Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1 s2.0 S0263823122006772 Main
1 s2.0 S0263823122006772 Main
Thin-Walled Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tws
Axial and bending behaviour of steel tubes infilled with rubberised concrete
A. Mujdeci a , Y.T. Guo a,b ,∗, D.V. Bompa a,c , A.Y. Elghazouli a
a
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London, UK
b
Institute for Ocean Engineering, Tsinghua Shenzhen International Graduate School, China
c Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Surrey, UK
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: a.mujdeci18@imperial.ac.uk (A. Mujdeci), guoyutao@imperial.ac.uk, guoyutao@sz.tsinghua.edu.cn (Y.T. Guo), d.bompa@surrey.ac.uk
(D.V. Bompa), a.elghazouli@imperial.ac.uk (A.Y. Elghazouli).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2022.110125
Received 2 June 2022; Received in revised form 4 August 2022; Accepted 5 September 2022
Available online xxxx
0263-8231/© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
Latin lowercase
𝑒 Eccentricity
empirical-based modifications to account for the nonlinear material
𝑒test Test eccentricity
response of RuC.
𝑑c Compression damage factor Specific modelling approaches to predict RuCFST behaviour with
𝑑max,c Maximum compression damage factor high rubber ratios, as well as suitable representations of the bending–
𝑓c,28d Concrete compressive strength compression interactions, which are essential for sectional design, are
𝑓ctr, Concrete splitting tensile strength needed. Eurocode 4 [23] covers the design of conventional CFST and
𝑓rc Rubberised concrete compressive strength estimates of this approach have typically led to reliable predictions for
𝑓c0 Reference concrete compressive strength RuCFST members with relatively low rubber content [13,24]. However,
this may not be the case when relatively high rubber ratios, for which
𝑓yi 0.2% steel proof yield strength
improved design procedures are needed [3]. Validation of such proce-
𝑓ui Testing ultimate steel strength of steel
dures requires a relatively large database that includes configurations
𝑓usm The modified ultimate strength of steel representative of a wide range of material parameters, cross-sections
ℎn The distance between the neutral axis and and loading conditions. To complement experimental datasets, nonlin-
the cross-section centreline ear modelling is typically employed to develop databases with ranges
𝑢 Axial shortening that are of practical interest [3]. Developing full three-dimensional
𝑢i Shortening (3D) continuum finite element (FE) models of RuCFST members under
𝑡 Thickness of steel tube combined loading would be required for this purpose, but is lacking to
date. Such numerical modelling approaches would also need to adopt
Greek letters material models that capture closely the effects of high rubber content
and confinement.
𝛿 Displacement
This paper presents an experimental and numerical study on rub-
𝜀co Crushing strain of concrete
berised concrete-infilled circular steel tubes subjected to combined
𝜀c0,1 Reference concrete axial strain at crushing loading conditions, and proposes modified design procedures for RuCF-
𝜀crush Crushing strain STs with high rubber content of up to 60%. The experimental pro-
pl
𝜀ln True plastic strain gramme includes axial compression tests with aspect ratios of 2 and
𝜀rc,e1 Rubberised concrete proportionality limit 4, bending tests with a shear span-to-depth ratio of 3.4, as well as
specimens tested in combined loading. The tests from this investigation
and previous related studies are used to validate detailed nonlinear
finite element (FE) procedures. To reliably represent the RuC response,
cross-section were carried out, although the rubber ratio was still modelling techniques which are suitable for low strength concrete with
high rubber replacements in compression and bending, are proposed.
moderate with less than 15% [22]. Since existing numerical studies After gaining confidence in the reliability of the modelling procedures,
extensive parametric assessments including over five hundred mod-
focused on relatively low rubber ratios, most of them included several els are carried out. In these models, the cross-section size, material
2
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
2. Experimental programme
3
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
Table 1
Specimen details and test results.
Type of test (–) Specimen type (–) Specimen ID Size (D × L)/t 𝜌vr (–) etest (mm) Ntest or Ptest (kN) Mtest (kN m) 𝜃peak /𝜃max (mrad)
(mm × mm/mm)
Axial C R00E00L1a 150 × 300/2.8 0.0 0 1314 – –
C R30E00L1a 150 × 300/2.8 0.3 0 311 – –
C R60E00L1a 150 × 300/2.8 0.6 0 113 – –
C R00E00L2a 150 × 600/2.8 0.0 0 1151 – –
C R30E00L2a 150 × 600/2.8 0.3 0 384 – –
C R60E00L2a 150 × 600/2.8 0.6 0 127 – –
ST STE00L1A 152 × 300/2.8 – 0 448 – –
ST STE00L1B 152 × 300/2.8 – 0 445 – –
ST STE00L2 152 × 600/2.8 – 0 440 – –
CF CFR00E00L1A 152 × 300/2.8 0.0 0 1944 – –
CF CFR00E00L1B 152 × 300/2.8 0.0 0 1970 – –
CF CFR00E00L1C 152 × 300/2.8 0.0 0 1904 – –
CF CFR00E00L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.0 0 1929 – –
CF CFR30E00L1A 152 × 300/2.8 0.3 0 920 – –
CF CFR30E00L1B 152 × 300/2.8 0.3 0 915 – –
CF CFR30E00L1C 152 × 300/2.8 0.3 0 863 – –
CF CFR30E00L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.3 0 866 – –
CF CFR60E00L1A 152 × 300/2.8 0.6 0 680 – –
CF CFR60E00L1B 152 × 300/2.8 0.6 0 685 – –
CF CFR60E00L1C 152 × 300/2.8 0.6 0 560 – –
CF CFR60E00L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.6 0 551 – –
Bending ST STE∞L3 152 × 1200/2.8 – – 73 18.9 19
CF CFR00E∞L3 152 × 1200/2.8 0.0 – 104 27.0 >85
CF CFR30E∞L3 152 × 1200/2.8 0.3 – 90 23.4 >85
CF CFR60E∞L3 152 × 1200/2.8 0.6 – 82 21.4 >85
Axial [3] ST STE00 152 × 300/2.8 – 0 426 – –
CF CFR00E00L1A 152 × 300/2.8 0.0 0 1688 – –
CF CFR00E00L1B 152 × 300/2.8 0.0 0 1637 – –
CF CFR30E00L1A 152 × 300/2.8 0.3 0 941 – –
CF CFR30E00L1B 152 × 300/2.8 0.3 0 944 – –
CF CFR60E00L1A 152 × 300/2.8 0.6 0 618 – –
CF CFR60E00L1B 152 × 300/2.8 0.6 0 628 – –
Eccentric [3] CF CFR00E10L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.0 12 1330 15.9 14/45
CF CFR00E25L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.0 24 986 23.7 19/58
CF CFR00E50L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.0 53.5 592 31.7 23/73
CF CFR30E10L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.3 12 859 10.3 7/46
CF CFR30E25L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.3 23 679 15.6 17/67
CF CFR30E50L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.3 50.5 448 22.3 25/115
CF CFR60E10L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.6 12 525 6.3 34/67
CF CFR60E25L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.6 25 415 10.3 37/112
CF CFR60E50L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.6 53.5 307 16.5 35/115
Bending [3] ST STE∞L2 152 × 600/2.8 – – 140 15.5 >110
CF CFR00E∞L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.0 – 217 24.9 >115
CF CFR30E∞L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.3 – 219 24.7 >115
CF CFR60E∞L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.6 – 187 21.0 >115
Notes: (i) the notations for the type of specimens refer to: C — concrete cylinder, ST — circular hollow steel tube, CF — circular concrete filled steel tube; (ii) Ptest corresponds
to the peak axial load for compression tests, or the peak load applied at midspan in three-point bending tests, Ntest for concentric compression tests; (iii) symbol ‘‘>’’ indicates
that 𝜃max was not achieved and the test was halted due to test rig constraints; (iv) 𝜃peak = 𝜃max in bending tests due to bi-linear hardening response.
a Refers to average values of three tests.
