Poteau Avec Resrevation

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF REINFORCED CONCRETE COLUMN
WITH LONGITUDINAL HOLE
AMIRHOSSEIN BASRAVI
A project report submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirement for the award of the degree of
Master of Engineering (Civil Structure)
Faculty of Civil Engineering

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
DECEMBER 2010
iii
To my beloved family
Love you forever
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I have a host of people to grace of their involvement in this major work. The
order I mentioned below does not necessarily represent the amount of work they did.
I am sincerely grateful to my supervisor, Assoc. Prof. Ir. Dr. Mohd Hanim

Osman, for his continuous support, suggestions and immeasurable contribution to my
project. He always provides me guidance and feedback in this project. I am also very
thankful to Prof. Dr. Jahangir Bakhteri for his advice, guidance and motivation. Without
their help, I would not have completed my project.
I would also like to express my deepest gratitude to Universiti Teknologi

Malaysia (UTM) for providing the necessary facilities and the staff in Faculty of Civil
Engineering for their help in the completion of this project.
Deep appreciation goes to my dear parents and sisters; I would definitely not
succeed in my life without their love and support. I would like to grab this opportunity
to thank my friends who have always provided inspiring ideas on my work.
Lastly, thanks are due to the people that I did not mention their name for their
assistance and encouragement.
ABSTRACT
A finite element study was carried out to investigate the effect of positioning
hole along reinforced concrete short braced columns in multi-storey buildings. RC
columns having different sizes and reinforcement, with holes positioned at the centers
of their cross-sections were modeled by LUSAS using three-dimensional non-linear
finite element analysis. The ultimate strengths of the columns obtained from the present
study is compared with the results obtained from the laboratory testing of the same
columns as well as with the design strengths recommended by the BS 8110 and ACI
codes of practice. The reduction in the load carrying capacity of columns with holes
was highlighted. In conclusion, the analysis results showed significant reduction in
their load carrying capacities and the safety factors obtained were much less than the
nominal value usually recommended by various codes of practice.
vi
ABSTRAK
Satu kajian menggunakan kaedah unsur terhingga telah dilakukan untuk

mengetahui kesan membuat kedudukan lubang di dalam tiang konkrit bertetulang pada
bangunan bertingkat. Tiang konkrit tetulang yang memiliki ukuran dan tetulang yang
berbeza, dengan lubang terletak di pusat keratan telah di modelkan dengan perisian
LUSAS menggunakan analisis unsur terhingga tiga-dimensi secara non-linear.
Kekuatan muktamad dari tiang yang diperolehi daripada kajian ini dibandingkan dengan
keputusan yang diperolehi daripada ujian makmal keatas tiang yang sama saiz juga
dengan kekuatan rekabentuk yang disyorkan oleh BS 8110 dan kod amalan ACI. Beban
rintangan
telah
didapati
berkurangan
bagi
tiang
yang
mempunyai
lubang.
Kesimpulannya, hasil analisis menunjukkan penurunan yang ketara pada beban

keupayaan dan faktor keselamatan yang diperolehi jauh kurang dari nilai nominal yang
biasanya disyorkan oleh pelbagai kod amalan.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
TITLE
PAGE
DECLARATION
ii
DEDICATION
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
iv
ABSTRACT
ABSTRAK
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
vii
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
xi
LIST OF SYMBOLS
xiv
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
1.2
Problem Statement
1.3
Objective of the Study
1.4
Scopes of the Study
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
Concrete
2.1.1 Stress-Strain Relation of Concrete
2.1.2 Elastic Modulus of Concrete
viii
2.2
Steel Reinforcement
10
2.3
Reinforced Concrete
12
2.3.1 Affecting Factors on Choosing of

Reinforced Concrete for a Structure
2.4
13
Reinforced Concrete Column
16
2.4.1 Types of Column and Failure Modes
17
2.4.2 Reinforced Concrete Column Capacity
20
2.4.3 Fracture
21
2.4.4 Buckling of Column
22
Finite Element Method
25
2.5.1 Brief History
26
2.5.2 Definition of FEM
26
2.5.3 Advantages of FEM
27
2.5.4 Methods of Formulating FE Problems
28
2.5.5 Types of Finite Element
29
2.5.6 Basic Steps of Finite Element Analysis
30
2.5.7 Fundamental Requirements
32
2.5.8 Meshing
32
2.5.9 Verification of Results
33
LUSAS
34
2.6.1 Characteristic of LUSAS Software
34
2.6.2 Analysis Procedure According to LUSAS
34
2.7
Non-linear Analysis
35
2.8
Studies Done Related to RC Column with Hole
40
2.5
2.6
2.8.1 A Critical Review of RC Columns and

Concealing Rain Water Pipe in Buildings
40
2.8.2 Full Scale Test on Shear Strength and

Retrofit of RC Hollow Columns
46
2.8.3 Slender High Strength Concrete Columns

Subjected to Eccentric Loading
49
ix
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
53
3.1
Introduction
53
3.2
Finite Element Modeling
54
3.2.1 Geometry
54
3.2.2 Finite Element Meshing
56
3.2.3 Material Properties
58
3.2.4 Boundary Condition
59
3.2.5 Loading
60
3.2.6 Nonlinear Analysis
61
Experimental Work
63
3.3.1 Test Models
63
3.3.2 The Test Models Classification
65
3.3.3 Preparation of the Test Specimens
66
3.3.4 Instrumentation and Testing of Models
71
Flowchart of the Finite Element Analysis
74
3.3
3.4
ANALYSIS, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
76
4.1
Introduction
76
4.2
The Results of Finite Element Analysis
77
4.2.1 Vertical Stress-Strain Curves of Models

Based on FEA Results
4.3
4.4
4.5
81
Reduction in Load Carrying Capacity of RC

Columns Concealing Hole
82
Comparison of the Results
84
4.4.1 Design Strength Requirement of Columns
87
Discussions
91
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
92
5.1
Conclusions
92
5.2
Recommendations
93
REFERENCES
94
LIST OF TABLES
TITLE
TABLE NO.
PAGE
2.1
Details of columns in group A, B and C
49
3.1
The specification and dimension of the column models
55
3.2
Concrete properties
58
3.3
Steel properties
59
3.4
The specification and dimension of the column models
64
3.5
The column models type
66
4.1
Maximum vertical stress and strain in the all columns
77
4.2
The percentages of reduction in load carrying capacity of

columns with hole
83
Comparison of the maximum vertical compressive stress

and strain in the models from experimental work and FEA
84
Comparison of safety factors from experimental study

and FEA based on BS code
89
Comparison of factor of safety from experimental study

and FEA based on ACI code
90
4.3
4.4
4.5
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO.
TITLE
PAGE
1.1
Hole (rain water pipe) is positioned inside columns
1.2
Typical column with hole (embedded drain pipe)
2.1
Stress-strain curve of concrete
2.2
Static modulus of concrete
2.3
Typical stress-strain curve for reinforcing steel
11
2.4
Simplified stress-strain curve for reinforcing steel
12
2.5
P- effect on slender column
18
2.6
Columns failure modes
19
2.7
Forces act on the column section
20
2.8
Basic modes of fracture
21
2.9
Buckling of column
24
2.10
Bending moment in the column
24
2.11
Flow chart for the basic steps of FEA
31
2.12
P- effect on a column
37
xii
2.13
Nonlinear boundary condition
38
2.14
Forms of modified Newton-Raphson iteration
39
2.15
Inappropriate positioning of rain water pipe in

columns section
41
2.16
Formation of honeycombs around the drain pipe
42
2.17
Leakage in the lapping parts of the PVC drain pipes
43
2.18
Congestion and non-uniformity in beams reinforcements

at columns section caused by presence of drain pipe
43
2.19
Elbow part of the drain pipe at the ground level
44
2.20
Configurations of lateral reinforcement in

hollow columns
47
2.21
Geometry and details of configurations (a) and (b)
49
2.22
Load arrangement for the test
50
2.23
Instrumentation of slender column
51
3.1
Three dimensional solid hexahedral element (HX8M)
56
3.2
Modeling of bar and meshing of model C1b
57
3.3
Typical model showing generated mesh, loading

and boundary condition
60
3.4
Incremental / iterative nonlinear solution
61
3.5
Modified arc length load incrementation for the one

degree of freedom response
62
Steel works consist of cutting, bending and tying steel bars
67
3.6
xiii
3.7
Positioning of the pipes in center of columns cross-section
68
3.8
Column form work was positioned horizontally and

ready for casting
69
3.9
The fresh reinforced concrete columns after casting
70
3.10
Test setup
74
3.11
Flowchart of finite element analysis
75
4.1
Deformed shape of model C7b
78
4.2
Vertical stress contour of model C7b
78
4.3
Vertical strain contour of model C7b in 2D
79
4.4
79
4.5
Vertical stress contour of model C7a
80
4.6
Vertical strain contour of model C7a
80
4.7
Stress-strain curve of column C1
81
4.8
81
4.9
82
4.10
82
4.11
Vertical stress-strain curve for column C1a
85
4.12
86
4.13
Vertical stress-strain curve for column C5b
86
4.14
87
xiv
LIST OF SYMBOLS
Ag
Gross area of the column section
Anc
Net concrete area of the cross-section of the model
Asc
Area of the longitudinal reinforcement
Ast
Total area of longitudinal reinforcement
Width of column
Effective depth
Eccentricity of load
Youngs Modulus
fcu
Characteristic compressive strength of concrete
fy
Characteristic yield strength of steel
Gross area of the column section
Net concrete area of the cross-section of the model
Ultimate moment
Column design load
Vertical load to the column
xv
Modulus ratio
Coefficient dependant on the bar type
Strength reduction factor
Compressive strain
Compressive stress
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
A column is the vertical structural member supporting axial compressive loads,

