is the
area of concrete in the i-th layer, Asj is the steel stress in the j-th layer, di and dj are the the
distance of the centroid of i-th layer for concrete and of j-th lamina for steel, from reference
axis for moment calculation, n is the number of layer of concrete, m is the number of layer for
steel.
The curvature is given by:
ε cm
ϕ=
c
where εcm is the concrete strain in the extreme compression fibre, c is the neutral axis depth.
The variables affecting curvature ductility may be classified under three groups (after
Derecho 1989), namely 1) loading variable such as the level of axial load; 2) geometric
variables such as the amount of tension and compression reinforcement, amount of transverse
reinforcement and the shape of the section; and 3) material variables such as the yield strength
of reinforcement and characteristic strength of concrete.
The objective of this study is to analyse curvature ductility of 10 beams with three
different variables. A computer program was developed to establish ductility analysis for
those reinforced concrete beams. The software, referred to CD Analysis, provides moment-
curvature analysis and curvature ductility analysis.
2. METHODOLOGY
Many variables influence the curvature ductility of reinforced beams and the presented
numerical analysis is done on specimens that are designed to address some of them. The
parametric study has been carried out for all the specimens. The effect of different variables
is studied by varying one variable at a time, keeping the value of other variables fixed. The
summary of the specimen properties is given in Table 1.
The variables studied in the presented test program are as follows 1) concrete
compressive strength (fcu). The test specimens contained four types of compressive strength.
The compressive strength (fcu) ranged between 20-35 MPa; 2) longitudinal reinforcement ratio
(ρ'/ρ). The longitudinal reinforcement consisted of tension and compression reinforcement
and was varied between 0.25 to 1.00. The reinforcement ratios were calculated as As/bh;
where As is the area of reinforcing steel; b and h are width and height of the concrete section,
respectively; 3) spacing of confinement reinforcement. The stirrups spacing were taken
between 50-150 mm. Ten beams with 77 x 130 mm in cross section and 1320 mm length were
investigated in this research.
Curvature Ductility Of Reinforced Concrete Beam 3
(Monita Olivia, Parthasarathi Mandal)
Table 1. Specimen properties
Diameter Diameter of Diameter Spacing
fcu
Beam of tensile compression of of
(MPa) ρ ρ' ρ'/ρ
No. reinforce- reinforce- stirrups stirrups
ment (mm) ment (mm) (mm) (mm)
1 25 2#6 0.00704 2#6 0.00704 1.0 3 75
2 25 2#8 0.01263 2#6 0.00710 0.55 3 75
3 25 2#10 0.01993 2#6 0.00717 0.36 3 75
4 25 2#12 0.02898 2#6 0.00725 0.25 3 75
5 20 2#10 0.01993 2#6 0.00717 0.36 3 75
6 30 2#10 0.01993 2#6 0.00717 0.36 3 75
7 35 2#10 0.01993 2#6 0.00717 0.36 3 75
8 25 2#10 0.01993 2#6 0.00717 0.36 3 50
9 25 2#10 0.01993 2#6 0.00717 0.36 3 100
10 25 2#10 0.01993 2#6 0.00717 0.36 3 150
0.85f'c
f'co Confined
Unconfine
0.85f'c
0.20f'c
Strain
ε01 ε085 ε1 ε85 ε20 ε
Figure 2. Stress-strain relationship for concrete confined by circular spirals
(Saatcioglu & Razvi 1992).
The equations relating to the various segments of the stress-strain curve are shown below:
The parabolic part:
4
Volume 6 No. 1, Oktober 2005 : 1 - 13
For 0 ≤ εc ≤ ε1
− (1+ 2 K )
ε ε
2
f c = f ' cc 2 c − c ≤ f cc
ε 1 ε 1
ε c − ε1
f c = f 'cc − 0.15 f 'cc ≤ 0.20 f 'cc
ε 85 − ε1
For εc ≥ ε20
fc = 0.20f'cc
where K = k1fle/fcc
k1 = 6.7(fle)-0.17
fle = k2fl
f'cc = f'c + k1f1e
ΣAs f yh sin α
fl =
s bc
b bc 1
k 2 = 0.26 c ≤ 1.0
s s1 f 1
where f'c is the unconfined strength of concrete; εc, fc is the strain and corresponding stress
from stress-strain curve; ε1, ε85 is the strain corresponding to the peak stress and 85% of the
peak stress, for confined concrete; εo, εo85 is the strain corresponding to the peak stress and
85% of the peak stress, for unconfined concrete; ε20 is the strain at 0.20 of maximum stress
on the falling branch of stress-strain curve for unconfined concrete; f1 is the uniform confining
pressure (MPa); fle is the equivalent uniform pressure (MPa); flex is the effective lateral
pressures acting perpendicular to core dimension bcx; fley is the effective lateral pressures
acting perpendicular to core dimension bcy; As, fyh is the area and yield strength of transverse
reinforcement; bcx, bcy is the core dimensions of rectangular section; s is the centre to centre
Curvature Ductility Of Reinforced Concrete Beam 5
(Monita Olivia, Parthasarathi Mandal)
distance of tie spacing; s is the spacing between laterally supported longitudinal
reinforcement.