4
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
Table 3
Material properties.
Unconfined concrete fc,28d (MPa) fctr (MPa) 𝜀rc,1 (%) 𝜀rc,2 (%) Erc (GPa) Slump (mm)
R00 70.7 ± 0.09 5.60 ± 0.10 – – 49.0 125
R30 18.1 ± 0.05 2.30 ± 0.13 0.13 0.09 15.2 115
R60 6.2 ± 0.14 0.9 ± 0.12 0.15 0.10 8.2 50
Steel tube D/t (mm/mm) fy (MPa) fu (MPa) 𝜀u (%) Es (GPa)
ST 152/2.8 297 388 0.18 200
Table 4
Damage factor definitions.
Damage definitions Type of test (–) 𝑓rc ≤ 30 MPa 𝑓rc > 30 MPa
Axial dc = 1 − (fc ∕fcu )
Compression damage Eccentric Linear to (𝜀crush , dc,max ) Ignored
Bending Ignored
Tension damage Ignored
be ignored. For hollow section steel tube specimens, timber blocks were
inserted at the ends and at the mid-span to obtain stiffened regions.
These blocks and steel saddles at mid-span had the same width of
60 mm, whilst the timber blocks were 20 mm at the ends.
Three LVDTs were placed vertically beneath the specimen to mon-
itor deflection, and three inclinometers were used to measure the
rotations at the ends and at the mid-span. Strain gauges were attached
to the top and bottom fibres to obtain extreme strain values at a
distance of 50 mm from the mid-span of the beams. The tests were
performed following the same displacement control of 0.25 mm/min,
and the rate was increased to 1.0 mm/min in the inelastic regime. The
tests were terminated when the support rotation limit was reached. A
digital image correlation (DIC) system was used for the axial and bend-
ing tests, whereby a speckle pattern was applied to the required area
as illustrated in Fig. 3 for bending tests. Two cameras with 35 mmf/2D
lenses Strain Master DIC system from LaVision were employed to record
the detailed deformations and strains. The images were taken at a
recording rate of 0.25 Hz and processed using DaVis 10 [29].
Fig. 2. Testing arrangement: (a) axial tests for stub-columns, (b) axial tests for short
columns, (c) bending tests (Legend: (1) specimen; (2) transducer; (3) end plates; (4)
inclinometer; (5) bearing; (6) strain-gauges). 2.3. Test results
5
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
Fig. 4. (a) Comparative applied load-shortening curves for columns under axial loading, (b) deformed shapes of stub columns, (c) deformed shapes of short columns.
6
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
Fig. 6. (a) Moment (M) versus chord rotation (𝛩), (b) crack distribution of CFST beams, (c) Failure modes of CFST beams under bending.
Fig. 7. Moment (M) versus strain (𝜀) at mid-span at the extreme tensile fibre. Four-node shell elements with reduced integration (S4R), and eight-
node solid elements with reduced integration (C3D8R) were used for
the thin-walled steel tubes and concrete, respectively. To optimise the
models, a mesh sensitivity study was undertaken. Mesh element sizes
was observed without steel fracture in tension, whilst the failure was
between D/10 and D/20 were considered, and based on the results, the
characterised by a folding failure mechanism. The failure mechanism
most efficient geometry was incorporating a 10 mm (D/15) mesh size
was largely similar for specimens with 𝐿∕𝐷 = 4 subjected to three-point
for both concrete and steel tubes, which was adopted in all models.
bending, and crack patterns of the concrete core showed flexural type
A finer mesh of less than 5 mm was applied in regions where local
failure modes without influence from shear.
The moment (M) versus strain (𝜀) at mid-span at the extreme tensile buckling was expected. The Newton–Raphson method was employed,
fibre is depicted in Fig. 7 for the members tested in bending only. As and the measured geometric and material properties were considered.
shown in the figure, the inelastic stage was characterised by hardening. The adopted Newton–Raphson implicit method, rather than the dy-
For consistency, the moment capacity of these members is considered namic explicit method used in other studies [22], has higher accuracy
as the test bending moment at a longitudinal flexural strain of 1.0%. but lower efficacy, which is more suitable for monotonic cases. The
In general, by comparing the material properties and the member latter might be more useful to deal with more complex geometries and
capacities, a high rubber content in the concrete core results in good loading histories, where higher efficiency is required.
confinement performance, suggesting that RuC benefits to a greater For validation of the numerical procedures, the interaction be-
extent from the confinement offered by the steel tube compared with haviour between the steel tube and the concrete was defined as a
conventional concrete. This is especially obvious in the axial-load ‘‘surface-to-surface contact’’. The external surface of the concrete core
dominated cases since the concrete is under compression. An increase and the internal surface of the steel tube were defined as the slave
in rubber content also provided an enhancement in ductility which was and master surfaces, respectively. Through this procedure, the master
attributed to the composite interaction between the RuC and the steel surface can penetrate the slave surface, but not vice versa [37]. Fur-
tube. thermore, the normal behaviour was defined as ‘‘hard contact’’ allowing
for separation after contact, and the tangential behaviour was defined
3. Numerical assessments as the ‘‘penalty’’ algorithm with a friction coefficient. The friction
coefficient was considered first within a range of 0.2–0.8 based on
A numerical study was carried out using the three-dimensional (3D) existing literature [38,39], then taken as 0.5 based on a sensitivity
nonlinear finite element (FE) analysis software programme ABAQUS analysis. As the main objective is to obtain stiffnesses and strengths of
7
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
Fig. 8. CFST member FE models under eccentric and bending, respectively in ABAQUS.
Fig. 9. Comparisons of elastic modulus.
various configurations, for the parametric investigations, the surface- presence of rubber, the Poisson’s ratio of RuC is evaluated by the ‘‘rule
to-surface contact was replaced by a tie. Up to peak, both contact of mixtures’’ [19], given in Eq. (3), in which 𝑉c0 and 𝑉r are the volume
modelling approaches provided identical stiffness and strength, as a
of the concrete and rubber in the mixture, respectively. The 𝜈c0 and 𝜈r
highly non-linear response is associated with large deformations.
parameters are the Poisson’s ratios of concrete and rubber, taken as 0.2
The displacements and rotations of the end boundary conditions of
and 0.5, respectively [19]. Based on this expression and the RuC mix
the specimens were linked with reference points, and suitable repre-
ratios, Poisson’s ratio of RuC (𝜈rc ) are 0.27 and 0.33 for R30 and R60,
sentations reflecting the test setup were applied as shown in Fig. 8.
respectively.