with or with-out moments. Columns support vertical loads from the floors and roof and
transmit these loads to the foundations. The load carrying capacity of a column depends
on the materials used in its construction, its length, the shape of its cross-section, and
the restraints applied to its ends. Failure of a column in a critical location can cause the
progressive collapse of the adjoining floors and the ultimate total collapse of the entire
structure.
For design purposes, columns are divided into two types namely, short columns
and slender columns. Considering lateral load action, columns are divided into two
groups which are braced columns and unbraced columns.
2
In the construction of modern multistory buildings, holes (pipes) are positioned
vertically inside the reinforced concrete columns to accommodate the essential services
such as drainage of roof top rain water, electric wiring from floor to floor etc. The holes
(pipes) are placed inside the columns, based on pretext to maintain the aesthetic of the
buildings. The practice of embedding rain water down pipes (holes) inside reinforced
concrete columns is followed particularly in those multistory buildings which have flat
roofs and glass front views. The diameters of holes (pipes) vary, depending on the
amount of drained water.
Tropical countries such as Malaysia are having rainfall throughout the year,
which require an effective and appropriate drainage system for rain water in the
construction of any new building project. Therefore, the practice of positioning hole
(Poly Vinyl Chloride (PVC) pipes) inside reinforced concrete (RC) columns to drain the
rain water from the roof top of the multi-storey buildings and discharge it at the ground
level has become a usual practice nowadays (Figure 1.1). The practice has been adopted
under the impression that, exposing the pipes (holes) outside the columns will affect the
appearance of the buildings.
Figure 1.1
Hole (rain water pipe) is positioned inside columns
3
However, this method of drainage could cause serious damage to the safety of
the structure. Columns constructed with holes (embedded PVC drain pipes), not only
have reduced load carrying capacities but also, could be very dangerous to the safety of
the entire building structure and can reduce its useful life significantly.
Some of the problems caused by the practice of positioning hole (PVC rain
water down pipe) inside the column are as follows:
i.
Positioning the hole in the corner or edge of the columns section will reduce the
effective cross-sectional area of the column significantly and also will affect to
its shear capacity.
ii.
Even in case the hole (rain water pipe) is positioned at the central part of the
columns cross-section, the assessment of the effective depth of the column
section might become inaccurate and hence, load carrying capacity of the
columns is further reduced.
iii.
There is a chance of formation of honeycombs around the hole (drain pipe).
iv.
Leakage from the joint lapping part of the pipe (hole) can cause corrosion and
rusting in the reinforcement of the column, and hence loss of bond and reduction
in the strength of the structural element.
v.
The huge reduction in the columns strength at ground level, where elbow part
is used to discharge rainwater.
Therefore, the present study has been carried out to investigate the reduction in
load carrying capacity of rectangular and square reinforced concrete short columns with
hole (embedded PVC drain pipe).
4
The hysteric performance of the columns is evaluated using various cross
sections with different amount of reinforcement. Figure 1.2 shows a typical column
with hole positioned at the center of column cross-section. The cross section dimensions
of the column are represented by h and b, where its height is l.
Figure 1.2
1.2
Typical column with hole (embedded drain pipe)
Problem Statement
The practice of positioning hole (PVC pipe) inside reinforced concrete (RC)
columns to drain the rain water common nowadays, however this method of drainage
could cause serious damage to the safety of the structure.
5
To the best of the knowledge of the author, no significant investigations have
been carried out to study the load carrying capacity of these types of columns. Most of
the previous works in this regard have been limited to the study of the effects of
constant axial load and eccentric load on the behavior of rectangular and circular hollow
reinforced concrete columns and also no information and guidelines in codes of practice
(ACI 318-05, BS 8110-97) on this problem are available and no other significant
investigations have been carried out.
1.3
Objective of the Study
The objectives of the study are listed below:
1. To investigate the reduction in load carrying capacity of the reinforced concrete

short braced columns having rectangular and square cross-sections with hole
(embedded drain pipe).
2. To model the RC columns using three-dimensional non-linear finite element

analysis.
3. To study the compressive strength of the columns subjected to axial

compressive loads only and to compare the research findings with the results of
half scale laboratory tests and the design strengths recommended by the BS
8110 and ACI codes of practice.
6
1.4
Scope of the Study
The study includes 3-D finite element analyses of RC braced short columns with
holes (embedded drain pipes) representing lower level (i.e. ground floor columns). The
investigation concentrate on the modeling of axially loaded columns with hole (PVC
drain pipes) positioned at the center of the columns cross-sections. The LUSAS finite
element program was used to model the columns. The analysis covers material nonlinearity. The dimensions of the columns were the same as the dimensions of the model
tested in the laboratory. The half scale laboratory test was carried out and the finite
element analysis results were compared with them as part of the study.
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
Concrete
Concrete materials have a sufficient compressive strength, so are widely used in

civil engineering, reactor buildings, bridges, irrigation works and blast resistant
structures, etc.
Concrete is a construction material consisting of coarse aggregate, fine

aggregate,
cement,
water
and
other
chemical
and
pozzolanic
admixtures
(superplasticizer, air entraining, retarder, fly ash and etc.) It has a very wide variety of
strength, and its mechanical behavior is varying with respect to its strength, quality and
materials. The strength and the durability are two important factors in concrete.
8
2.1.1 Stress-Strain Relation of Concrete
Concrete has an inconsistent stress-strain relation, depending on its respective

strength. Compressive strength of concrete depends on the cement content, the cementwater ratio, the age of concrete and the type of aggregate. However, there is a typical
patent of stress-strain relation for the concrete regardless the concrete strength, as
shown in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1
Stress-strain curve of concrete [1]
The behavior of concrete is almost elastically when the load is applied to the
concrete. So according to the stress, the strain of the concrete is increasing
approximately in a linear manner. Finally, the relation will be no longer linear and the
concrete tends to behave more and more as a plastic material. So the displacement
9
cannot complete after the removal of the loadings, therefore permanent deformation
incurred.
Generally, the strength of concrete depends on the age, the cement-water ratio,
type of cement and aggregate, and the admixture added to the concrete, an increment in
any of these factors producing an increase in strength. Assumption the concrete can
reach its strength at the age of 28-day because usually the increment of concrete
strength is insignificant after the age of 28-day.
2.1.2 Elastic Modulus of Concrete
The stress-strain relationship for concrete is almost linear provided that the
stress applied is not greater than one third of the ultimate compressive strength. A
number of alternative definitions are able to describe the elasticity of the concrete, but
the most commonly accepted is E = Ec, where Ec is known as secant or static modulus
(see Figure 2.2).
Figure 2.2
Static modulus of concrete [1]
10
The modulus of elasticity of concrete is not constant and highly depends on the
compressive strength of concrete.
BS 1881 has recommended a series of procedure to acquire the static modulus.

In brief, concrete samples in standard cylindrical shape will be loaded just above one
third of its compressive strength, and then cycled back to zero stress in order to remove
the effect of initial bedding-in and minor redistribution of stress in the concrete under
the load. Eventually the concrete strain will react almost linearly to the stress and the
average slope of the graph will be the static modulus of elasticity [2].
2.2
Steel Reinforcement
Steel has great tensile strength and use in the concrete because concrete does not
act in tension well alone; also there is good bond between concrete and reinforcement.
The reinforcing steel has a wide range of strength. It has more consistent properties and
quality compared to the concrete, because it is manufactured in a controlled
environment. There are many types of steel reinforcement. The most common are plain
round mild steel bars and high-yield stress deformed bars.
The typical stress-strain relations of the reinforcing steel can be described in the
stress-strain curve as shown in Figure 2.3.
11
Figure 2.3
Typical stress-strain curve for reinforcing steel [1]
From the Figure 2.3, the mild steel behaves as an elastic material until it reaches
its yield point, finally it will have a sudden increase in strain with minute changes in
stress until it reaches the failure point. On the other hand, the high yield steel does not
have a limited yield point but has a more gradual change from elastic to plastic
behavior.
Reinforcing steels have a similar slope in the elastic region with Es = 200
kN/mm2. The specific strength taken for the mild steel is the yield stress. For the high
yield steel, the specific strength is taken as the 0.2% proof stress. BS 8110 has
recommended an elastic-plastic model for stress-strain relationship, which the
hardening effect is neglected [3]. The stress-strain curve may be simplified bilinear as
shown in Figure 2.4.
12
Figure 2.4
2.3
Simplified stress-strain curve for reinforcing steel [3]
Reinforced Concrete
Concrete is strong in compression, but weak in tension. As a result, cracks

develop whenever loads, restrained shrinkage, or temperature changes give rise to
tensile stresses in excess of the tensile strength of the concrete. The tensile cracking
reduces the stiffness of the concrete and is usually the major contributor to the nonlinear
behavior of reinforced concrete structures, such as panels and shells, where the stress is
generally the biaxial tension-compression type.
Concrete and reinforcement can solidify because of good bond between them
and also feature of concrete in compression and steel in tension. Reinforced concrete is
a durable and ductile construction material that can be formed into many shapes and
sizes from a simple rectangular column to a shell.
13
Tensile strength of concrete is neglected in the design of reinforced concrete
because the tensile strength of concrete is just about 10% of its compressive strength.
Therefore the tensile force is assumed to be resisted by the reinforcing steel completely.
The tensile stress is transferred to reinforcing steel through bonding between concrete
and steel, thus insufficient bond will cause the reinforcement to slip within the concrete.
Reinforcing steel can only develop its strength in concrete on the condition that it is
anchored well to the concrete.
2.3.1 Affecting Factors on Choosing of Reinforced Concrete for a Structure
The choice of whether a structure should be built of reinforced concrete, steel,

masonry, or timber depends on the availability of materials and on a number of value
decisions.
i.
Economy
Frequently, the foremost consideration is the overall cost of the structure. This
is, of course, a function of the costs of the materials and of the labor and time
necessary to erect the structure. Frequently, however, the overall cost is affected
as much or more by the overall construction time, because the contractor and the
owner must allocate money to carry out the construction and will not receive a
return on their investment until the building is ready for occupancy. S a result,
financial savings due to rapid construction may more than offset increased
material and forming costs. The materials for reinforced concrete structures are
widely available and can be produced as they are needed in the construction,
whereas structural steel must be ordered and partially paid for in advance to
schedule the job in a steel-fabricating yard.
14
ii.
Suitability of material for architectural and structural function
Concrete has the advantage that it is placed in a plastic condition and is given
the desired shape and texture by means of the forms and the finishing
techniques. This allows such elements as flat plates or other types of slabs to
serve as load-bearing elements while providing the finished floor and ceiling
surfaces. Finally, the choice of size or shape is governed by the designer and not
by the availability of standard manufacture members.
iii.
Fire resistance
The structure in a building must withstand the effects of a fire and remain
standing while the building is being evacuated and the fire extinguished. A
concrete building inherently has a 1 to 3 hours first rating without special
fireproofing or other details. Structural steel or timber buildings must be
fireproofed to attain similar fire rating.
iv.
Rigidity
The occupants of a building maybe disturbed if their building oscillates in the

wind or if the floors vibrate as people walk by. Due to the greater stiffness and
mass of a concrete structure, vibrations are seldom a problem.
v.
Low maintenance
Concrete members inherently require less maintenance than do structural steel or

timber members. This is particularly true if dense, air-entrained concrete has
been used for surfaces exposed to the atmosphere and if care has been taken in
15
the design to provide adequate drainage form the structure.
vi.
Availability of materials
Sand, gravel or crushed rock, water, cement, and concrete mixing facilities are
very widely available, and reinforcing steel can be transported to most
construction sites more easily than can structural steel.
On the other hand, there are a number of factor that may cause one to select a
material other than reinforced concrete. Those include:
1. Low tensile strength
As stated earlier, the tensile strength of concrete is much lower than its
compressive strength (about 1/10); hence, concrete is subject to cracking when
subjected to tensile stresses.
2. Forms and shoring
The construction of a cast-in-place structure involves three steps not

encountered in the construction of steel or timber structures. These are (a) the
construction of the forms, (b) the removal of these forms, and (c) the propping
or shoring of the new concrete to support is weight until its strength is adequate.
Each of these steps involves labor and/or materials that are not necessary with
other forms of construction.
16
3. Relatively low strength per unit of weight or volume
The compressive strength of concrete is roughly 5 to 10 percent that of steel,

while its unit density is toughly 30 percent that of steel. As a result, a concrete
structure requires a larger volume and a greater weight of material than does a
comparable steel structure. As a result, long-span structures are often built from
steel.
4. Time-dependent volume changes
Both concrete and steel undergo approximately the same amount of thermal
expansion and contraction. Because there is less mass of steel to be heated or
cooled, and because steel is better conductor than concrete, steel structure is
generally affected by temperature changes to a greater extent than is a concrete
structure. On other hand, concrete undergoes during shrinkage, which, if
restrained, may cause deflections or cracking. Furthermore, deflection will tend
to increase with time, possibly doubling, due to creep of the concrete under
sustained compression stress.
2.4
Reinforced Concrete Column
Columns are compression members, although they may have to resist bending
forces due to the eccentricity. A column in a structure transfers loads from beams and
slabs down to foundations. Design of the column is governed by the ultimate limit state,
and the service limit state is seldom to be considered [1].
17
2.4.1 Types of Column and Failure Modes
For considering lateral load action, columns are divided into two types which
are braced and unbraced. A column is a braced column when the load is resisted by the
bracing members like shear wall. In this case, the column does not resist lateral load. An
unbraced column is the column that is subjected to lateral loads.
For design purposes, column can be classified as short or slender by a ratio of

effective height (le) in the bending axis considered to the column depth in the respective
axis (h). BS 8110 has recommended that a slender column can be determined by
Equation 2.1 (for braced structure) or equation 2.2 (for unbraced structure) [3].
The column failure mode can be predicted when knowing the column is short or
slender,
Braced columns:

15
(2.1)
Unbraced columns:

10
(2.2)
Lateral loading acts on a building can cause lateral deflection () to the column.
Consequently, gravity load (P) in the column with eccentricity () will induce additional
moment (M=P), and increase the column moment.
18
Buckling unlikely occurs to a short column. So when the axial load exceeded its
material strength, it will fail. This will cause the column to bulge and eventually to
crush. Buckling may cause a slender column to deflect sideways and therefore induces
an additional moment (M=P), as illustrated (P- effect) in Figure 2.5.
Figure 2.5
P- effect on slender column [1]
In heavily clad low and medium rise buildings, the P- effects may be small.
However for lightly clad tall buildings with greater lateral flexibility, the P- effects
may become significant. The P- effects may be large enough and require an increase in
the column size.
19
There are three modes of column failure, crushing, intermediate and buckling.
Crushing usually occurs in short columns when there is material failure with
negligible lateral deflection. When there are large end moments acted on a
column with an intermediate slenderness ratio, it is possible to occur. Figure 2.6
(a) illustrates the column failure mode in crushing.
Intermediate is typical of intermediate columns and occurs when material failure

intensified by the additional moment and the lateral deflection.
In buckling, there is instability failure which occurs with slender columns.

Figure 2.6 (b) illustrates the failure mode of column in buckling.
(a)
Figure 2.6
(b)
Columns failure modes
20
2.4.2 Reinforced Concrete Column Capacity
There is a small moment in the short column when cast in-situ concrete structure
in the practical case. This moment supports an approximately symmetrical arrangement
of beams. BS 8110 expresses the capacity of the column (N) as [3],
= 0.35
+ 0.70 0.35
(2.3)
The columns capacity can be acquired by performing analysis on its cross

section that is subjected to moments and axial forces (see Figure 2.7).
Figure 2.7
Forces act on the column section [1]
The basic equation for axial force capacity (N) and moment capacity (M) can be
derived from Figure 2.7 as follows,
= + + = 0.405

+ +
(2.4)
21
0.9

=
+
2
2
2
2
(2.5)
2.4.3 Fracture
Fracture is the separation of material into two or more pieces under the action of
stress. It is a complex process to predict the occurrence of crack on the concrete that
involves the growth of micro and macro voids or cracks, the geometry of the concrete,
and mechanisms of dislocations. So the understanding on fracture is important to know
the crack.
Concrete will suffer from microscopic damage at high stresses regions, and
forming microcracks. Therefore, a zone will be formed in the concrete where the
interaction of microcracks taking place, and finally leads to localization of a
macroscopic discontinuity. Hence, with the classical linear elastic fracture mechanics
cannot get the process zone forming in the concrete. Over the past few decades,
theoretical approaches that are both physically and practically applicable have been
developed for fracture analysis in concrete structures. Figure 2.8 shows three basic
modes of fracture.
Mode I: Opening
Mode II: In-plane shear

Figure 2.8
Mode III: Out-of-plane shear
Basic modes of fracture
22
The mode I fracture is called as the opening mode. In this mode, the forces are
perpendicular to the crack, pulling it to open. An example of this fracture mode is
flexural crack at the bottom of beams at mid-span.
In mode II, the forces are parallel to the crack. In the same direction, one force is
pushing the top half of the crack backward and the other is pulling the bottom half of
the crack forward. Hence, the crack is sliding along itself and a shear crack is formed.
The mode III fracture is called as out-of-plane shear. The material will be
separate and slide along itself, moving out of its original plane, because the forces are
perpendicular to the crack, and are moving in opposite directions of left and right, in
order to grow the crack in front-back direction.
2.4.4 Buckling of Column
Buckling is a failure mode characterized by a sudden failure of a structural

member subjected to high compressive stresses, where the actual compressive stress is
less than the ultimate compressive stresses at the point of failure that the material is
capable of withstanding.
A short column will fail under the action of an axial load by direct compression
before it buckles, but a slender column will fail by buckling in the same manner. When
a compression member becomes longer, the role of the geometry and stiffness (Young's
modulus) becomes more and more important.
23
When axial load applies at the column, the critical load for a slender column can
be determined by the Euler Buckling Load,
=
2
2

(2.6)
In reality, loads are seldom loaded on the column centric, and the moment may
react due to the small eccentricity. The initial column shape can be approximated before
the application of load by the sine function, suggested by Meyer [4],
0 = !0 sin

(2.7)
:KHUH 0 is the maximum deviation from the straightness at mid-height (see

Figure 2.9).
Also the maximum displacement due to buckling at the mid-height can be

expressed as,
"# =
!0

(2.8)
24
Figure 2.9
Buckling of column [4]
It is important that consider the effect of P- in the buckling. Hence, the bending
moment taking place in the column, when the column reaches its instability state, as
illustrated in Figure 2.10.
Figure 2.10
Bending moment in the column [4]
25
Therefore, the maximum moment is,
=

0
(2.9)
Where M0 = P.e is the moment due to the load eccentricity (e), and also the
factor 1/ [1-(P/Pc)] is the moment magnification factor. When the column load reaches
the buckling load, the buckling moment will grow unbounded.
2.5
Finite Element Method
The Finite Element Method (FEM) of analysis is a very powerful, modern

computational tool. This method has been used successfully to solve very complex
structural engineering problems. FEM has also been widely used in other fields such as
thermal analysis, fluid mechanics, and electromagnetic fields.
Since the method involves a large number of computations, therefore it requires

computer to solve a problem.
The finite element method represents the extension of matrix method for skeletal
structures to the analysis of continuum structures. In finite element method, the
continuum is idealized as a structure consisting of a number of individual elements
connected only at nodal points.
26
2.5.1 Brief History
Courant has been credited with being the first person to develop the finite
element method in 1943. He used piecewise polynomial interpolation over triangular
subregions to investigate torsion problems.
The next significant step in the utilization of finite element method was taken by
Boeing in the 1950s, in which Boeing used triangular stress elements to model airplane
wings. At 1956, Turner et al. had presented their findings on the stiffness matrices for
beam, truss and other elements. Also at 1960, Clough made the term Finite Element
popular.
During 1960s, investigators began to apply the finite element method to other
areas of engineering, such as heat transfer and seepage flow problems.
The very first attempt to analyze the reinforced concrete by finite element was
done by Ngo and Scordelis in 1967. And finally, Zienkiewicz and Cheung wrote the
first book entirely devoted to the finite element method in 1967 [5].
2.5.2 Definition of FEM
The finite element method (FEM) is a general numerical technique for

approximating the behavior of continua by assembly of small parts (elements). Each
27
element is of simple geometry and therefore is much easier to analyze than the actual
structure. In essence approximate a complicated solution by a model that consists of
piecewise continuous simple solutions. The elements are called Finite to distinguish
them from differential elements used in calculus.
2.5.3 Advantages of FEM
When numerical analyses were first introduced in engineering practice in the

1960s, many analysis methods such as boundary element method and finite difference
method, were in use. Over time, these methods were dominated by the FEM because of
its inherent generality and numerical efficiency. Although other methods retain
advantages in certain niche applications, they are difficult or impossible to employ to
other types of analyses. At the same time, the FEM has wider applicability. The
versatile analysis tool can be applied to almost any types of engineering problems. For
this reason, the FEM has widespread adoption for increasingly diverse problems and
dominated the market of commercial analysis software.
One of the main advantages of FEM over most other analysis methods is the fact
that FEM can handle irregular geometries routinely and implement higher order
elements with relative ease. Besides, very little extra effort is required in the FE
formulation when anisotropic or heterogeneous are to be modeled. In FE modeling,
elements with different properties and geometries are used to cater for structures with
different types and behaviors. Another advantage of FEM is the ease to handle mixed
boundary condition. All the various types of boundary conditions that may encounter in
problem can be included in the formulation of FE.
28
2.5.4 Methods of Formulating Finite Element Problems
The finite element method consists primarily of replacing a set of differential

equations in terms of unknown variables with an equivalent but approximate set of
algebraic equations where each of the unknown variables is evaluated at a nodal point.
Generally there are three approaches to formulate the finite element problems:
1. Direct Method
In direct method individual structural members, such as bars, are analyzed with
techniques similar to those used in analysis of simple trusses and frames. The
displacement caused by applied forces is expressed by a set of equations
convertible into a stiffness matrix for each of the structural member. The
assembly of the element stiffness matrices together will form a large (global)
matrix, which represents the stiffness of the entire structure. Direct method is
difficult to apply to two-and three dimensional problems.
2. The Minimum Total Potential Energy Method
The minimum total potential energy method is a common approach in

generating finite element model in solid mechanics. External load applied to the
body will cause the body to deform. During deformation, the work alone by
external forces is stored in the material in the form of elastic energy, called
Strain Energy. The minimum total potential energy principal states that for a
stable system, the displacement at the equilibrium position occurs such that the
value of the systems total potential energy is a minimum.
29
3. Weighted Residual Method
The weighted residual methods are based on assuming an approximate solution

for the governing differential equations. The assumed solution must satisfy the
initial and boundary conditions of the given problem, because the assumed
solution is not exact, substitution of the solution into the differential equation
will lead to some residual or error. Simply stated, each residual method requires
the error to vanish over some selected intervals or at some points.
2.5.5 Types of Finite Element
Classification according to the way the element represents the displacement field
in three dimensions distinguishes among solid, shell, membrane and beam elements.
a) Solid element
The solid element fully represents all three dimensions. The solid element
models the 3-D displacement field with three variables.
b) Shell element
The shell elements are used when the thickness of the shell is considered small
relative to the other dimensions. Stresses normal to the shell cross section are
usually assumed to have linear distribution; consequently the shell element can
model bending. The shell element models the displacement field with two
variables.
30
c) Membrane element
The membrane element is visually similar to the shell element, but stresses
normal to the shell cross section are usually assumed to be constant. The
membrane element can model only membrane stresses but not bending stresses.
d) Beam element
The cross section is small in comparison with the length. The beam element
models the 3-D displacement field with one variable.
2.5.6 Basic Steps of Finite Element Analysis
In general, there are several approaches to formulating finite element problems:
1. Direct formulation
2. The minimum total potential energy formulation
3. Weighted residual formulation
Again, it is important to note that the basic steps involved in any finite element
analysis, regardless of how generate the finite element model, will be the same as those
listed in Figure 2.11. Basic steps for the finite element analyses are illustrated as a flow
chart in Figure 2.11.
31
Pre-processing Phase
1. Create and discrete the solution domain into finite elements; that is,
subdivide the problem into nodes and elements.
2. Assume a shape function to represent the physical behavior of an
element; that is, a continuous function is assumed to represent the
approximate solution of an element.
3. Develop equations for an element.
4. Assemble the elements to present the entire problem. Construct the
global stiffness matrix.
5. Apply boundary conditions, initial conditions and loading.
Solution Phase
6. Solve a set of linear or non-linear algebraic equations simultaneously
to obtain nodal results, such as displacement values at different
nodes.
Post-processing Phase
7. Obtain other important information. (i.e. principle stresses)
Figure 2.11
Flow chart for the basic steps of FEA [6]
32
2.5.7 Fundamental Requirements
Three basic conditions must be observed, which are:
1) The equilibrium of forces