Figure 3. Design stress-strain curve from BS 8110 (British Standard Institution 1985)
In this research, a simple bilinear idealisation of the steel stress-strain relationship is
adopted in which no strain hardening of the material is taken into account (Figure 3) from BS
8110 (British Standard 1985). BS 8110 idealises an identical behaviour of the steel in tension
and compression, as being linear in the elastic range up to the design yield stress of fy/γm
where, fy is the characteristic yield stress, the partial safety factor γm = 1.15.
Inputs for the program are beam geometry, material properties and axial loading.
Geometric data for a beam consist of width (b = 77 mm), depth (h = 130 mm), concrete cover
= 9 mm, the ratio of the amount of longitudinal reinforcement (ρ'/ρ = 0.025-1.0) and the
spacing of transverse reinforcement (s = 50-100 mm). While, material properties include
Young's Modulus (200 MPa), concrete compressive strength (fcu = 20-35 MPa), yield strength
of reinforcing steel (250 MPa), modulus elasticity of steel (Es = 200,000 Mpa) and maximum
elongation of steel reinforcement grade 250 is 0.22 (BS EN 10002 1992).
The computational procedure for obtaining the curvature ductility from the moment-
curvature behaviour of cross section is as follows (Saatcioglu & Yalcin 1999). Firstly,
calculate the ultimate axial load (Po) that the section can carry using
Po = (Ac - As)(maximum stress of concrete) + Asfy
where Ac is the gross area of core concrete for confined section, As is the area of longitudinal
steel, fy is the yield strength of longitudinal steel. If the given axial load is less than the
ultimate axial load (Po), the process will continue to the next step.
Then, analysis is conducted for the strain at the extreme compressive fiber as if the
section is loaded under once axial load without any moment. The strain profile is established
for the value of fibre strain. It is assumed that strain has a linear variation over the beam cross
section. The section is divided into rectangular strips (lamina) for the purpose of calculating
compressive forces in concrete as shown in material models described in Figure 4. Figure 4
shows a rectangular section with stress and strain diagram, and the forces acting on the cross
section. Corresponding stresses in concrete and steel are determined from its appropriate
stress-strain models. Internal forces in reinforcing steel are calculated.
Once internal forces are computed, the axial force is calculated. The moment-
curvature curve is plotted from the values of moment and curvature. Curvature at each section
is obtained from the moment-curvature relationship. The sectional analysis continues until
either the yield condition of steel is being satisfied at this particular iteration or the ultimate
condition has reached. If the yield condition is satisfactory, the present curvature is set as
6
Volume 6 No. 1, Oktober 2005 : 1 - 13
yield curvature. If the ultimate condition has reached, curvature ductility of the section can be
determined. The results are presented in a tabulation form in term of moment-curvature values
and a value of curvature ductility of a section. Program flowchart is in Figure 5.
b
εc 0.85f'c
c1
Assumed
fs1 c2
S1
c strain c3 h/2
profile c4
M
Neutral M
h axis
φ Actual P
strain
profile
εs fs2 S2
Once internal forces are computed, the axial force is calculated. The moment-
curvature curve is plotted from the values of moment and curvature. Curvature at each section
is obtained from the moment-curvature relationship. The sectional analysis continues until
either the yield condition of steel is being satisfied at this particular iteration or the ultimate
condition has reached. If the yield condition is satisfactory, the present curvature is set as
yield curvature. If the ultimate condition has reached, curvature ductility of the section can be
determined. The results are presented in a tabulation form in term of moment-curvature values
and a value of curvature ductility of a section. Program flowchart is in Figure 5.
Is the yield
Is y > 0.0 NO YES
condition of steel
? achieved ?