For axial or eccentric compression tests, all degrees of freedom at the
√
end of the models were coupled with a reference point using kinematic Ec0 = 4700 fc0 (1)
constraints, coupling the motion of the nodes at the end of the spec- ( )2∕3
f
imen (cross-section of concrete and steel together) to the condition Erc = 12000 rc (2)
10
of the reference point [37]. For bending tests, only a quarter of the
𝜈 V + 𝜈r Vr
member length was modelled to enhance the computational efficiency, 𝜈cr = c0 c0 (3)
Vc0 + Vr
as suggested in previous numerical studies [40]. The region under the
loading point was restrained against all degrees of freedom, while the
3.2.1.2. Constitutive curves. The CFST response shown in Fig. 10a can
end of the beam was coupled with a reference point using kinematic
be represented by three stages: the elastic stage (points O to A), a
coupling constraints. The coupling was only applied to the steel tube
plateau where the peak strain of concrete increases from 𝜀c0 to 𝜀cc due
at the end of the beam section to allow sliding between the steel and
to the confinement (Points B to C) and a softening response beyond
concrete to reliably represent the test. The reference point at the axis
𝜀cc (Point C). The lateral expansion of the concrete core is less or
of symmetry was fixed, assuming rigid end boundary conditions, whilst
similar to the expansion of the steel tube before the concrete stress
vertical displacements were applied through an end reference point to
simulate the testing procedure, as illustrated in Fig. 8. Interfacial sliding reaches the peak strength. At this stage, the confining stress is small,
was possible in the bending test since the end of the beam was not fixed and the stress–strain behaviour of confined concrete is similar to that
and only had lateral support. of unconfined concrete. Eqs. (4)–(9) give a constitutive law suitable
for both unconfined CC and RuC and are employed for modelling the
3.2. Material models elastic response [9]. By considering 𝜌vr = 0, the RuC strength (𝑓rc )
reverts to CC strength (𝑓c0 ), and the RuC crushing strain 𝜀cr,1 to that
3.2.1. Concrete materials of CC (𝜀c0 ). The parameter 𝜆 in Eq. (7) is function of the replaced
The concrete damage plasticity (CDP) model was employed in mineral aggregate size 𝑑g,repl (𝜆 = 2.43 for 𝑑g,repl = 0 − 5, 𝜆 = 2.90 for
this numerical investigation as this was typically used in CFST mod- 𝑑g,repl = 0 − 𝑑g,max , 𝜆 = 2.08 for 𝑑g,repl = 5 − 𝑑g,max , in mm).
elling [41,42] incorporating confined conventional concrete (CC) [43– 𝜎
= Erc 𝜀 → 𝜀 ≤ 𝜀rc,el = 0.3frc ∕Erc . (4)
45]. These approaches are well accepted for CFST, yet they need to frc
[ ]
be modified to reliably capture the response of confined rubberised 𝜎 5
= 𝜂1 − 𝜂12 + 0.3 → 𝜀rc,el < 𝜀 ≤ 𝜀rc (5)
concrete (RuC). In the following sections, the parameter definitions for frc 3
( )
reference CC and RuC modelling are given. The former adopts ‘c0’ as a 𝜀 − 𝜀rc,el
subscript, whilst the latter uses ‘rc’. 𝜂1 = (6)
𝜀rc
3.2.1.1. Elastic parameters. Tao et al. [45] suggested that the elastic 1
frc = ( ) fc0 . (7)
modulus of CC (𝐸c0 ) can be estimated with Eq. (1), and the elastic 3𝜆𝜌vr 3∕2
1+2 2
modulus of RuC (𝐸rc ) can be determined with Eq. (2) [9], where 𝑓c0
and 𝑓rc are the CC or RuC strength, respectively. Direct comparison 𝜀𝑟𝑐 = (1 − 𝜌vr )𝜀𝑐0 (8)
between the predictions of Eqs. (1)–(2) and experimental data (𝐸Test ) 0.31
𝜀𝑐0 = 0.7fc0 (9)
show that Eq. (1) provides good agreement with tests for 30 MPa
≤ 𝑓c ≤ 60 MPa, whilst Eq. (2) estimates are more reliable for low After the concrete stress reaches its peak, the concrete shows ob-
strength RuC (𝑓c ≤ 30 MPa). The comparison is given in Fig. 9, and vious inelastic characteristic properties, and the lateral expansion in-
Eq. (2) is adopted in the FE for material modelling of RuC. Due to the creases significantly. The behaviour of the confined concrete is more
8
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
Fig. 10. (a) Material model of concrete infill [45], (b) Steel constitutive model [45].
ductile than the unconfined counterpart due to the confinement pro- which is referred to as low strength concrete in this paper. Thus, the
vided by the outer tube. The enhancement in ductility can be taken dilation angle requires a modification for 𝑓c ≤ 30 MPa. Based on
into account by modifying the descending branch of the unconfined the experimental data, 𝑛l factor is proposed to consider confinement
concrete stress–strain curve. To address this, the definition of a more affected by the low strength concrete in Eq. (22) and multiplied with
ductile post-peak curve rather than the unconfined curve is derived 𝜓0 .
from plain concrete tests and can be adopted in the FE modelling [45] Eq. (23) is used to estimate the fb0 ∕frc ratio, whilst Eq. (24) is
(Eqs. (10)–(15)). The parameter 𝜀rcc is the strain at Point B, fB is the employed to determine 𝐾c [45]. The default parameter 0.1 [37] is
confining stress at point B, fy is the yield strength of steel, fres is the adopted for the flow potential eccentricity. The numerical integration is
residual stress, 𝛼 and 𝛽 are the parameters do define the softening sensitive to the softening behaviour and the stiffness degradation in the
branch. The parameter 𝛽 can be taken as 1.2 for a circular section [45], constitutive material model, which means that the accuracy of results
whilst 𝜉𝑐 is a confinement factor. The latter is the ratio between the can be influenced by the convergence rate of the model. To improve
yield strength and the cross-sectional area of the steel tube (fy As ), the rate of convergence in the softening regime, a smaller viscosity
and concrete compressive strength and the cross-sectional area of the parameter than the increment is suggested [37]. This was taken as
concrete core (frc Ac ). 𝜇v = 2 × 10−4 for the simulations in this paper.
