THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF TALL BUILDINGS

Struct. Design Tall Build. 7, 251260 (1998)

SEISMIC RESISTANCE OF STEEL CONFINED REINFORCED

CONCRETE (SCRC) COLUMNS
RIYAD S. ABOUTAHA*, AND RAFAEL MACHADO
Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Atlanta, GA 30332-0355, U.S.A

SUMMARY
Tall building columns are subjected to high axial loads particularly at lower levels. In zones of high seismicity,
these columns have to maintain their axial load carrying capacity during an earthquake. Conventional ordinary
reinforced concrete, structural steel and concrete filled tube columns are not as effective as steel confined concrete
columns. Steel tubed concrete columns are more ductile and have higher lateral resistance even under high axial
compressive loads. In this paper, the seismic behavior of steel confined reinforced concrete columns is presented.
Results were compared with those of ordinary reinforced concrete columns. The test results suggest that steel
confined reinforced concrete columns are more ductile and have better seismic performance than ordinary
reinforced concrete columns. 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

1. INTRODUCTION
This paper presents a new type of structural concrete column for tall concrete buildings in zones of
high seismicity. The following sections present a background and an overview of conventional
columns used in tall buildings, as well as, the advantages of the new steel confined reinforced concrete
(SCRC) columns.
1.1. Ordinary reinforced concrete columns
It is widely recognized that ductility of structural members and systems is one of the most important
factors in the seismic design of structures. The current design codes for reinforced concrete structures
assure adequate ductility by the use of a sufficient amount of transverse reinforcement and well
distributed longitudinal reinforcement. The ordinary reinforcing bars provide good confinement to the
concrete. However, the ordinary reinforcing bars do not confine the concrete cover which may result in
spalling of the cover during an earthquake. Spalling of the concrete cover is usually associated with a
decrease in bonding between the steel bars and the surrounding concrete, and degradation of the
columns stiffness. In addition, a cross tie that is anchored with a 90-degree hook tends to lose its

* Correspondence to: Riyad S. Aboutaha, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, George Institute of
Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332-0355, U.S.A. E-mail: riyad.aboutaha@ce.gatech.edu

Assistant Professor

Graduate Research Assistant

Contract/grant sponsor: The Portland Cement Association

CCC 10628002/98/03025110 $17.50

1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received July 1997

Revised August 1997

252

R. S. ABOUTAHA AND R. MACHADO

Figure 1. Stresses in: (a) SCRC column, axial load carried by the concrete core only; and (b) CFT column, axial
load carried by the steel tube and the concrete core

effectiveness in bracing longitudinal bars after spalling of the concrete cover, which may result in
buckling of the longitudinal bars during an earthquake.
1.2. High strength concrete columns
The use of high strength concrete (HSC) in columns has several advantages over normal strength
concrete: increased strength and stiffness, reduced construction time, reduced splice and anchorage
length, and more consistent capacity design by ensuring-strong oblique column-weak beam behavior.
However, due to the brittleness of HSC there is a major concern over the ductility of HSC columns
subjected to seismic forces. Previous experimental research conducted on unconfined concrete
specimens have shown that high strength concrete is more brittle than normal strength concrete (ACI
Committee 363,1 1984). Martinez et al.2 (1984) experimentally investigated the effect of spiral
confining steel on high strength concrete. A total of 94 circular columns were tested. It was concluded
that lower strength concrete columns showed higher plastic deformation without significant decrease
in load carrying capacity after reaching the peak load. On the other hand, high strength concrete
columns showed a rapid decrease in load carrying capacity.
Although the use of HSC frame may have some advantages over normal strength concrete frames,
such as an increase in strength and stiffness, its use as a primary lateral force resisting system has been
limited in zones of high seismicity due to the brittleness of HSC, which may result in low overall
ductility in building frames. Ductility of HSC columns can be significantly improved by encasing the
whole concrete section in a steel shell, which can provide shear resistance, and improve the ductility of
the concrete section. The steel shell prevents spalling of the concrete cover, buckling of the
longitudinal bars and shear failure. This paper presents SCRC structural columns for tall building in
zones of high seismicity.
1.3. Concrete filled tubed columns
Conventional concrete filled tube (CFT) columns may be a good alternative to ordinary reinforced
concrete (ORC) and structural steel (SS) columns. CFT columns may result in a more efficient system
for resisting seismic forces than ORC columns. Steel tube confines the whole concrete section
1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Struct. Design Tall Build. 7, 251260 (1998)