2) The compatibility of displacements
3) The material behavior law
The first condition requires that the internal forces balance the external applied
loads. Compatibility condition requires that the deformed structure fits together that the
deformations of the member are compatible.
It is also necessary to know the relationship between load and deformation for
each component of the structure (material behavior law). This relationship in linear
elasticity is the Hooks law.
2.5.8 Meshing
The most important requirement of the FEM is the need to split the solution
domain (model geometry) into simply shaped subdomains called finite elements. This
is a discretization process commonly called meshing and elements are called finite
because of their finite, rather than infinitesimally small size having infinite number of
degrees of freedom. Thus the continuous model with an infinite number of degrees of
33
freedom (DOF) is approximated by a discretized FE model with a finite DOF. This
allows for reasonably simple polynomial functions to be used to approximate the field
variables in each element. Meshing the model geometry also discretizes the original
continuous boundary condition. The loads and restraints are represented by discrete
loads and supports applied to element nodes [7].
There are many ways in turning a mathematical model into an FE model by

meshing. The three major factors which define the choice of discretization are element
size, element order (order of the element shape function) and element mapping (element
shape may distort from the ideal shape after mapped to the actual shape in the FE
mesh).
2.5.9 Verification of Results
Finite element analysis software has become a common tool in the hands of
design engineers. The results of the finite element analysis have to be verified so that it
does not contain errors such as applying wrong boundary conditions and loads, poor
element shape and size after meshing, wrong input data, selecting inappropriate types of
elements.
Experimental testing of the model is one of the best ways for checking the
results, but it may be time consuming and expensive. Hence, it is always a good practice
to start by applying equilibrium conditions and energy balance to different portions of a
model to ensure that the physical laws are not violated.
34
2.6
LUSAS
LUSAS is one of the worlds leading structural analysis systems. The LUSAS
system uses finite element analysis techniques to provide accurate solutions for all types
of linear and nonlinear stress, dynamic, and thermal problems. It is an associative
feature-based modeler. The model geometry is entered in terms of features which are
sub-divided (discretized) into finite element in order to perform the analysis. Increasing
the discretisation of the features will usually result in an increase in accuracy of the
solution, but with a corresponding increase in solution time and disk space required.
The features in LUSAS form a hierarchy that is volumes are comprised of surfaces,
which in turn are made up of lines or combined lines, which are defined by points [8].
2.6.1 Characteristic of LUSAS Software
LUSAS software can analysis and organize complex structure problems and
shapes including 3 dimensional structures. This software also can be used in dynamic
structural analyses with temperature changes. LUSAS software can solve problems up
to 5000 number of elements.
2.6.2 Analysis Procedure According to LUSAS Software
There are 3 steps in the finite element analysis using the LUSAS software,
which are as follows:
35
a) Pre-processing phase
Pre-processing involves creating a geometric representation of the structure,

then assigning properties, then outputting the information as a formatted data
file (.dat) suitable for processing by LUSAS [8].
b) Finite Element Solver
Sets of linear or nonlinear algebra equations are solved simultaneously to obtain

nodal results, such as displacement values at different nodes or temperature
values at different nodes in heat transfer problems.
c) Result-Processing
In this process, the results can be processed to show the contour of

displacements, stresses, strains, reactions and other important information.
Graphs as well as the deformed shapes of a model can be plotted.
2.7
Non-linear Analysis
In a linear finite element analysis, all materials are assumed to have linear elastic
behavior and deformations are small enough not to significantly affect the overall
behavior of the structure. However, nonlinear finite element analysis is required in
situations such as gross changes in structural geometry, permanent deformations and
structural cracks.
36
The nonlinear analysis generally can be divided into three types:
1. Material nonlinearity
2. Geometric nonlinearity
3. Boundary nonlinearity
1. Material nonlinearity
Material nonlinearity effects occur from a nonlinear constitutive model which

has disproportionate stresses and strains. A nonlinear material model is one that
does not follow a linear relation between strain and stress and thus does not have
a constant modulus of elasticity. Using such a material, model stiffness changes
during the loading process and the stiffness matrix must be recalculated during
the solution process. The nonlinear material properties require more complex
definition, which depends on what stress-strain relationship is assumed in the
model [7]. Common examples of nonlinear material behavior are the plastic
yielding of metals, the ductile fracture of granular composites such as concrete
or time-dependant behavior such as creep.
2. Geometric nonlinearity
Geometric nonlinearity occurs when there is significant change in the structural

configuration during loading.
In nonlinear geometry analysis, the shape
deformation (rather than the change in material properties, as was the case in the
nonlinear material model) changes the structure matrix. Consequently, stiffness
does not remain constant throughout the process of deformation due to the
applied load, and the stiffness matrix must be recalculated during the process of
load application. Common examples of geometric nonlinearity are plate
structures which develop membrane behavior, and the geometric split of truss or
37
shell structures. The geometric non-linearity is the main factor that causes the
second order effect (P- effect). In Figure 2.12, it is necessary to consider
geometrical non-linearity for knowing the actual response of the column to the
load, because the linear solution would fail to consider the bending moment due
to the eccentricity () of the vertical load (P). If the effects of nonlinear in
geometry are neglected, errors could be occurred depend on the deflections.
Figure 2.12
P- effect on a column [8]
3. In boundary nonlinearity, the modifications to the external restraints resulting

from deformation process such as lift-off, or smooth or frictional contact are
taken into account within an analysis. In the Figure 2.13, the structure and its
supporting surface can resist being pushed together, but not being pulled apart.
The required contact condition may be imposed by using joint elements to
connect between the structure and the rigid support, and specifying a nonlinear
38
contact joint model incorporating large and zero local stiffness in compression
and tension respectively.
Figure 2.13
Nonlinear boundary condition [8]
LUSAS applies the modified Newton-Raphson iteration in the non-linear static

analysis. Newton-Raphson iteration is stable and converges quadratically, provided an
initial estimation which is close enough to the solution is available. Besides that, the
tangent stiffness matrix needs to be inverted during each iteration. It may fail to
converge when extreme material nonlinearities are present in a structure, because of the
complex iteration procedure.
Therefore, modification was done on Newton-Raphson iteration. With the

modified Newton iteration, the current tangent stiffness matrix is replaced with a
39
previous stiffness matrix. This reduces the number of iteration as the factorization of the
tangent stiffness matrix is not required for every iteration.
Three common forms of modified Newton-Raphson iteration are illustrated in

Figure 2.14.
Figure 2.14
Forms of modified Newton-Raphson iteration [8]
40
2.8
Studies Done Related to Reinforced Concrete Column with Hole
There are few studies conducted by researchers to comprehend the behavior of

the reinforced concrete column with hole. The literature study on the problems shows
that no information and guidelines in codes of practice (ACI 318-05, BS 8110-97) on
this problem are available and also no other significant investigations have been
carried out. Reviews are done by studying the article and material from the reliable
sources.
2.8.1 A Critical Review of the Reinforced Concrete Columns and Walls

Concealing Rain Water Pipe in Multistory Buildings
Jahangir Bakhteri, Wahid Omar and Ahmad Mahir Makhtar [9], presented a
critical review of the reinforced concrete columns and walls concealing rain water pipe
in multistory building. This paper showed that using drain pipe inside columns not only
reduces the load carrying capacity of the columns, also cause several dangerous to the
buildings safety which are as follow:
i.
Positioning the drain pipe in the corner or at the edge of the columns section
and will virtually reduce the effective cross-sectional area of the column as
shown in Figure 2.15 (a), (b) and (c). The pipe may not be held at central
position in the column/wall, because during casting and vibrating of the concrete
there are chances that the pipe may get an inclined position which will cause
further decrease in load carrying capacity of the column /wall.( Figure 2.15 (d)).
41
(a), (b) & (c): Column section in plan showing probable effective area
(d): vertical section of column showing inclined position of the drain pipe
Figure 2.11
Inappropriate positioning of rain water pipe in columns section [9]
42
ii.
There are chances of honeycomb formation around the drain pipe in the column
as shown Figure 2.16.
Figure 2.12
iii.
Formation of honeycombs around the drain pipe [9]
Rusting of reinforcement in the structure will occur because the pipes may have
leakage at their lapping parts or joints as shown in Figure 2.17, which is cause
loss of bond and reduction in the strength of the structural elements by
corrosion.
43
Figure 2.13
iv.
Leakage in the lapping parts of the PVC drain pipes [9]
Due to the presence of drain pipe in beam-column joints, the beams

reinforcement has to be bent as shown in Figure 2.18, which causes irregularity
and non-uniformity in the beams reinforcement and hence a reduction in
strength and functioning of the beam. The problem will be much critical in
beams with higher percentage of reinforcement.
Figure 2.14
Congestion and non-uniformity in beams reinforcements at columns
section caused by the presence of drain pipe [9]
44
v.
The columns strength at base level is reduced by elbow part of the pipe, which
is used to drain the rain water at ground level. In case the drain pipe has not been
taken out at ground level i.e. the positioning of the elbow part of the pipe has
been forgotten. To rectify this mistake, the concrete of the columns section at
ground level has been hacked severely and then the elbow part of the pipe has
been installed followed by grouting of fresh concrete as shown in Figure 2.19.
Figure 2.15
Elbow part of the drain pipe at the ground level [9]
45
The columns concealing drain pipes are usually designed by the Malaysian
practicing engineers on the basis of their reduced cross-sectional areas Ar which is
calculated as follows:
Ar = Ag - Ap
(2.10)
Where, Ar is reduced area of the section of the column, Ag is gross area of the
columns section, and Ap is cross-sectional area of the drain pipe.
In case of the column with higher flexural stresses (i.e. moment), the assumption
made in the effective depths of the column which contains drain pipe is usually
inappropriate. This is because, for the design purposes, the practicing engineers assume
an approximate effective depth for the columns section and a rational formula for the
calculation of the effective depth of such type of columns is lacking.
An experimental study has been carried out (Jahangir Bakhteri & Ahmad
Iskandar,[10]) to consider the effect of concealing Poly Vinyl Chloride (PVC) pipe
inside reinforced concrete (RC) columns in multistory buildings.
Compressive strength and load carrying capacity of rectangular reinforced