( )
𝜀rcc ( ) fB 0.3124+0.002frc 𝜓 = 𝜂l 𝜓0 (20)
= 𝑒𝑘 𝑘 = 2.9224 − 0.00367frc (10) ( )
𝜀rc frc ⎧
⎪56.3 1 − 𝜉𝑐 for 𝜉c ≤ 0.5
( ) −0.02 D
1 + 0.027fy ⋅ 𝑒 t 𝜓0 = ⎨ 7.4 (21)
fB = ( )4.8 (11) ⎪6.672𝑒 4.64+𝜉c for 𝜉c > 0.5
1 + 1.6𝑒 −10⋅ frc ⎩
[ ( ]
𝜀 − 𝜀rcc )𝛽
1∕2
( ) 𝜂l = 0.2frc ≤ 1.0 (22)
𝜎 = fres + frc − fres exp − 𝜀 ≥ 𝜀rcc (12) ( )−0.075
𝛼 fb0 ∕frc = 1.5 frc (23)
( )
fres = 0.7 1 − 𝑒−1.38𝜉𝑐 frc ≤ 0.25frc (13) 5.5
Kc = ( )0.075 (24)
0.036 5 + 2 frc
𝛼 = 0.04 − (14)
1 + 𝑒6.08𝜉𝑐 − 3.49
3.2.1.4. Damage modelling. Compression damage definitions for low
fy As
𝜉𝑐 = (15) strength concrete (i.e. RuC in this paper), are categorised into three
frc Arc loading cases: (1) for pure bending, the damage definition can be dis-
The stress–crack displacement curve given by Eqs. (16)–(19) is regarded since the tensile behaviour of the steel dominates the overall
adopted for material modelling in tension [9]. As for the compression response, while the contribution of the concrete infill in compression is
constitutive response, this converges to CC when the 𝜌vr = 0. The marginal; (2) for axial compression, the common definition of compres-
parameter fctr,sp is the splitting tensile strength of concrete, fctr is sion damage 𝑑c = 1 − 𝑓c ∕𝑓cu is considered [38,39], having maximum
the tensile strength of concrete, 𝑤𝑚𝑎𝑥,i is the maximum crack width values around 0.7–0.8 due to the residual strength; (3) for eccentric
(𝑤𝑚𝑎𝑥,0 = 0.18 mm when 𝜌𝑣𝑟 = 0). These parameters were employed compression, to consider concrete crushing at the buckling region, a
to obtain the lowest fracture energy (𝐺f ) [9,46]. linear damage towards crushing strain (the compression damage factor
𝑑c reaches values close to 1.0) is suggested. For case (3), the crushing
fctr,sp = 0.9fctr (16) strain is suggested considered as 𝜀rc = (90 − 1.6frc )𝜀c0 for 𝑓rc ≤ 30 MPa.
2∕3
fctr = 0.26fcr (17) With this assumption, the ductility decreases when strength increases.
The maximum damage factor, in practice, can be taken as 0.98–0.99
𝑤𝑚𝑎𝑥,𝑟 = 𝑤𝑚𝑎𝑥,0 + 0.3𝜌𝑣𝑟 (in mm) (18) since the limit in the programme is defined as 0.99. For CC with 30 MPa
𝑤𝑚𝑎𝑥,0 = 0.18 mm (19) ≤ 𝑓c ≤ 100 MPa, the damage definition can be neglected as suggested
by existing studies [45]. Damage definitions for different cases are
3.2.1.3. Plasticity parameters. For both CC and RuC, the dilation angle summarised in Table 4. In all cases, the tension damage definition is
(𝜓) was initially estimated using Eqs. (21) [45], in which 𝜉𝑐 is the not considered since the tensile response is governed by the steel tube.
confinement factor for each configuration given by Eq. (15). As this
model is mainly validated for a CC with a strength range of 30 MPa 3.2.2. Steel materials
≤ 𝑓c ≤ 100 MPa, a sensitivity study [19] indicated that Eqs. (21) The elastic modulus of steel was considered as 200 GPa. The mea-
provide unreliable responses for R30 and R60 RuC as 𝑓c ≤ 30 MPa, sured engineering stress–strain response from tensile coupon tests is
9
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
Fig. 12. Comparative assessment between existing data and FEM models with/without damage definition; (a) ‘confinement locking’ behaviour of low strength concrete, (b) axial
load–strain curves, (c) failure mode of CFR60E25 under eccentric loading [3], (d) failure mode without damage, (e) failure mode with damage.
10
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
Table 5
Comparison between current test results and FE predictions.
Type of test Type of Specimen ID Size (D × L)/t 𝜌vr etest (mm) Ntest or Ptest NFEM or PFEM Ntest /NFEM or
(–) specimen (–) (mm × mm/mm) (kN) (kN) Ptest /PFEM
Axial CF CFR00E00L1 152 × 300/2.8 0.0 0 1939 1955 0.99
CF CFR30E00L1 152 × 300/2.8 0.3 0 899 881 1.02
CF CFR60E00L1 152 × 300/2.8 0.6 0 687 652 0.99
CF CFR00E00L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.0 0 1930 1708 0.85
CF CFR30E00L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.3 0 866 861 1.00
CF CFR60E00L2 152 × 600/2.8 0.6 0 551 566 0.97
Bending CF CFR00E∞L3 152 × 1200/2.8 0.0 – 104 109 0.95
CF CFR30E∞L3 152 × 1200/2.8 0.3 – 90 89 1.01
CF CFR60E∞L3 152 × 1200/2.8 0.6 – 82 82 1.00
Axial [3] CF CFR00-E00 152 × 600/2.8 0.0 0 1688 1648 1.02
CF CFR30-E00 152 × 600/2.8 0.3 0 940 940 1.00
CF CFR60-E00 152 × 600/2.8 0.6 0 624 631 0.99
Eccentric [3] CF CFR00-E10 152 × 600/2.8 0.0 12 1330 1224 1.09
CF CFR00-E25 152 × 600/2.8 0.0 24 986 1003 0.98
CF CFR00-E50 152 × 600/2.8 0.0 53.5 592 625 0.95
CF CFR30-E10 152 × 600/2.8 0.3 12 859 778 1.10
CF CFR30-E25 152 × 600/2.8 0.3 23 679 660 1.03
CF CFR30-E50 152 × 600/2.8 0.3 50.5 448 449 1.00
CF CFR60-E10 152 × 600/2.8 0.6 12 525 549 0.96
CF CFR60-E25 152 × 600/2.8 0.6 25 415 405 1.02
CF CFR60-E50 152 × 600/2.8 0.6 53.5 307 307 1.00
Bending [3] CF CFR00-E∞ 152 × 600/2.8 0.0 – 217 249 1.15
CF CFR30-E∞ 152 × 600/2.8 0.3 – 219 222 1.01
CF CFR60-E∞ 152 × 600/2.8 0.6 – 187 182 0.97
Mean 1.00
COV 0.06
Fig. 13. Comparison of experimental and FEM results; (a) axial load-shortening curves for CFST stub columns, (b) moment-chord rotation curves for CFST beam.
a less severe buckling pattern. Based on the load–strain curves of Spec- 3.4. Parametric studies
imen CFR60E25L2 from Fig. 12b as well as the buckling shapes from
tests [3] (Fig. 12c) and models (Fig. 12d,e), it is suggested that, using 3.4.1. Main parameters
the above damage modelling procedures, a reliable representation of FE models were constructed to generate additional cross-sectional
the deformational response and failure modes can be obtained for resistance data for a wide range of rubber levels, concrete grades,
RuCFST. steel grades, geometries and loading eccentricities. Five rubber levels
(𝜌vr = 0, 0.15, 0.30, 0.45, 0.60), four reference concrete strengths
(𝑓c0 = 40, 60, 70, 90 MPa), three steel yield strengths (𝑓ys = 285, 355,
3.3.2. Overall response
450 MPa) by means of steel contribution ratios 0.2 ≤ 𝛿 = 𝑓y × As ∕𝑁pl,R
The modelling procedures described in Section 3.1 and the material
≤ 0.9 [23], five thicknesses of steel tube (t = 2.8, 4, 5, 6.3, 8 mm),
modelling approaches from Section 3.2 were validated against the test
and ten different eccentricity levels (denoted X1 to X10 and shown in
results of specimens depicted in Table 1. The test and numerical load–
Fig. 16) were examined. The compressive concrete strength of RuC was
deformation (N-u) curves under axial loading, load–rotation (N-𝜃) for determined from 𝑓c0 using Eqs. (7) [9].