SCRC COLUMNS SEISMIC RESISTANCE

253

including the concrete cover; consequently, CFT columns may exhibit better ductility than ORC
columns during an earthquake. The steel tube provides shear resistance, adequate confinement and
increase in axial load carrying capacity. However, when the steel tube is axially loaded in compression
and laterally loaded in tension, it will be in a state of biaxial stress which, as St. Venants criterion
shows, will reduce the effective yield stress in the lateral direction (Boresi and Sidebottom,3 1985).
The maximum strain criterion (often called St. Venants criterion) states that inelastic action begins
when the maximum strain reaches a value equal to the yield strain under a uniaxial state of stress.
Figure 1 shows two blocks of a steel tube under uniaxial (Figure 1(a)) and biaxial (Figure 1(b)) states
of stress. According to St. Venants criterion, the inelastic action begins in the block under the uniaxial
state of stress when the stress fl becomes equal to Fy since ey = Fy/E. However, the inelastic action
begins in the block under a biaxial state of stress at strain el = (fl/E)  (faE). Therefore, under the state
of biaxial stress, the inelastic action begins at a stress less than Fy.
The steel tube loses some of its effectiveness in confining concrete section when it is axially loaded
in compression. The experimental results of Gardner and Jacobson4 (1967) showed that loading both
the concrete core and the steel tube did not increase the failure load to much above that obtained from
loading the concrete core alone. When the steel tube and the concrete core were both loaded, the steel
tube carried some direct axial load, but the concrete carried less axial load than if only the concrete
core was loaded, because the steel tube (which was axially loaded in this case) was less effective in
confining the concrete core than if it was not axially loaded. Therefore, if the confinement of the
column section and the ductility of the member are among the most important design factors, then it is
recommended only the concrete core be loaded.

1.4. Steel jacketed/tubed columns

Steel jackets have been investigated for seismic strengthening of non-ductile reinforced concrete
members. Aboutaha5 (1994) and Aboutaha et al.6 (1996) investigated the use of rectangular steel
jackets for seismic strengthening of non-ductile rectangular reinforced concrete columns. Similarly,
Priestley et al7 (1994) investigated the use of circular and elliptical steel jackets. Experimental
research showed that, compared with lightly reinforced concrete columns, concrete columns confined
by steel jackets showed improved ductility and higher energy dissipation. The California Department
of Transportation strengthened many bridge piers by the use of steel jackets that were terminated 10@
1.5@ from the column ends. These bridge piers performed well during the Northridge earthquake.
The Tomii et al.8 (1987) investigated the seismic resistance of low strength steel tubed short
columns. The column section was 7@  7@ (175 mm  175mm), and the columns height was 14@
(350 mm). The shear span to depth ratio was 10. The steel tube was 1/4@ (6 mm) thick, and was
terminated 1/4@ (5 mm) from the column end. The columns were tested under cyclic lateral loads and
constant axial loads. It was concluded that steel tubes are very effective in preventing shear failure in
short columns where shear dominates the behavior.

1.5. Tall building columns

Wakabayashi and Minami9 (1976) investigated the seismic response of ordinary reinforced concrete
columns subjected to different levels of constant axial load and lateral cyclic displacements. Test
results suggested that concrete members exhibit lower ductility under higher axial loads, as shown in
Figure 2. As is well known, ductility is among the most important structural design factors in zones of
high seismicity. In tall buildings, columns are subjected to high axial loads, particularly at lower
levels, which raises the issue of axial load versus ductility.
1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Struct. Design Tall Build. 7, 251260 (1998)

254

R. S. ABOUTAHA AND R. MACHADO

Figure 2. Hysteretic response of concrete columns under axial load and cyclic load
(Wakabayashi and Minami 1976)

1.6. Steel confined reinforced concrete (SCRC) columns

Figure 3 shows an elevation view between two floors of a reinforced concrete frame where the
columns are constructed of SCRC columns. As shown in Figure 3 the steel tube is extended over the
full height of the column but terminated 10@ (25 mm) from both ends of the column, so no axial loads
transfer through the steel tube. This will maximize the effectiveness of the steel tube in confining the
concrete column. Because the steel tube is terminated 10@ (25 mm) from the column ends, no steel
base nor end plates are required for SCRC columns, which helps reduce the cost of the column. Since
the steel tube resists shear forces, the amount of the ordinary transverse reinforcement can be reduced
accordingly. Consequently, this will result in reduced fabrication and installation cost of the transverse
ties. As Aboutahas research5 (1994) showed, the steel jackets were very effective in confining the 90
degree hooks of the transverse reinforcement, which allowed the development of the yield strength of
the ties. Similarly, 90 degree hooks can be used for all the transverse ties of the new SCRC columns,
which will make tie installation easier and reduce the required installation time. The steel tube will
serve as formwork for the column, so column formwork cost would be eliminated during construction.
The longitudinal reinforcing bars are identical to those of an ORC column. As shown in Figure 3 the