y =
NO
Continue
8
Volume 6 No. 1, Oktober 2005 : 1 - 13
Figure 5. The program flow chart for the moment-curvature calculation
4.50E+06
4.00E+06
3.50E+06
3.00E+06
Moment (Nmm)
5.00E+05
0.00E+00
0.00E+00 1.00E-04 2.00E-04 3.00E-04 4.00E-04 5.00E-04 6.00E-04
Curvature (rad/mm)
4.00E+06
3.50E+06
3.00E+06
Moment (Nmm)
2.50E+06
Beam 3
2.00E+06 Beam 5
Beam 6
1.50E+06 (fcu = 25 MPa)
Beam 7
1.00E+06 (fcu = 20 MPa)
(fcu = 30 MPa)
5.00E+05
(fcu = 35 MPa)
0.00E+00
0.00E+00 1.00E-04 2.00E-04 3.00E-04 4.00E-04 5.00E-04 6.00E-04
Curvature (rad/mm)
10
Volume 6 No. 1, Oktober 2005 : 1 - 13
6,00E+06
Beam 1
5,00E+06
Beam 2 (ρ'/ρ = 1.0)
Beam 3 (ρ'/ρ = 0.55)
4,00E+06 Beam 4
(ρ'/ρ = 0.36)
Moment (Nmm)
(ρ'/ρ = 0.25)
3,00E+06
2,00E+06
1,00E+06
0,00E+00
0,00E+00 2,00E-04 4,00E-04 6,00E-04 8,00E-04 1,00E-03 1,20E-03 1,40E-03 1,60E-03 1,80E-03
Curvature (rad/mm)
Available curvature ductility of the beams that calculated using the CD program is
listed in the Table 2. The table generally shows that for the same amounts of longitudinal and
confinement reinforcement. Curvature ductility rise gradually as the concrete strength
increases from 20-35 MPa. Thus, the ductility of high strength concrete beams was generally
higher than those of beams with moderate concrete strength. For the same concrete strength,
the curvature ductility increase drastically as the ratio of ρ'/ρ increases. Finally, the results did
not show the expected effect of decrease spacing in confinement reinforcement on curvature
ductility.
In seismic design it would appear to be reasonable to aim at an available curvature
ductility factor of at least 10 when εcu = 0.004 is reached in the potential plastic hinge regions
of beams (Park & Ruitong 1988). According to Dowrick (1987), during a severe earthquake
the curvature ductility (µφ) available at the reinforced concrete beams section may be in the
range of 10 to 20.
Table 2. Properties and curvature ductility from experimental and computation results
of reinforced concrete beams (steel reinforcement with fY = 250 MPa).
4. CONCLUSION
The effect of geometric and material variables on the available curvature ductility of
reinforced concrete beam can be readily assessed using Curvature Ductility Program. As
expected it was found that, with other variables held constant, the available curvature ductility
factor is increased if the longitudinal reinforcement ratio is increased and the concrete
compressive strength is increased. While, there is no significant increase if the confined
reinforcement spacing is decreased.
REFERENCES
British Standard Institution, BS 8110: Part 1: 1985. Structural Use of Concrete, London: BSI.
1985.
Dowrick, D.J., 1987. Earthquake Resistant Design, Great Britain: John Wiley & Sons.
European Committee for Standardization, Eurocode 8: 1994.Design provisions for earthquake
resistance of structures Part 3: Specific rules for various materials and elements.
Mandal, P., 1993. Curvature ductility of reinforced concrete sections with and without
confinement, Master Thesis Department of Civil Engineering, Kanpur: Indian Institute
of Technology Kanpur.
Park, R. & Paulay, T., 1975. Reinforced Concrete Structures, Canada: John Wiley & Sons.
Park, R. & Ruitong, D., 1988. Ductility of doubly reinforced concrete beam section, ACI
Structural Journal 85: 217-225.
Saatcioglu, M. & Razvi, S.R., 1992. Strength and ductility of confine concrete columns, ASCE
Journal Structural 106: 1079-1102.
Saatcioglu, M. & Yalcin, C., 2000, Inelastic analysis of reinforced concrete columns,
Computer and Structures 77 [online], London: Elsevier Science Ltd. Available at:
<http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00457949> [Accessed 29 August
2000].
Shin, S., Ghosh, S.K. & Moreno, J., 1989. Flexural ductility of ultra high strength concrete
members, ACI Structural Journal 86: 394-400.
Xie, Y., Ahmad, S., Yu, T., Hino, S. & Chung, W., 1994. Shear ductility of reinforced
concrete beams of normal and high strength concrete, ACI Structural Journal 91: 140-
149.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This article is a part of MSc Dissertation of Structural Engineering. The author wish to
acknowledge the financial support given by Engineering Education Development Project
ADB-INO 1432. Special thanks are due to the technical staff of the Structural Laboratory of
12
Volume 6 No. 1, Oktober 2005 : 1 - 13
Civil & Structural Department, UMIST, Manchester, i.e. John Mason, Steve Edwards, Paul
Nedwell, and John Wall for their kind assistance throughout the project.
RIWAYAT PENULIS
Monita Olivia MSc, adalah staf pengajar pada Jurusan Teknik Sipil Fakultas Teknik
Universitas Riau, Pekanbaru.
Parthasarathi Mandal PhD adalah staf pengajar pada Civil & Structural Engineering
Department, UMIST, Manchester, United Kingdom.