eccentric loading tests, and moment–rotation (M-𝜃) curves under three- The diameter of the steel tube (D) was fixed at 152 mm, and the
point loading conditions are shown in Figs. 13 and 14, whilst the main thickness of the steel tube (t) was varied within the Class 1–2 ranges
results are listed in Table 5. It could be seen that an overall good according to the classification limits in Eurocode 4 and 3 [23,26]. With
agreement was achieved between the tests and simulations, including a fixed tube diameter of 152 mm and varying tube thickness of 2.8–
for the stiffness and capacity. The standard deviation of the ultimate 8 mm, the diameter to thickness D/t range was from 19.0 to 54.3, and
capacities is within 6% which is reasonable for this type of models [38]. the steel to concrete area ratio 𝐴s ∕𝐴c range was from 7.8% to 24.9%.
Failure patterns observed in tests and modes for specimens under The studied CFST member cross-sections yield strength of 355 MPa
different loading cases are shown in Fig. 15. The FE models show and 450 MPa does not cover Class 2 limit in Eurocode 3 and 4, where
similar failure patterns compared to those observed in the tests: (a) (D/t ⩽ 70(235/fy )). It is worth noting that the classification limit for
bulges at top and bottom in axial loading; (b) buckling and damage the circular CFST section in Eurocode 8 is D/t ⩽ 85(235/fy ) for Class
in the extreme compression fibre in eccentric loading; (c) buckling and 2 [48], however the CFST specimens with steel yield strength of 450
damage in the extreme compression fibre in bending. MPa are beyond that limit. The length of all the modelled specimens
11
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
Fig. 14. Comparative applied load–rotation curves between previously reported test results [3] and FEM results; (a) CFR00, (b) CFR30, (c) CFR60.
Fig. 15. Comparison of failure modes between existing study [3] and proposed FEM models; (a) axial test for CFR00E00, (b) eccentric test for CFR60E25, (c) bending test for
CFR30E∞.
was set equal to 600 mm. The key parameters of the CFST and RuCFST 3.4.2. Overall trends
members are summarised in Table 6. For brevity, a schematic representation of the complete N-M interac-
As noted above, the FE models were constructed to assess the cross-
tion diagrams obtained from the FE results and parameters for CFR30
sectional capacity for a total of 10 eccentricity levels (X1–X10), which
models are depicted in Fig. 17. As expected, an increase in concrete
are aligned with the simplified axial bending (M–N) curve in Eurocode
strength, steel yield strength or tube thickness expands the N-M curves.
4 [23]. Four eccentricity levels coincide with N–M curve key points (A,
B, C, D) shown in Fig. 16. The additional six points were considered To obtain an insight into the influence of the main parameters varied
on the simplified base curve while dividing each zone (A–C, C–D, D–B) in the parametric study on the N-M curve key points (A, B, C, D), the
into three levels to ensure a sufficient number of data points to obtain numerical results are plotted against the rubber ratio in Fig. 18, and
complete interaction diagram representations. discussed in the following paragraphs.
12
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
Table 6
Cross-section dimensions and material properties of CFST and RuCFST members for validation of FE model in Section 3.4 and chosen for
parametric study.
𝜌vr,0 D0 × t0 fc,0 fy0.2,0 e0 𝜌vr,i Di × ti fc,i fy0.2,o ei
(mm × mm) (MPa) (MPa) (mm) (mm × mm) (MPa) (MPa) (mm)
0 152 × 2.8 60 285 0 0 152 × 2.8 40 285 X1, X2,
0.30 10 0.15 152 × 4 60 355 X3, X4,
0.60 25 0.30 152 × 5 70 450 X5, X6
50 0.45 152 × 6.3 90 X7, X8
∞ 0.60 150 × 8 X9, X10
13
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
Fig. 17. Completed N-M interaction diagrams with FEM results for CFR30Ezz .
Fig. 18. Variation of 𝑁pl,rd , 𝑀pl,rd , 𝑁pm,rd , 𝑀max with respect to defined parameters.
14
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
Fig. 19. Cross-section capacity comparison between FEM results and predictions under (a) axial loading and (b) bending.
[( ) ( ) ]
Mu,AS = Wps − Wpsn 𝜙fy + 0.5 Wpc − Wpcn 𝜙c fc (34) Table 7
Cross-sectional slenderness and material limits in design codes.
In the Chinese provisions GB 50936 [51], the cross-sectional re- Design codes Slenderness limits fy (MPa) fc (MPa)
sistance is dependent on the confinement effects, as indicated by D fy
EC4 [23] t 235
≤ 70 235–460 20–60
Eqs. (35)–(39). The axial cross-section capacity (𝑁u,GB ) is the product D fy
AISC 360 [49] ≤ 0.09 ≤525 20–70
of the cross-sectional area 𝐴sc and the confined concrete strength 𝑓sc , t 𝐸𝑠
D fy
which depends on a confinement factor (𝜉c ). The moment resistance AS 5100 [50] t 250
≤ 82 230–400 25–65
D fy
(𝑀u,GB ) is defined as the compressive design strength of the confining GB 50936 [51] t 235
≤ 70 235–460 30–80
concrete (𝑓sc ) multiplied by 𝑊sc = 𝜋D3 ∕32 and by a 𝛾m factor. The
parameter 𝛾m is dependent on the confinement factor 𝜉c and as well as
Table 8
on the hollow rate factor 𝜒 which was considered here as 0 for solid Comparison of FE results and predicted axial-bending capacities from EC4 [23], AISC
sections, as specified in the code. 360 [49], AS 5100 [50] and GB 50936 [51].