Figure 3. Elevation view between two floors of SCRC structural frame

1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Struct. Design Tall Build. 7, 251260 (1998)

255

SCRC COLUMNS SEISMIC RESISTANCE

Figure 4. Column SCRC2 in the test frame

longitudinal reinforcement of SCRC column is continuous through the beamcolumn joint. Tensile
axial loads in the SCRC column are resisted only by the ordinary reinforcing bars. The steel tube is not
intended to resist any tensile or compressive axial loads.
2. ADVANTAGES OF SCRC COLUMNS
Steel confined reinforced concrete column offers several advantages over other structural columns.
Compared to ordinary reinforced concrete (ORC) columns, SCRC columns offer the following
advantages:
(1) SCRC columns require no formwork which reduces cost;
(2) the whole concrete section of the SCRC column is confined by the steel tube, which
considerably improves the required ductility of the concrete section and member;
(3) shear forces are resisted by the steel tube and the ordinary transverse reinforcementas a result,
fewer ordinary ties are needed;
(4) SCRC columns require a smaller amount of ordinary transverse reinforcement, which results in
a less congested concrete column section; consequently, it is easier to achieve well compacted,
good quality concrete on construction sites;
(5) for concrete of the same quality and strength, the concrete of SCRC columns shows higher
1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Struct. Design Tall Build. 7, 251260 (1998)

256

R. S. ABOUTAHA AND R. MACHADO

Figure 5. Details of the test columns

useful concrete stress and ductility because the whole concrete section is confined by the steel
tube;
(6) SCRC allows the use of smaller size column due to the use of well confined concrete, which is
considered a very good advantage in the structural and architectural design of tall buildings.
(7) when combined with high strength concrete, it offers a very ductile column that has high axial
and lateral strengths.
SCRC columns offer several advantages over ordinary concrete filled tube (CFT) columns as
follows:
(1) no longitudinal axial loads are transferred through the steel tube, which maximizes the
effectiveness of the steel tube in confining the concrete core;
(2) the beamcolumn joint of the SCRC system is a well detailed ordinary reinforced concrete
beamcolumn joint. Therefore, all the uncertainties associated with the performance of steel
1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Struct. Design Tall Build. 7, 251260 (1998)

257

SCRC COLUMNS SEISMIC RESISTANCE

Figure 6. The envelopes of the cyclic response of the test columns

connections are avoided. This is of particular importance after the poor performance of steel
connections during the Northridge earthquake Engelhardt and Husain,10 1993; Engelhardt et
al.,11,12 1995; EERI,13 (1994);
(3) the costly base and end plates of the CFT columns are eliminated,
(4) the slenderness ratio of the SCRC columns is not as critical as that of CFT columns;
(5) the possibility of buckling of the steel tube is virtually eliminated because the SCRC steel tube
carries no axial compressive loads.
SCRC columns offer several advantages over the structural steel (SS) columns as follows:
(1) local buckling of the steel section is eliminated because the steel tube carries no axial
compressive loads;
(2) all the uncertainties, such as through thickness properties of steel, welding procedure, weld
toughness, and joint detail, that are associated with the performance of the steel connections are
avoided.
Although concrete shrinkage may be considered a possible problem in concrete filled tube systems,
it is not of major concern in SCRC columns because only the concrete will be axially loaded in
compression. Compressive axial loads due to the own weight of the structure (concrete dead load) will
produce lateral expansion that may overcome concrete shrinkage.
This paper presents the results of experimental research into the seismic behavior of steel tubed
reinforced concrete columns. A total of twelve columns were investigated. The columns were divided
into two groups of six having concrete strength of 50 and 120 ksi. In this paper, the response of six
columns having 50 ksi concrete strength are reported: three ordinary reinforced concrete columns
detailed according to the current ACI 318-95 Code (ACI Committee 318) and three steel tubed
reinforced concrete columns. The principal variable was the amount of axial compressive load.
1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Struct. Design Tall Build. 7, 251260 (1998)

258

R. S. ABOUTAHA AND R. MACHADO

Figure 7. Hysteretic response of ORC2 and SCRC2 columns, fc = 5.0 ksi, P/Ag.fc = 0.25