concrete short columns with embedded rain water pipe have been investigated and the
results have been presented. The models have been loaded axially until their failure and
the collapse load and maximum axial strain of samples are recorded.
To summarize this paper all the results show reduction in load carrying
capacities of the columns by positioning drain pipes inside them [10].
46
For design of the column with embedded drain pipe , the strength of the columns
should be taken as half of the value obtained in BS 8110 and ACI code, because of the
huge reduction in the load carrying capacity of these type of the columns.
Usage of coated steel pipe instead of PVC pipe positioned at the center of
columns cross-section is suggested in this paper as an alternative solution. It has also
been mentioned that in the case of structure subjected to lateral load, this practice
should not be used because appropriate determination of the effective depth of the
column concealing rain water pipe is difficult.
2.8.2 Full Scale Tests on Ductility, Shear Strength and Retrofit of Reinforced
Concrete Hollow Columns
Y. L. Mo, Y.-K. Yeh, C.-T.Cheng, I. C. Tsai and C. C. Kao [11], worked on

hollow bridge column. To maximize structural efficiency in terms of the strength/mass
and stiffness/mass ratios and to reduce the mass contribution of the column to seismic
response, it is desirable to use a hollow section with high-strength concrete for the
columns. To consider both ductility and workability, the configuration of lateral steel in
the hollow columns used in the high-speed rail project of Taiwan.
The purpose of this integrated project is five points:
1) To study experimentally the flexural, shear, and retrofit performances of hollow

rectangular and circular reinforced concrete bridge columns.
47
2) To investigate the constitutive models of confined concrete as affected by the
configuration, spacing and steel ratio of confinement reinforcement, as well as
the compression/shear ratio.
3) To evaluate the reduction of shear strength with increasing ductility factor and
develop a set of guidelines for seismic design, retrofit, and repair of such
columns.
4) To extend the applicability of the truss model for shear element to include such
columns to develop a computer program that can predict the shear stress-shear
strain relationship of hollow bridge columns with confined reinforcement.
5) Find a good method for seismic repair of such columns and develop a computer
program that can perform seismic design, retrofit, and repair of such columns.
The cross-sections used in this integrated research project are shown in Figure
2.20.
(a) hollow bridge columns with

rectangular section
Figure 2.6
(b) hollow bridge columns with

circular section
Configurations of lateral reinforcement in hollow columns [11]
48
The above mentioned investigation shows that, when a specimen with
insufficient shear reinforcement was FRP retrofitted, the failure mode of the specimen
could change from brittle shear failure to ductile flexural failure.
The specimen, with both insufficient lateral reinforcement and lap splice at the
plastic hinge region, should not be used in design because it has much lower ductility
due to premature bond failure.
The specimen, with insufficient lateral reinforcement, has flexure and shear
failures. Its ductility is less than that of specimen failed by flexure because its plastic
hinge could not be fully developed. The ultimate displacements and flexural capacities
of FRP-repaired columns were about 50% to 60% and 10% to 20%, respectively,
greater than those of original columns.
In the column analyses there were three cases, namely, Case 1 with coderequired confinement reinforcement, Case 2 with 50% of code required confinement
reinforcement, and Case 3 with 50% of code required confinement reinforcement and
the remaining 50% replaced by steel plate. In Case 1, the ductility capacity was very
good, and increased with increasing confinement reinforcement. The shear strength was
less than that calculated by Priestleys formula. In Case 2, both the ductility capacity
and the shear strength were reduced dramatically. In Case 3, both the ductility capacity
and the shear strength were not less than those for Case 1.
49
2.8.3 Slender High Strength Concrete Columns Subjected to Eccentric Loading
An experimental study is done by Claeson and Gylltoft [12]. The research is

about studying the behavior of slender reinforced concrete columns. In the research, 12
full-scale reinforced concrete columns were tested to failure under the eccentric load.
The research was then followed by performing numerical simulations to verify
with the test results.
The detailing and configuration of the column cross section is as indicated in

Figure 2.21 and as tabulated in Table 2.1.
Figure 2.21
Geometry and details of configurations (a) and (b) [12]
Table 2.1 : Details of columns in group A, B and C [12]

Column group Length (mm)
Configuration
Eccentricity (mm) Stirrup spacing (mm)
2400
20
100/180
3000
20
130/240
4000
20
130/240
50
There were 4 test sample prepared for each group of column. In each group, 2
columns were cast by normal-strength concrete and the other 2 columns were cast by
high-strength concrete. The materials for the columns tested for obtaining the data on its
mechanical properties such as elasticity, strength, etc.
Both the ends of the column were attached to a bearing plate to produce a good
pinned support to the column before the test. Figure 2.22 is illustrating the load
arrangement for the test. It can be seen that the column are supported and loaded with
an eccentricity of 20mm.
Figure 2.22
Load arrangement for the test [12]
51
Sensors were attached to the test sample at different height level, as illustrated in
Figure 2.23. Sensors consist of different types of gauges which were used to measure
the lateral displacement of the column, as response to the vertical eccentric load.
Figure 2.23
Instrumentation of slender column [12]
The research is continued with the finite element modeling. The objective was to
develop a non-linear finite element model that could simulate the failure mechanism of
the column. ABAQUS was used to perform the analysis. A 3-noded 3-dimensional
52
hybrid beam element was developed for the model of the columns, because it enabled
the analysis to run in a reasonable amount of time. Also, a similar study done by
Claeson [13] has concluded that there is a good agreement between the analysis using
beam elements and one using solid elements.
During the modeling, the program ABAQUS combines the standard elements of
plain concrete with a special option, called the rebar. The option strengthens the
concrete in the direction chosen, thereby simulating the behavior of a reinforcement bar.
By the approach, the material behavior of the plain concrete is taken into account
independently of the reinforcement.
In order to simulate the behavior of the materials in plastic state, constitutive

models for the concrete and the reinforcement were developed. The concrete model was
developed by the smeared crack approach, and the reinforcement was modeled by a
linear elastic-plastic model.
The research has concluded that the high-strength concrete columns fail in a
brittle manner, and the spacing of the links does not affect the column ultimate strength.
Secondly, the failure mode of the column is depending on the eccentricity of the vertical
load. When the eccentricity of the load is low, the material crushing strength played a
dominant role. When the load eccentricity is increased, the yielding of the compressive
reinforcement determined the column capacity. Thirdly, the maximum lateral
deflections at the mid-height of the columns were almost the same. Finally, the column
strength is very much depending on the eccentricity of the vertical load.
53
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1
Introduction
A number of powerful finite element software packages have become

commercially available. They include ABAQUS, ANSYS, COSMOSM, MARC and
LUSAS.
In order to meet the objectives of this research, the reinforced concrete
column with hole was modeled using LUSAS version 14.0. The experimental work
was used to calibrate the finite element model. As the research focused on the accuracy
of finite element analysis, the results of analysis were checked by comparison with the
results of laboratory test.
This chapter explains the process to build the model and the process to run the
non linear analysis using LUSAS software.
54
3.2
Finite Element Modeling
The technique of finite element modeling lies in the development of a suitable

mesh arrangement. Thus, many trial models were created during the early stage of the
research. Different element types and different methods of modeling were created
before the final arrangement of mesh and element was determined. In the following
sections, the procedures for the implementation of a FEM for nonlinear analysis are
described.
3.2.1 Geometry
The geometry of the models is based on the details of the tested columns. Ten
columns in five sets, having various size and reinforcement were modeled. The hole
was positioned at the centre of cross-section of each one of them. Each set contain two
types of column with same size and reinforcement:
Type (a): Model without hole (control model)
Type (b): Model with hole
The dimensions of the columns cross-section vary from 125125 mm to

300300 mm. All models were placed with 20 mm cover to reinforcement. The holes
having four different diameters (48, 60, 89 and 114 mm) were modeled. The models
specification and dimension of each set are shown in Table 3.1.
55
Table 3.1 : The specification and dimension of the column models
Column
Gross Area
Hole Diameter
Hole Area
Bar
set
(mm)
(mm)
(mm2)
(mm)
(mm2)
Size
C1
125
125
15625
48
1809
4Y10
C2
150
150
22500
60
2827
4Y10
C3
200
150
30000
60
2827
6Y10
C4
200
200
40000
60
2827
4Y12
C5
200
200
40000
89
6221.
4Y12
C6
250
200
50000
89
6221
4Y16+2Y12
C7
250
250
62500
89
6221
4Y16
C8
275
275
75625
114
10207
4Y20
C9
300
250
75000
89
6221
4Y16+2Y12
C10
300
300
90000
89
6221
4Y20
C11
300
300
90000
114
10207
4Y20
One of the biggest changes in the columns geometry design is the geometry of
the reinforcement bars. The reinforcement bars have a circular cross section in reality,
whilst in the model they are modeled with a square cross-section. The square form of
the reinforcement is much easier to model, i.e. design and mesh, in LUSAS, as well as
contributing to minimizing the calculation time for the FE-analyses. It should be noted
that the area of the reinforcements square cross section is equivalent to the area of the
circular reinforcement. The stirrups are not modeled due to the miniscule effect they
have on the studied behavior of the column. Element aspect ratio should be considered
in the FE modeling. In many cases, as the element aspect ratio increases, the inaccuracy
of solution increases. So using partitions can cause low aspect ratio for getting more
accurate solution.
56
3.2.2 Finite Element Meshing
The HX8M (3D solid continuum element) is a three dimensional solid

hexahedral element and one of many available elements in LUSAS and is used in the
numerical model when modeling the concrete and reinforcement in 3D. This element
type is numerically integrated and has three nodal degrees of freedom, i.e. translations
in X, Y, and Z directions. It should be noted that the local and global coordinate
systems are defined in the same directions. The HX8M element consists of eight Gauss
points, i.e. 2 2 2, and its interpolation order, i.e. shape of the basis functions, is linear.
The HX8M is shown in Figure 3.1.
Figure 3.1
Three dimensional solid hexahedral element (HX8M) [8]
The concrete, reinforcement and bond-mechanism are modeled with hexahedral

volume features (HX8M three-dimensional continuum solid elements).
57
The reinforcement is modeled with hexahedral volume features (HX8M three
dimensional continuum solid elements). The reinforcement bars have a circular cross
section in reality, whilst in the model they are modeled with a square cross-section. The
square form of the reinforcement is much easier to model, i.e. design and mesh, in
LUSAS, as well as contributing to minimizing the calculation time for the FE-analyses.
It should be noted that the area of the reinforcements square cross section is equivalent
to the area of the circular reinforcement. Aspect ratio is defined as the ratio of the
longest to the shortest dimension of a quadrilateral element. Element aspect ratio is
considered in the FE modeling. In many cases, as the element aspect ratio increases, the
inaccuracy of solution increases. So using partitions can cause low aspect ratio for
getting more accurate solution, because the best results are obtained when the element
shape is regular and compact. It is tried to maintain low aspect ratio and corner angles
of quadrilateral be 90 degree in the meshing of all models. The modeling of bar and
meshing of model are shown in Figure 3.2.
Figure 3.2
Modeling of bar and meshing of model C1b
58
3.2.3 Material Properties
Material nonlinearity occurs when the stress- strain relationship ceases to be

linear by plastic yielding and strain hardening. Materially nonlinear effects arise from a
nonlinear constitutive model (that is, progressively disproportionate stresses and
strains). Common examples of nonlinear material behavior are the plastic yielding of
metals, the ductile fracture of granular composites such as concrete or time-dependent
behavior such as creep. LUSAS incorporates a variety of nonlinear constitutive models,
covering the behavior of the more common engineering materials.
a) Concrete
The concrete is defined as an isotropic material in the modeling. In addition, the