Design NFEM ∕Ncode MFEM ∕Mcode
NGB = Asc fsc (35)
[ ( ) ( ) ] codes Mean COV Mean COV
fy 0.104𝑓𝑐
fsc = 1.212 + 0.176 + 0.974 𝜉c + 0.031 − 𝜉c2 fc (36) EC4 0.91 0.09 1.05 0.03
213 14.4 AISC 360 1.12 0.02 1.05 0.03
𝜉c = As fy ∕Ac fc (37) AS 5100 0.91 0.09 1.05 0.03
√ GB 50936 0.90 0.05 0.90 0.15
𝛾𝑚 = (1 − 0.5𝜒)(−0.483𝜉c + 1.926 𝜉c ) (38)
Mu,GB = 𝛾𝑚 Wsc fsc (39)
statistical assessments are shown in Table 8. Numerical-to-estimated
Table 7 lists the main differences in terms of cross-sectional slen-
ratios above 1.0 indicate conservative estimates, whilst values below
derness limits, steel and concrete material strengths specified in the
various codes, with particular focus on the ranges relevant to the tubes 1.0 indicate unconservative code predictions.
used in the tests described in Section 2. Note that these limits were For the axial compressive resistance, the mean ratio of FE to Eu-
exceeded in the parametric study to obtain a detailed insight into the rocode 4 predicted capacity ratio is 0.91 with corresponding COV
response of RuCFST with characteristics beyond the current limits of values equal of 0.09. More unconservative estimates are obtained with
the codes considered. Eurocode 4 gives a slenderness limit for Class 2 increasing 𝜌vr , noting that intermediate to large 𝜌vr ratios lead to
as D/t ⩽ 70(235/fy ), which is also adopted in GB 50936. Note that the low strength concrete which is beyond the limits of the code. For
latter code employs the hollow section local buckling limits of CFST the moment resistance, the Eurocode 4 predictions indicate a more
members, rather than having specific values for composite sections. consistent and less scattered conservative trend (Fig. 19b); the mean
A similar approach is given in AS 5100, in which for the same FE-to-predicted moment capacity ratio is equal to 1.05 with the corre-
section type the diameter-to-thickness ratio D/t ⩽ 82(250/fy ). In AISC, sponding COV values equal to 0.03. The mean FE to AISC 360 predicted
the slenderness limits are given as a function of the 𝐸s ∕𝑓y ratio. These axial capacity ratio is equal to 1.12, with a COV value of 0.02. This
are 0,09(𝐸s /fy ) for CFST compact sections. In all codes, a fully plastic code provided conservative estimates, that are attributed to the code
stress distribution is considered for members with section classes such which disregards the confinement effects within the composite section.
as those used in the tests described above. Although some of the FE The FE-to-predicted moment capacity ratios are identical to those of
models had sections in which these limits were exceeded, the results
Eurocode 4 since the same approach is adopted. As the AS5100 code
showed that the configurations developed their full plastic capacity.
uses a similar background to Eurocode 4 for axial section capacity
With regard to concrete strengths, Table 7 shows that relatively low
design, the FE-to-predicted axial capacity ratio is the same.
strength concretes such as those of RuC with intermediate to high
rubber ratios, are outside of the scope of the codes. Finally, estimates of GB 50936 are unconservative for both axial
compression and moment capacities. The results of axial compression
4.2. Comparative results resistance for CFST with conventional concrete are generally on the
safe side, whilst the predicted bending resistance capacities are also
The axial compression resistance (𝑁pl.R ) and bending moment re- conservative but with large scatter, particularly for RuCFST. For GB
sistance (𝑀pl,R ) estimated by codes were compared with the corre- 50936, The mean 𝑁FEM ∕𝑁code and 𝑀FEM ∕𝑀code are both 0.90, whilst
sponding FE results from the parametric studies, denoted as 𝑁FEM and the COVs are 0.05 and 0.15, respectively. As can be seen from Table 8
𝑀FEM , respectively. Fig. 19 gives the ratios between the numerical- and Fig. 19, the ability of current design codes to predict the RuCFST
to-estimated values (𝑁FEM ∕𝑁code or 𝑀FEM ∕𝑀code ), whilst the main cross-section capacities differs, depending on the action and specific
15
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
Fig. 20. Comparisons of FE resistances with Eqs. (40)–(47) and EC4 predictions.
assumptions included in the model, indicating the need for modifica- 𝜆rcc = 1 − 0.55𝜌vr (45)
tions particularly for material and geometrical parameters specific for
𝜒rcc = 1 − 0.05𝜌vr (46)
RuCFST sections.
𝜔rcc = 1 − 0.38𝜌vr (47)
4.3. Proposed modifications Comparative N-M interaction curves obtained from FE simulations,
Eurocode 4 (𝜆rcc = 𝜒rcc = 𝜔rcc = 1.0), and modified Eurocode 4 pre-
As noted above, RuC with intermediate to high 𝜌vr ratios has rel- dictions (Eqs. (40)–(47) with 𝜌vr -dependent 𝜆rcc, 𝜒rcc and 𝜔rcc factors),
atively low compressive strengths which are typically outside of the are illustrated in Fig. 20. The mean values of FE results relative to
scope of current design codes. Thus, these cannot be directly employed estimates of Eq. (40), (41), (42) and (44) are 1.00, 1.01, 1.05, and 1.01,
to design RuCFST members, and modifications to the current design respectively. The modified EC4 expressions are generally more accurate
expression need to be considered. As mentioned above and shown in and less scattered compared with current guidelines. A good agreement
Fig. 16, Eurocode 4 considers four key points to evaluate a piecewise is also shown in Fig. 21 which depicts the predicted N-M interaction
N-M interaction diagram. These are given by Eq. (40) for axial compres- diagrams against FE results for CFR00, CFR30, and CFR60 specimens.
sion (Point A), Eq. (41) for bending only (Point B), Eq. (42) for bending It is shown that the proposed modifications provide more reliable
and compression (Point C), Eq. (44) for maximum moment resistance estimates for all axial-bending interaction points and are suitable to
(Point D). evaluate the cross-sectional capacity of RuCFST incorporating concrete
For conventional concrete parameters 𝜆rcc , 𝜒rcc and 𝜔rcc are 1.0. with high rubber content.
These are introduced in this paper to better represent the specific
response of RuC. As shown above, unconservative axial resistances for 5. Conclusions
RuCFST members were obtained and attributed to the low strength of
concrete and the presence of rubber whose behaviour is not captured This paper presented an experimental and numerical investigation
by the current code. The experimental and numerical dataset developed into the axial and bending behaviour of circular rubberised concrete-
in this paper was used to calibrate the four key points of the N-M filled steel tubes (RuCFST) incorporating relatively high rubber con-
integration diagram by 𝜌vr -dependent 𝜆rcc, 𝜒rcc and 𝜔rcc factors given tents of up to 60%. The results from compression, bending and com-
in Eqs. (45)–(47). bined loading tests, including the stiffness, strength, ductility, and
( ) failure modes were used to validate detailed nonlinear modelling pro-
t fy
Npl,R = 𝜂s fy As + 𝜆rcc 1 + 𝜂c fA (40) cedures. Parametric investigations were then carried out and modifica-
D frc c c
[( ) ( ) ] tions to existing design expressions were proposed. The main conclu-
Mpl,R = 𝜒rcc Wps − Wpsn fy + 0.5 Wpc − Wpcn fc (41) sions from the study are outlined below.
( )
t fy
Npm,R = 𝜔rcc 1 + 𝜂c fA (42)
D fc c c 1. A high rubber content in the concrete core under compression
results in good confinement performance, suggesting that RuC
ND = Npm,R ∕2 (43)
benefits to a greater extent from the confinement offered by the
Mmax,R = Wps fy + 0.5Wpc fc (44) steel tube compared with conventional concrete. An increase in
16
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
Fig. 21. Comparison between FEM results and prediction of Eqs. (40)–(47) for specimens: (a) CFR00, (b) CFR30, (c) CFR60.
rubber content also provided an enhancement in ductility which Declaration of competing interest
was attributed to the composite interaction between the RuC and
the steel tube. The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
2. The inelastic response of RuCFST in bending indicates that the cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
ductility is only slightly influenced by the rubber content, as the influence the work reported in this paper.
outer tube had a substantial influence and dominated the overall
structural response. It was shown that there is a proportional Data availability
reduction in the plastic moment resistance of the RuCFST with
the increase in rubber content, but to a lesser extent than that Data will be made available on request.
in the case of axial compression.