LUSAS concrete (model 94) material model is used to model the concrete in the
plastic stage. For good correlation with experimental results, the plastic material
properties of the concrete were assigned according to the results from the
experimental test. Tabulated in Table 3.2 are the properties of the concrete.
Table 3.2 : Concrete properties

Elastic Properties
Youngs Modulus = 20130 N/mm2

Poissons Ratio = 0.2
Compressive Strength = 37.12 N/mm2
Plastic Properties
Tensile Strength = 3.712 N/mm2

Strain at end of softening curve = 0.003
59
b) Steel Bar
The reinforcing steel is defined as an isotropic material. In the plastic properties,

the stress potential model was selected and Von Mises yield surface was tried
for the plastic behavior of the steel. Table 3.3 below shows the steel properties
for the reinforcement.
Table 3.3 : Steel properties

Elastic Properties
Plastic Properties
Youngs Modulus = 200000 N/mm2

Poissons Ratio = 0.3
Yield Stress = 460 N/mm2
3.2.4 Boundary Condition
The bottom of the column was fully fixed in x, y and z directions. The top of
the column, which was supported by two rollers, allowed movement in vertical z
direction. Thus the restraint at the top of the column was fixed from movement in x and
y directions.
60
3.2.5 Loading
The axial compression load was assigned at the top face of the column. The
results of the experimental test were showed that the amount of loading is variable in
each column. However, LUSAS would apply the load in the incremental manner until
the analysis stopped. The generated mesh, applied load and boundary condition of the
model are shown in Figure 3.3.
Figure 3.3
Typical model showing generated mesh, loading and boundary condition
61
3.2.6 Nonlinear Analysis
Nonlinear analysis control properties were defined as properties of a loadcase. In

LUSAS, the nonlinear analysis is based on the Newton-Raphson procedure by which
the stiffness matrix (KT) is updated after each iteration. The procedure is an increment
iterative method, in which the total load is applied in a number of increments. A linear
prediction of nonlinear response is made with each increment, and subsequent iterative
corrections are performed to restore equilibrium by the elimination of the residual or
out of balance forces. The load incrementation procedures in this analysis were set for
each model in order to reduce the elapsed time of the analysis [8].
LUSAS incorporates two groups of the Newton-Raphson method, which are

standard Newton-Raphson and modified Newton-Raphson. The standard NewtonRaphson was employed. Automatic load incrementation was adopted in the analysis.
The incremental / iterative nonlinear solution is shown in Figure 3.4.
Figure 3.4
Incremental / iterative nonlinear solution [8]
62
Fine integration was used in this analysis as recommended by the LUSAS
modeler user manual. Alternatively, the Rheinbolts arc-length control was set to
improve the convergence characteristics and the ability to detect and negotiate limit
points according to LUSAS theory manual [8].
Figure 3.5 below shows the Rheinbolts arc-length load incrementation method
for the midspan displacement of the model in this study.
Figure 3.5
response [8]
Modified arc length load incrementation for the one degree of freedom
63
3.3
Experimental Work
The results of the half scale laboratory test were used as comparison with the
results from the finite element analysis. Hence, the finite element model was
implemented based on the parameters and conditions in the laboratory test [14].
3.3.1 Test Models
Twenty two columns in eleven sets, having various size and reinforcement were
constructed. The PVC pipes were positioned at the centre of cross-section of each one
of them. Each set contain two types of column with same size and reinforcement:
Type (a): specimen without pipe (control model)
Type (b): specimen with PVC pipe
The dimensions of the columns cross-section vary from 125125 mm to

300300 mm. The models specification and dimension of each set are shown in Table
3.4. All models were placed with 20 mm cover to reinforcement based on BS 81110
requirement i.e bar size, maximum aggregate size and to meet 1.5 hours period of fire
resistance. The PVC pipes having four different diameters (48, 60, 89 and 114 mm)
were used.
64
Table 3.4 : The specification and dimension of the column models
Column
Gross Area
Pipe Diameter
Pipe Area
Bar
set
(mm)
(mm)
(mm2)
(mm)
(mm2)
Size
C1
125
125
15625
48
1809
4Y10
C2
150
150
22500
60
2827
4Y10
C3
200
150
30000
60
2827
6Y10
C4
200
200
40000
60
2827
4Y12
C5
200
200
40000
89
6221.
4Y12
C6
250
200
50000
89
6221
4Y16+2Y12
C7
250
250
62500
275
275
75625
6221
10207
4Y16
C8
89
114
4Y20
C9
300
250
75000
89
6221
4Y16+2Y12
C10
300
300
90000
300
300
90000
6221
10207
4Y20
C11
89
114
4Y20
High strength deformed steel bars having yield strength of 460 N/mm2 were
used in the models. After completion of reinforcement details (i.e. bars cutting and
bending), using water proof grade one plywood, appropriate formwork for the models
were prepared.
The concreting of the models has been carried out in the Structures laboratory of
the Faculty of Civil Engineering at UTM, during which, cube samples have been
prepared in random order. This is needed in order to assess the actual strength of the
concrete in the models. The surface of the models has been kept wet for at least three
days. After removal of the formworks, the models were kept undisturbed for 28 days.
65
3.3.2 The Test Models Classification
According to the loading arrangement and the analysis of a structure, the

columns are classified into one of the following types based on BS 8110:
1. A braced column: where the lateral loads are resisted by walls or some other
form of bracing.
2. An unbraced column: where the lateral load are resisted by bending action of the
columns.
All models were assumed to be braced column, which means no bending action
considered in this study.
Also a column is classified as short if the $ and $

are:
x
Less than 15 for a braced column.
Less than 10 for an unbraced column.
Where,
#% = The effective height relative to XX and YY axis.
= The overall depth of the section in the plane of bending about the XX axis.

= The dimension perpendicular to the XX axis.
66
All columns were assumed to be braced column. So they were designed as short

braced column. The & #% &
ratios and the type of the models are shown in Table
3.5.
Table 3.5 : The column models type

Column set
'*&
,
'*&
-
Column Type
C1
12.0
12.0
short
C2
10.0
10.0
short
C3
7.5
10.0
short
C4
7.5
7.5
short
C5
7.5
7.5
short
C6
6.0
7.5
short
C7
6.0
6.0
short
C8
5.45
5.45
short
C9
5.0
6.0
short
C10
5.0
5.0
short
C11
5.0
5.0
short
3.3.3 Preparation of the Test Specimens
Basically, preparation of specimens consists of steel works and concrete works.

Steel works consist of cutting, bending and tying steel bars. Steel bar tensile test was
67
also conducted to obtain the yielding strength of steel bars. Meanwhile, concrete works
involve preparing formworks, casting, compacting and curing.
a) Steel Works
Appropriate reinforcement details are very essential for achieving required

strength in reinforced concrete. Therefore, they should be tied together properly
to ensure greatest quality of work. Steel bars having yield strength of 460
N/mm2 in different sizes were cut. Mild steel bars with 6 mm diameter as links
were cut and bended carefully. The minimum size of the links was considered as
1$4 multiply the size of the largest compression bar but not less than 6 mm.
The spacing between links was taken 12 times of the smallest compression bar
size. Figure 3.6 shows the arrangement of reinforcement bar of columns in the
laboratory.
Figure 3.6
Steel works consist of cutting, bending and tying steel bars
68
Meanwhile, another important step was the positioning of the pipes. The pipe
was installed in center of cross-section of each column. The pipes were tied to the
longitudinal steel bar by steel wire to ensure no movement during casting. Positioning
of the pipes in the center of columns cross-section is shown in Figure 3.7.
Figure 3.7
Positioning of the pipes in center of columns cross-section
a) Concrete Works
All these column specimens were made with 20 mm clear cover to all
reinforcement according to BS 8110, i.e. based on bar size, maximum aggregate
size and to meet 1.5 hours period of fire resistance. The sets of formwork with
18mm thickness water proof plywood, which was well-cut into desired
69
dimensions, were prepared. After the formwork and reinforcement were
completed, casting work was carried out. Ready mixed concrete with Grade 35
was used in this experiment. The columns were casted horizontally because of
ease in casting and compacting, also to prevent construction tolerances. Extra
care has been taken to prepare the columns formworks such that to produce the
exact dimensions of the models and to have the verticality in the models.
Column was positioned horizontally on a leveled ground surface as shown in
Figure 3.8. This was then followed by the pouring of the mix into the formwork.
Figure 3.8
Column form work was positioned horizontally and ready for casting
The concrete mix was compacted using poker vibrator. Before the concrete was
hardened, the top surface of the columns was well-trowel to have smooth surface.
Figure 3.9 shows the fresh concrete after casting. In order to obtain the concrete
strength of the models at certain duration after casting, 9 cubes were prepared for cube
test.
70
Figure 3.9
The fresh reinforced concrete columns after casting
b) Curing Techniques
Curing is a technique necessity for the development of desired concrete strength

and hardness. Normally, curing begins after placement of concrete. It helps to
maintain the satisfactory moisture content in the concrete. Temperature and
relative humidity conditions are two important factors in proper curing and they
play a significant role in contribution to the rate of moisture loss from the
concrete. The surface of the models has been kept wet for 7 days. Burlap is used
to cover the specimens and wet with water regularly. This helps to maintain the
concrete surface at continuously wet condition as well as prevent evaporation
from the concrete surfaces.
71
3.3.4 Instrumentation and Testing of the Models
In this study, specimens were prepared and tested under axial compressive load
to investigate the load carrying capacity of the short braced reinforced column with
embedded pipe. The models have been tested using a 5000 kN capacity universal testing
machine. The columns were loaded under a monotonically increasing axial compressive
load until their collapse.
a) Strain Gauge
Before the testing of the column specimens the strain gauges were installed on
the models. In order to record the vertical axial strains in each model, two
electric resistance strain gauges on opposite vertical faces of the column at its
mid height and two electric resistance strain gauges at the adjacent faces of the
model near its top end have been installed. The installations of the strain gauges
were carried out as in the following stage:
Preparation
The following items were required for bonding and lead wire connection: strain
gauge, bonding adhesive, solvent, cleaning tissue for industrial use, abrasive
paper, polyethylene sheet.
Positioning
The location on the test specimen where the strain gauge was to be bonded was
roughly determined.
72
x
Surface preparation
Before bonding, all grease, rust, etc were removed. An area somewhat larger
than the bonding area uniformly and finely was sanded with abrasive paper.
Fine cleaning
The bonding area was cleaned with industrial tissue paper soaked in small
quantity of acetone. Cleaning was continued until a new tissue appeared
completely free of contamination.
Applying bonding adhesive
The proper amount of adhesive was dropped onto the back of gauge base. The
adhesive was spread over the back surface thinly and uniformly by using
adhesive nozzle.
Curing and pressing
Curing and pressing gauge was placed on guide mark, and then a polyethylene
sheet was placed onto it and pressed down on the gauge constantly by using
thumb. This was done quickly as curing process was completed very fast.
The analysis of strain measurements is not done in the scope of this study. It can
be referred to the experimental work by Hossein Mousavian [14].
73
b) Loading Procedure
In order to represent the restraint provided by the beams and slab to the column
in each floor level, in the testing set up, each end of the model were fixed to the
testing machine to simulate the actual condition in the columns.
Before positioning the models in testing machine the center of the columns were
marked, then the center of the columns were positioned in center of testing machine
loading surface to achieve an axial compressive loading condition without eccentricity.
In the next stage, the model was checked to be aligned vertically by the spirit level
readings on two opposite face of the column. In order to prevent local failure at the
loaded ends of the columns, two pieces of plywood with 10 mm thickness were located
in top and bottom of the model. In final stage before testing, the strain gauges wires
were connected to the data logger.
The models have been tested using the 5000 kN capacity universal testing
machine. The columns were loaded under a monotonically increasing axial compressive
load until their collapse. The loading and the vertical axial strain readings were recorded
after every increment of 20 kN load. The test setup is shown in Figure 3.10.
74
Figure 3.10
3.4
Test setup
Flowchart of the Finite Element Analysis
In order to achieve the stated objectives, this FEA study is carried out in few
stages. The flowchart of all stage is indicated in Figure 3.11 which provides a general
overview about finite element analysis of this research and its completion procedure.
75
Draw the Geometry of the Model