3. To represent the specific response of RuCFST under combined Acknowledgements
loading, detailed finite element models were constructed and
suitable modelling procedures were suggested. The proposed The first author wishes to acknowledge the scholarship funding
constitutive material models for rubberised and conventional provided by the Turkish Ministry of National Education. The second
author wishes to acknowledge the postdoc funding provided by Zijing
confined concrete, as well as the concrete damage approaches
Scholar Program of Tsinghua University, China. The authors would
adopted, were able to capture reliably the capacity, ductility,
additionally like to thank the technical staff of the Structures Labo-
and failure modes of all configurations covering a wide range
ratories at Imperial College London, particularly Mr T Stickland, for
of material, geometry, and eccentricity conditions.
their assistance with the tests. The support of Adria Abruzzo, Breedon
4. The results from an extensive numerical parametric study com-
Group, Elkem and Sika through material provision is also gratefully
bined with those from the tests were used to assess the adequacy
acknowledged.
of current design provisions for steel–concrete composite sec-
tions under combined loading. It was shown that RuC generally
References
lies outside of the concrete strength ranges adopted in codes,
leading to unreliable predictions of the cross-section capacities, [1] A.Y. Elghazouli, D.V. Bompa, B. Xu, A.M. Ruiz-Teran, P.J. Stafford, Performance
depending on the action and specific assumptions included in of rubberised reinforced concrete members under cyclic loading, Eng. Struct. 166
the methods. (June) (2018) 526–545, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.03.090.
[2] F. Nocera, J. Wang, F. Faleschini, C. Demartino, P. Gardoni, Probabilistic
5. The modifications proposed herein, which incorporate rubber-
models of concrete compressive strength and elastic modulus with rubber
content dependent factors, provide improved predictions across aggregates, Constr. Build. Mater. 322 (2022) 126145, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
all axial-bending interaction ranges, yet within the limits of j.conbuildmat.2021.126145.
the materials and geometries covered in the test and numerical [3] A. Mujdeci, D.V. Bompa, A.Y. Elghazouli, Confinement effects for rubberised
concrete in tubular steel cross-sections under combined loading, Arch. Civ. Mech.
dataset. The proposed expressions are suitable for implementa-
Eng. 21 (2) (2021) http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43452-021-00204-8.
tion in practical design guidance. [4] K. Strukar, T.Kalman. Šipoš, I. Miličević, R. Bušić, Potential use of rubber as
aggregate in structural reinforced concrete element – A review, Eng. Struct. 188
CRediT authorship contribution statement (March) (2019) 452–468, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.03.031.
[5] S. Raffoul, R. Garcia, K. Pilakoutas, M. Guadagnini, N.F. Medina, Optimisation
of rubberised concrete with high rubber content: An experimental investiga-
A. Mujdeci: Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Soft- tion, Constr. Build. Mater. 124 (2016) 391–404, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
ware, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft. Y.T. Guo: conbuildmat.2016.07.054.
Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Visualization, [6] M. Elzeadani, D.V. Bompa, A.Y. Elghazouli, Preparation and properties of
Supervision, Writing – original draft. D.V. Bompa: Conceptualiza- rubberised geopolymer concrete: A review, Constr. Build. Mater. 313 (November)
(2021) 125504, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125504.
tion, Methodology, Investigation, Supervision, Writing – review & edit- [7] D.V. Bompa, A.Y. Elghazouli, Behaviour of confined rubberised concrete members
ing. A.Y. Elghazouli: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Project under combined loading conditions, Mag. Concr. Res. (2019) 1–55, http://dx.doi.
administration, Resources, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. org/10.1680/jmacr.19.00121.
17
A. Mujdeci, Y.T. Guo, D.V. Bompa et al. Thin-Walled Structures 181 (2022) 110125
[8] P. Ayough, Z. Ibrahim, N.H.R. Sulong, P. Hsiao, Numerical analysis of square [29] DaVis 10, LaVision. DaVis 10, LaVision, 2017.
concrete-filled double skin steel tubular columns with rubberized concrete, Struc- [30] Y. Zhang, J. Zhao, W. Yuan, Study on compressive bearing capacity of concrete-
tures 32 (2020) (2021) 1026–1047, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.03. filled square steel tube column reinforced by circular steel tube inside, J.
054. Civ. Eng. Manage. 19 (6) (2013) 787–795, http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/13923730.
[9] D.V. Bompa, A.Y. Elghazouli, B. Xu, P.J. Stafford, A.M. Ruiz-Teran, Experi- 2013.799088.
mental assessment and constitutive modelling of rubberised concrete materials, [31] R.D. Ziemian, Guide To Stability Design Criteria for Metal Structures, sixth ed.,
Constr. Build. Mater. 137 (2017) (2017) 246–260, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 2010.
conbuildmat.2017.01.086. [32] X. Chang, Z.L. Ru, W. Zhou, Y.B. Zhang, Study on concrete-filled stainless
[10] B. Xu, D. V. Bompa, A.Y. Elghazouli, Cyclic stress – strain rate-dependent steel–carbon steel tubular (CFSCT) stub columns under compression, Thin-Walled
response of rubberised concrete. 254. 2020, pp. 1–14.. Struct. 63 (2013) 125–133, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2012.10.002.
[11] Y. Jiang, S. Zhang, Experimental and analytical study on the mechanical [33] C. Roeder, D. Lehman, A. Heid, T. Maki, Shear design expressions for concrete
properties of rubberized self-compacting concrete, Constr. Build. Mater. 329 filled steel tube and reinforced concrete filled tube 2016, 2016, June.
(2022) 127177, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127177. [34] Y.L. Shi, W. Xian, W. Wang, Da, H.W. Li, Mechanical behaviour of circular
[12] A. Mujdeci, D. Bompa, A. Elghazouli, Structural performance of composite steel steel-reinforced concrete-filled steel tubular members under pure bending loads,
rubber ised concrete members under combined loading conditions. 4, 2021, pp. Structures 25 (2019) (2020) 8–23, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.02.
641–647. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cepa.1343. 017.
[13] A.P.C. Duarte, B.A. Silva, N. Silvestre, J. de Brito, E. Júlio, J.M. Castro, Tests [35] C.C. Hou, L.H. Han, Q.L. Wang, C. Hou, Flexural behavior of circular concrete
and design of short steel tubes filled with rubberised concrete, Eng. Struct. 112 filled steel tubes (CFST) under sustained load and chloride corrosion, Thin-Walled
(2016) 274–286, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.01.018. Struct. 107 (2016) 182–196, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2016.02.020.
[14] A.P.C. Duarte, B.A. Silva, N. Silvestre, J. De Brito, E. Júlio, J.M. Castro, Experi- [36] B. Xu, D.V. Bompa, A.Y. Elghazouli, A.M. Ruiz-Teran, P.J. Stafford, Behaviour
mental study on short rubberized concrete-filled steel tubes under cyclic loading, of rubberised concrete members in asymmetric shear tests, Constr. Build. Mater.