and Make the Hole along Model (b)
Using Partition for Maintain

Low Aspect Ratio
Meshing and Discretization of the

Models using 3D Solid Element
Assign the Material Properties for

Concrete and Reinforcement
Apply Boundary Condition for Top

and Bottom of the Model
Apply Loading on the Top

Face of the Model
Run and Analysis of the Models

and Presentation of the Results
Figure 3.11
Flowchart of finite element analysis
76
CHAPTER 4
ANALYSIS, RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1
Introduction
This chapter presents the results of comparative study between numerical

approach using finite element analysis and laboratory test. The comparative study was
undertaken to determine the accuracy of the finite element analysis in predicting the
nonlinear behavior of the reinforced concrete column with hole. Comparison was made
on the aspects of stress-strain curve and mode of failure. With the aid of graphs and
diagrams, the results of the comparative study between finite element analysis and
experiment were highlighted.
Verifications of the finite element analysis results were done during the
modeling, to ensure the results obtained are reliable. In this part of the investigation, a
preliminary study was conducted for having an early understanding on the column
behavior. Subsequently, the results were inferred, leading to the outcomes that achieve
the aims of the study.
77
4.2
The Results of Finite Element Analysis
The axial compression load was assigned at the top of the column, so due to the
axial compression loading, the stress and strain in the z direction were calculated for
comparison of FEA results with experimental work based on BS and ACI codes. The
maximum vertical compressive stress and strain in all models using finite element
analysis are shown in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1 : Maximum vertical stress and strain in all columns

Column
set
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
Column
type
Max. vertical stress

( N/mm2)
Max. vertical strain

( 10-3)
a
b
a
b
a
b
a
b
a
b
a
b
a
b
a
b
a
b
a
b
a
b
44.218
37.834
44.901
37.542
45.184
37.163
45.842
36.935
45.842
36.475
46.892
36.012
47.285
35.401
47.914
36.391
48.311
35.760
49.115
37.792
49.115
37.008
2.604
3.024
2.675
3.096
2.742
3.108
2.780
3.169
2.780
3.196
2.843
3.207
2.850
3.223
2.754
3.136
2.794
3.293
2.890
3.358
2.890
3.316
78
The deformed shape and vertical stress contour of model C7b are shown in
Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2. According to the finite element analysis results, the
maximum stress in z direction is occurred near the hole area at bottom of the column
because of the axial compressive loading at the top of the column.
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.2
Deformed shape of model C7b
Vertical stress contour of model C7b
79
In Figures 4.3 and 4.4, the strain in the longitudinal direction is presented. It can
be seen that large strain, i.e. deformations due to compressive loading and supports, is
concentrated near the loading area. The vertical strain contour of model C7b in two
dimensional is shown in Figure 4.3 and the vertical strain contour of model C7b in three
dimensional is shown in Figure 4.4.
Figure 4.3
Figure 4.4
80
The vertical stress and strain contour of model C7a is shown in Figure 4.5 and
Figure 4.6. Because of the compressive loading, the maximum stress in z direction is
occurred near the support at bottom of the column and also the maximum strain is
concentrated near the loading zone.
Figure 4.5
Vertical stress contour of model C7a
Figure 4.6
Vertical strain contour of model C7a
81
4.2.1 Vertical Stress-Strain Curves of the Models Based on FEA Results
The typical stress-strain curves which are plotted in Figures 4.7 to 4.10 clearly
shows that the post-peak segment of the stress-strain curves are effected by using hole
inside the column. Also according to the stress-strain graph, the columns without the
hole have a greater ultimate point in comparison with those with hole inside.
Figure 4.7
Figure 4.8
82
4.3
Figure 4.9
Figure 4.10
Reduction in Load Carrying Capacity of Reinforced Concrete Columns
Concealing Hole
The percentages of the reduction load carrying capacity of reinforced concrete

short braced column having hole inside them based on finite element analysis are shown
in Table 4.2. The current study showed a huge reduction in the load bearing capacity of
83
the columns with hole (containing drain pipe) and also the reduction load carrying
capacity of columns with hole vary from 23% to 33%.
Table 4.2 : The percentages of reduction in load carrying capacity of columns with hole
Ultimate force
Reduction in load carrying
Type of
(kN)
capacity of columns (%)
column
C1a
690.906
0.0
Control
C1b
530.700
23.2
Hole
C2a
1010.272
0.0
Control
C2b
744.308
25.6
Hole
C3a
1355.250
0.0
Control
C3b
1009.832
25.8
Hole
C4a
1857.680
0.0
Control
C4b
1381.460
27.3
Hole
C5a
1857.680
0.0
Control
C5b
1232.080
28.2
Hole
C6a
2344.602
0.0
Control
C6b
1576.574
29.7
Hole
C7a
2992.810
0.0
Control
C7b
2015.463
30.6
Hole
C8a
3623.490
0.0
Control
C8b
2380.623
31.3
Hole
C9a
3623.322
0.0
Control
C9b
2459.531
32.2
Hole
C10a
4407.431
0.0
Control
C10b
3166.175
32.8
Hole
C11a
4407.431
0.0
Control
C11b
2952.979
33.0
Hole
Model
84
4.4
Comparison of the Results
The results of the reduced scale laboratory test were used as comparison with
the results from the finite element analysis. Hence, the finite element model was
implemented based on the parameters and conditions in the laboratory test. The
maximum vertical compressive stresses and strains from experimental investigation and
finite element analysis of the models are compared in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3 : Comparison of the maximum vertical compressive stress and strain in the
models from experimental work and finite element analysis
Column Column 1PP2)
10-3)
set
type
experimental experimental
a
40.576
2.645
C1
b
36.553
3.224
a
33.866
2.757
C2
b
31.007
3.260
a
31.466
2.210
C3
b
31.650
2.191
a
27.100
2.230
C4
b
26.92
3.392
a
27.100
2.230
C5
b
34.992
2.111
a
28.74
1.504
C6
b
35.999
1.813
a
33.360
2.194
C7
b
25.747
1.223
a
23.471
0.977
C8
b
42.343
3.101
a
34.985
2.032
C9
b
31.521
2.296
a
36.733
2.218
C10
b
35.011
2.341
a
36.733
3.128
C11
b
36.983
2.616
1PP2)
FEA
44.218
37.834
44.901
37.542
45.184
37.163
45.842
36.935
45.842
36.475
46.892
36.012
47.285
35.401
47.914
36.391
48.311
35.760
49.115
37.792
49.115
37.008
10-3)
FEA
2.604
3.024
2.675
3.096
2.742
3.108
2.780
3.169
2.780
3.196
2.843
3.207
2.850
3.223
2.754
3.136
2.794
3.293
2.890
3.358
2.890
3.316
85
Comparison of the results shows that finite element analysis of the models
predicts much higher vertical compressive strength in the models than experimental
results, because it is assumed in finite element analysis that materials are uniform and
consistent, also is considered perfect fixity at the base of columns. But there are some
problems in laboratory tests that cause inaccurate result occur during the tests such as
error in test set up, honeycomb and etc.
According to the finite element analysis result, the maximum stress in z

direction is occurred near the hole at bottom of the column, because of the compressive
loading and placing the hole along the column. Also the maximum strain in z direction
is concentrated near the loading area because of the support and applying the axial load
at the top of the column.
The vertical stress-strain curves for various models both from experimental and
finite element analysis are shown in Figures 4.11 to 4.14.
Figure 4.11
86
Figure 4.12
Figure 4.13
87
Figure 4.14
4.4.1 Design Strength Requirement of the Columns Based on Codes of Practice
Columns are key elements in the structures therefore, it is important that these
elements should be designed and constructed such that they should have full strength
with factors of safety of 2 to 3 as recommended by various codes of practice.
a) Design Strength of the Column Based On BS 8110 Code
Using Equation (39), clause 3.8.4.4 of the BS 8110: Part 1 [3], reproduced here
as Equation (4.1), the design load Nd for each model has been calculated.
Nd = 0.35 fcu Anc + 0.7 Asc fy
(4.1)
88
Where,
fcu is characteristic compressive strength of concrete.
Anc is net concrete area of the cross-section of the model.
Asc is the area of the longitudinal reinforcement.
fy is characteristic yield strength of steel.
Design load is calculated for model C1b based on Equation (4.1) as below:
Nd = (0.35) (37) (13816) + (0.7) (314.16) (460) = 280000 N
Factor of safety is calculated for model C1b as below:
Factor of safety = (Maximum load) / (Design load)
Factor of safety for FEA = (530.700) / (280) = 1.89