Compos. Struct. 136 (2016) 394–404, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct. 159 (2018) 361–375, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.10.091.
2015.10.015. [37] ABAQUS, Abaqus/CAE 6.14 User’s Manual, Vol. IV, (June) Dassault Systémes
[15] M. Dong, M. Elchalakani, A. Karrech, S. Fawzia, M.S. Mohamed Ali, B. Yang, Inc., USA, 2014, pp. 1–6.
S.-Q. Xu, Circular steel tubes filled with rubberised concrete under combined [38] M.I. Moharram, D.V. Bompa, B. Xu, A.Y. Elghazouli, Behaviour and design of
loading, J. Construct. Steel Res. 162 (2019) 105613, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ hybrid RC beam-to-steel column connections, Eng. Struct. 250 (2022) 113502,
j.jcsr.2019.05.003. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2021.113502.
[16] M. Elchalakani, M.F. Hassanein, A. Karrech, B. Yang, Experimental investigation [39] D.V. Bompa, A.Y. Elghazouli, Nonlinear numerical simulation of punching shear
of rubberised concrete-filled double skin square tubular columns under axial behavior of reinforced concrete flat slabs with shear-heads, Front. Struct. Civ.
compression, Eng. Struct. 171 (June) (2018) 730–746, http://dx.doi.org/10. Eng. 14 (2) (2020) 331–356, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11709-019-0596-5.
1016/j.engstruct.2018.05.123. [40] X. Meng, L. Gardner, Cross-sectional behaviour of cold-formed high strength steel
[17] S. Khusru, D.P. Thambiratnam, M. Elchalakani, S. Fawzia, Experimental testing circular hollow sections, Thin-Walled Struct. 156 (September) (2020) 106822,
of novel hybrid rubberised concrete double skin tubular columns with filament http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2020.106822.
wound CFRP tube under axial compressive loading, Compos. Struct. 276 (2021) [41] J. Lubliner, J. Oliver, S. Oller, E. Oñate, A plastic-damage model for concrete,
114568, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.114568. Int. J. Solids Struct. 25 (3) (1989) 299–326, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0020-
[18] S. Khusru, S. Fawzia, D.P. Thambiratnam, M. Elchalakani, Confined rubberised 7683(89)90050-4.
concrete tubular column for high-performance structures – Review, Constr. [42] S. Oller, E. Oñate, J. Oliver, J. Lubliner, Finite element nonlinear analysis of
Build. Mater. 276 (2021) 122216, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat. concrete structures using a plastic-damage model, Eng. Fract. Mech. 35 (1–3)
2020.122216. (1990) 219–231, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0013-7944(90)90200-Z.
[19] A.P.C. Duarte, B.A. Silva, N. Silvestre, J. de Brito, E. Júlio, J.M. Castro, Finite [43] L.H. Han, G.H. Yao, Z. Tao, Performance of concrete-filled thin-walled steel tubes
element modelling of short steel tubes filled with rubberized concrete, Compos. under pure torsion, Thin-Walled Struct. 45 (1) (2007) 24–36, http://dx.doi.org/
Struct. 150 (2016) 28–40, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.04.048. 10.1016/j.tws.2007.01.008.
[20] P. Ayough, Z. Ibrahim, N.H.R. Sulong, P. Hsiao, Numerical analysis of square [44] H.-T. Hu, C.-S. Huang, M.-H. Wu, Y.-M. Wu, Nonlinear analysis of axially
concrete-filled double skin steel tubular columns with rubberized concrete, Struc- loaded concrete-filled tube columns with confinement effect, J. Struct. Eng. 129
tures 32 (2020) (2021) 1026–1047, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.03. (10) (2003) 1322–1329, http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9445(2003)129:
054. 10(1322).
[21] Y. Jiang, A. Silva, J.M. Castro, T.M. Chan, R. Monteiro, Experimental study [45] Z. Tao, Wang, Q. Yu, Finite element modelling of concrete-filled steel stub
and numerical assessment of the flexural behaviour of square and rectangular columns under axial compression, J. Construct. Steel Res. 89 (2013) 121–131.
CFST members under monotonic and cyclic loading, Key Eng. Mater. 763 (2018) [46] D.A. Hordijk, Tensile and tensile fatigue behaviour of concrete; experiments,
804–811, http://dx.doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.763.804. modelling and analyses, in: Heron, Vol. 37, (1) 1992, pp. 1–79.
[22] A.P.C. Duarte, N. Silvestre, J.de. Brito, E. Júlio, Computational modelling of the [47] C. Buchanan, O. Zhao, E. Real, L. Gardner, Cold-formed stainless steel CHS
cyclic behavior of short rubberized concrete-filled steel tubes, Eng. Struct. 248 beam–columns – Testing, simulation and design, Eng. Struct. 213 (2020) 110270,
(2021) 113188. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110270.
[23] CEN European Committee for Standardization, EN 1994-1-1 Eurocode 4: Design [48] CEN (European Committee for Standardization), EN 1998-1-1: Design of Struc-
of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures – Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules tures for Earthquake Resistance - Part 1: General Rules, Seismic Actions and
for Buildings, British Standards, London, 2004. Rules for Buildings Eurocode. Building Code, CEN, Brussels (Belgium), 2004.
[24] A. Silva, Y. Jiang, J.M. Castro, R. Monteiro, 08.38: Experimental characterisation [49] AISC, 360-16, Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, American Institute of
of the flexural behaviour of rubberized concrete-filled steel tubular members, Steel Construction, Chicago, 2016.
Ce/Papers 1 (2–3) (2017) 2147–2156, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cepa.260. [50] AS, 5100.6-2004, Bridge Design Part 6: Steel and Composite Construction,
[25] CEN (European Committee for Standardization), EN 12390-2:2009, Testing Standards Australia, Sydney, Australia, 2004.
Hardened Concrete: Making and Curing Specimens for Strength Tests, CEN, [51] GB, 50936-2014, Technical Code for Concrete Filled Steel Tubular Structures,
Brussels (Belgium), 2009. Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of
[26] CEN (European Committee for Standardization), EN 1993-1-1. Eurocode 3: China., 2014.
Design of Steel Structures. Part 1.1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings, [52] Z. Tao, U.Y. Brian, L.H. Han, S.H. He, Design of concrete-filled steel tubular
Comite Europeen de Normalisation, Brussels, Belgium, 2005. members according to the Australian standard AS 5100 model and calibration
[27] CEN (European Committee for Standardization), EN 10002-1 Metallic Materials design of concrete-fi lled steel tubular members according to the Australian
– Tensile Testing – Part 1: method of Test at Ambient Temperature, British standard AS 5100 model and calibration *, 2015, p. 7982, http://dx.doi.org/
Standards Institution, London, 2001. 10.1080/13287982.2008.11464998.
[28] ISO, ISO 6892-1 Metallic materials — Tensile testing — Part 1: Method of test
at room temperature, 1, Vol. 2009, Met. Mater., 2017, p. 64, 2009.
18