Factor of safety for experimental work = (505) / (280) = 1.80
The calculation is similar for other models. Considering axial concentric load
with minimum eccentricity, the design strength of each model based on Equation (4.1)
has been calculated and also safety factors in the models obtained from finite element
analysis and experimental work based on BS code are shown in Table 4.4.
89
Table 4.4 : Comparison of safety factors from experimental study and FEA based on
BS code using Equation (4.1)
Design
Max. load
Factor of
Max. load
Factor of
load(kN)
(kN)
safety
(kN)
safety
(BS code)
(experimental)
(experimental)
(FEA)
(FEA)
C1b
280.0
505
1.80
530.700
1.89
C2b
453.5
610
1.30
744.308
1.64
C3b
497.5
860
1.70
1009.832
1.97
C4b
621.2
1001
1.60
1381.460
1.98
C5b
752.2
1182
1.57
1232.080
1.63
C6b
1109.8
1576
1.42
1576.574
1.42
C7b
977.4
1449
1.48
2015.463
1.94
C8b
1572.4
2770
1.76
2380.623
1.51
C9b
1630.2
2130
1.30
2459.531
1.50
C10b
1754.7
2826
1.61
3166.175
1.80
C11b
1834.0
2951
1.60
2952.979
1.72
Model
b) Design Strength of the Columns Based On ACI Code
Using Equation (10.2) of ACI 318 [15], i.e. American Building Code
Requirements for Reinforced Concrete reproduced as in Equation (4.2), the
design axial load strength of the models has been calculated.
P(n,max :) = 0.80[0.85fc (Ag Ast ) + fy Ast ]
(4.2)
90
Where,
Ag is gross area of the column section.
Ast is total area of longitudinal reinforcement.
fc is specified compressive strength of concrete.
fy is specified yield strength of reinforcement.
is strength reduction factor which is 0.65 for tied columns.
Design load is calculated for model C1b based on Equation (4.2) as below:
P = (0.80) (0.65) [(0.85) (37) (13501.84) + (460) (314.16)] = 296000 N
Table 4.5 : Comparison of factor of safety from experimental study and FEA based on
ACI code using Equation (4.2)
Design
Max. load
Factor of
Max. load
Factor of
load(kN)
(kN)
safety
(kN)
safety
(ACI)
(experimental)
(experimental)
(FEA)
(FEA)
C1b
296.0
505
1.70
530.700
1.79
C2b
520.1
610
1.20
744.308
1.43
C3b
549.4
860
1.56
1009.832
1.83
C4b
708.7
1001
1.41
1381.460
1.94
C5b
874.2
1182
1.35
1232.080
1.40
C6b
1229.0
1576
1.28
1576.574
1.29
C7b
1099.6
1449
1.32
2015.463
1.83
C8b
1775.3
2770
1.56
2380.623
1.68
C9b
1824.7
2130
1.26
2459.531
1.34
C10b
1982.2
2826
1.42
3166.175
1.59
C11b
2105.7
2951
1.40
2952.979
1.42
Model
91
The calculation is similar for other models. The design strength of each model
based on Equation (4.2) has been calculated and also safety factors in the models
obtained from finite element analysis and experimental work based on ACI code are
shown in Table 4.5.
4.5
Discussions
Comparison of the results shows that finite element analysis of the models
predicts much higher vertical compressive strength in the models than experimental
results, because it is assumed in finite element analysis that materials are uniform and
consistent, also is considered perfect fixity at the base of columns. But there are some
problems in laboratory tests that cause inaccurate result occur during the tests such as
error in test set up, honeycomb and etc. According to the finite element analysis result,
the maximum stress in z direction is occurred near the hole at bottom of the column.
Also the maximum strain in z direction is concentrated near the loading area.
Also the present study shows that the factors of safety of the models obtained
using BS 8110 design strength vary from 1.42 to 1.98, which is much lower than its
recommended value. Similarly, the safety factors obtained using ACI recommended
design strength vary from 1.29 to 1.94, which are again smaller than the recommended
value. In calculating the net concrete area of the columns cross-section in both Equation
(4.1) and (4.2), the area of the hole has already being deducted. However, the failure
loads of the columns with hole (embedded pipes) were less than the design load of them
based on the cods.
92
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1
Conclusions
The results and discussions can be summarized as follow:
i.
The load carrying capacity of the column is significantly reduced by positioning

the hole (drain pipe) inside the column.
ii.
The investigation shows that the factors of safety for the models with hole
obtained from the finite element analysis results vary from 1.42 to 1.98
(experimental work results vary from 1.09 to 1.82) according to BS 8110 code.
Based on ACI code evaluation, the similar factors vary from 1.29 to 1.94
(experimental work results vary from 1.12 to 1.70). In both cases, the obtained
values are lower than the recommended value of 2 to 3 by various codes of
practice.
93
iii.
The finite element modeling of the columns predict much higher strength for the
columns than experimental results, which might be due to the assumptions of
consistent and uniform material in the models, the assumption of perfect
verticality, perfect fixity assumption at the base of columns and etc.
iv.
According to huge reduction in the load carrying capacities of the columns with
hole (embedded pipe), it is recommended that, for the design purposes, the
strength of the columns should be taken as 50 to 75 percent of the values
obtained using Equations (4.1) or (4.2).
5.2
Recommendations
1) Further investigation is needed to study the effect of hole on the load carrying
capacity of slender column.
2) Since no information or guidelines are available in the codes of practice i.e. ACI
318, BS 8110 on this problem, therefore, further research has to be carried out to
get more appropriate result on the reduction in the load carrying capacities of
those columns with hole (embedded drain pipe) having another hole for
discharge the rain water using elbow part at ground level.
3) Further research is needed to be carried out to study the unbraced column with
hole using steel pipe.
94
REFERENCES
Mosley, W. H. and Bungey, J. H. and Hulse, R. Reinforced Concrete Design.

5th. ed. Bristol: J. W. Arrowsmith Ltd. 1999.
British Standards Institution. Testing Concrete, Part 121. London, BS 1881.

1983.
British Standards Institution. Structural Use of Concrete, Part 1: Code of

Practice for Design and Construction, Part 2: Code of Practice for Special
Circumstances. London, BS 8110. 1997.
Meyer, Christian. Design of Concrete Structures. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

1996.
Chandrupatla, Tirupathi R. and Belegundu, Ashok D. Introduction to Finite

Elements in Engineering. 3rd. ed. USA: Prentice Hall. 2002.
Moaveni, Saeed. Finite Element Analysis Theory and Application with ANSYS.
2th. ed. USA: Prentice Hall. 2003.
Kurowski P. M.
International. 2004.
Finite Element Analysis for Design Engineers. SAE
95
8
LUSAS Modeller. Theory Manual, Version 14.0. United Kingdom: Finite

Element Analysis Ltd. 2004.
Bakhteri, J., W. Omar and A. M. Makhtar. A Critical Review of the Reinforced

Concrete Columns Concealing Rain Water Pipes in Multistorey Buildings.
Journal of Civil Engineering. 2002. 15(2): 39-52.
10
Jahangir Bakhteri and Syed Ahmad Iskandar. Experimental Study of Reinforced

Concrete Columns Concealing Rain Water Pipes. Journal of Civil Engineering.
2005. 43(B): 13-26.
11
Y. L. Mo, Y. K. Yeh, C. T. Cheng, C. Tsai and C. C. Kao. Seismic Performance

and Retrofit of Hollow Bridge Columns. Earthquake Engineering and
Engineering Seismology. 2001. 3(1): 59-66.
12
Claeson, Christina and Gylltoft, Kent. Slender High-strength Concrete Columns

Subjected to Eccentric Loading. Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE).
1998. 124(3): 233-240.
13
Claeson, Christina. Behaviour of Reinforced High-strength Concrete Columns.

B.Sc. Thesis. University of Technology, Gteborg, Sweden; 1995.
14
Mousavian, S. H. Experimental Study of Reinforced Concrete Columns with

Embedded Pipes. M.Sc. Thesis. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia; 2010.
15
American Concrete Institute. Building Code Requirements for Reinforced

Concrete. USA, ACI 318. 2008.
16
British Standard Institution. Part 2: Method for Specifying Concrete Mix.

London, BS 5328. 1997.
96
17
Iemura, H., Y. Takahashi, K. Tanaka and S. Maehori. Experimental Study on

Seismic Performance of RC High Piers with Hollow Section. Proceedings of
10th Japan Earthquake Engineering Symposium. Tokyo, Japan. 1998. 21052110.
18
Poston, R. W., T. E. Gilliam, Y. Yamamoto and J. E. Breen. Hollow Concrete

Bridge Pier Behavior. ACI Journal. November-December, 1985. 779-787.
19
Mander, J. B., M. J. N. Priestley and R. Park. Behavior of Ductile Hollow

Reinforced Concrete Columns. Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for
Earthquake Engineering. 1983. 97(7): 1969-1990.
20
Norrie, D. H. and De Vries G. An Introduction to Finite Element Analysis.

Academic Press, Inc. 1978.
21
Boukais, Said. A Three Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Damages

Reinforced Concrete Columns. M.Sc. Thesis. University of Dundee; 1989.
22
Mansur. M. A. and Kiang. Hwee. Tan. Concrete beam with opening: analysis &
design. Florida: CRC press LLc. 1999.
23
M. Nadim Hassun and Akthem Al-Manaseer. Structural Concrete / Theory and

Design. United States of America: John Wiley & Sons INC. 2008.
24
Arya, Chanakya. Design of Structural Elements. 2nd. ed. Oxford: Alden Press.
2001.
25
James G. MacGregor and James K. Wight. Reinforced concrete mechanics and

design. Upper Saddle River, NJ : Prentice Hall. 2009.

Poteau Avec Resrevation

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Poteau Avec Resrevation

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF REINFORCED CONCRETE COLUMN

WITH LONGITUDINAL HOLE

A project report submitted in partial fulfillment of the

Faculty of Civil Engineering

I am sincerely grateful to my supervisor, Assoc. Prof. Ir. Dr. Mohd Hanim

I would also like to express my deepest gratitude to Universiti Teknologi

Satu kajian menggunakan kaedah unsur terhingga telah dilakukan untuk

Kesimpulannya, hasil analisis menunjukkan penurunan yang ketara pada beban

Objective of the Study

Scopes of the Study

2.1.1 Stress-Strain Relation of Concrete

2.1.2 Elastic Modulus of Concrete

2.3.1 Affecting Factors on Choosing of

Reinforced Concrete Column

2.4.1 Types of Column and Failure Modes

2.4.2 Reinforced Concrete Column Capacity

2.4.4 Buckling of Column

Finite Element Method

2.5.1 Brief History

2.5.2 Definition of FEM

2.5.3 Advantages of FEM

2.5.4 Methods of Formulating FE Problems

2.5.5 Types of Finite Element

2.5.6 Basic Steps of Finite Element Analysis

2.5.7 Fundamental Requirements

2.5.9 Verification of Results

2.6.1 Characteristic of LUSAS Software

2.6.2 Analysis Procedure According to LUSAS

Studies Done Related to RC Column with Hole

2.8.1 A Critical Review of RC Columns and

2.8.2 Full Scale Test on Shear Strength and

2.8.3 Slender High Strength Concrete Columns

Finite Element Modeling

3.2.2 Finite Element Meshing

3.2.3 Material Properties

3.2.4 Boundary Condition

3.2.6 Nonlinear Analysis

3.3.1 Test Models

3.3.2 The Test Models Classification

3.3.3 Preparation of the Test Specimens

3.3.4 Instrumentation and Testing of Models

Flowchart of the Finite Element Analysis

ANALYSIS, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The Results of Finite Element Analysis

4.2.1 Vertical Stress-Strain Curves of Models

Reduction in Load Carrying Capacity of RC

Comparison of the Results

4.4.1 Design Strength Requirement of Columns

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Details of columns in group A, B and C

The specification and dimension of the column models

The specification and dimension of the column models

The column models type

Maximum vertical stress and strain in the all columns

The percentages of reduction in load carrying capacity of

Comparison of the maximum vertical compressive stress

Comparison of safety factors from experimental study

Comparison of factor of safety from experimental study

Hole (rain water pipe) is positioned inside columns

Typical column with hole (embedded drain pipe)

Stress-strain curve of concrete

Static modulus of concrete

Typical stress-strain curve for reinforcing steel

Simplified stress-strain curve for reinforcing steel