Based on the results of these tests, SCRC columns exhibit higher lateral strength and more reliable
ductility and energy dissipation than ordinary reinforced concrete columns, particularly when
subjected to high axial loads.
3. TEST PROGRAM
Figure 4 shows a photograph of an SCRC column in the test frame. The test column was a cantilever
type specimen, free at the top and fixed at the bottom, representing half a column in a real building
frame. A total of six columns were tested, three (ORC) columns detailed according to the current ACI
318-95 Code, 14 and three SCRC columns. The axial load was the major variable in these tests. Three
different levels of axial load were applied, zero axial load, 025Agfc', and 036Agfc'. Every pair of
columns (one ORC and one SCRC) was subjected to the same level of axial load. All columns were
subjected to cyclic lateral force at the tip of the cantilever. Lateral loads were increased in 10 kip
increments until significant inelastic displacement was recorded. Lateral displacements were then
increased in increments corresponding to a 05% drift ratio.
Figure 5 shows the details of the test columns. All columns were 12@  20@ in cross section. They
1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Struct. Design Tall Build. 7, 251260 (1998)

SCRC COLUMNS SEISMIC RESISTANCE

259

were reinforced with 8 # 8 Gr. 60 longitudinal reinforcing bars. Transversely, ORC columns were
reinforced with #3 Gr. 60 periphery and cross ties spaced at 30@ in the potential plastic hinge region
and spaced at 60@ outside that region. On the other hand, SCRC columns were transversely reinforced
with #3 periphery ties spaced at 60@ and steel tube. The steel tube was 5/16@ thick made of A618 steel.
4. TEST RESULTS
Ordinary reinforced concrete columns showed reasonable lateral strength and ductility. Column
ORC1, with zero axial load, exhibited very good ductility. Flexural cracks formed over the full height
of the column. At increased loading, some of the flexural cracks turned into flexural-shear cracks.
After the development of the yield flexural capacity, and formation of a plastic hinge at the base of the
column, the column failed in shear by fracture of the second periphery tie from the bottom of the
column. On the other hand, column SCRC1, with zero axial load, exhibited very similar overall
response. Figure 6(a) shows the envelopes of the cyclic response of columns ORC1 and SCRC1. The
results for these two columns suggest that, when the axial compressive load is very small, there is no
advantage to using a steel tube over an ordinary reinforced concrete column (without a steel tube). The
peak applied lateral load for columns ORC1 and SCRC1 were 55 kips and 57 kips, respectively. The
difference was insignificant.
Columns OR2 and SCRC2 were subjected to a constant axial compressive load corresponding to
025Agfc', and cyclic lateral forces. Column ORC2 exhibited a cracking pattern similar to those formed
on column ORC1 with one exception, vertical cracks formed along the longitudinal bars. Those cracks
were very much affected by the high shear forces and the cyclic lateral displacements, because several
diagonal cracks formed along the vertical cracks. The peak lateral load of column ORC2 was 72 kips,
17 kips higher than that of column ORC1. However, column ORC2 exhibited lower ductility than
column ORC1. Column SCRC2 exhibited very high ductility, large energy dissipation, and a lateral
strength of 86 kips. Unlike column ORC2, the ductility of column SCRC2 did not deteriorate due to the
presence of the axial compressive load. Figure 7 shows the cyclic response of columns ORC2 and
SCRC2.
Column ORC3 and SCRC3 were subjected to a constant axial compressive load corresponding to
036Agfc', and cyclic lateral forces. The ductility of column ORC3 deteriorated rapidly after the
development of the yield flexural capacity. On the other hand, column SCRC3 exhibited a superb
performance compared with that of column ORC3. The peak lateral loads of column ORC3 and
SCRC3 were 74 and 94, respectively. Figure 6(c) shows the envelopes of the cyclic response of
columns ORC3 and SCRC3.
5. CONCLUSIONS
A total of six columns were investigated to evaluate their seismic resistance under different levels of
constant axial load. Three ORC and three SCRC columns were tested. Test results suggest that steel
confined columns exhibit better seismic response than ordinary reinforced concrete columns,
particularly when subjected to high axial compressive loads. Thus, SCRC columns are more effective
than ORC columns for tall concrete buildings in zones of high seismicity.
6. NOTATION
E = Modulus of elasticity (MPa)
Fy = Yield strength (MPa)
fl = Lateral stress in the steel tube (MPa)
fa = Axial stress in steel tube (MPa)
1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Struct. Design Tall Build. 7, 251260 (1998)

260

R. S. ABOUTAHA AND R. MACHADO

el = Lateral strain in the steel tube

ey = Yield strain of the steel tube
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors greatly appreciate the financial support provided by The Portland Cement Association
(PCA 1995 Fellowship). They also thank Thomas Concrete of Georgia for donating the concrete used
in this research.
REFERENCES

1. ACI Committee 363, State-of-the-art report on high-strength concrete, ACI Journal Proceedings, 81(4),
364411 (July-August 1984).
2. S. Martnez, A. H. Nilson and F. O. Slate, Spirally reinforced high-strength concrete columns, ACI Journal
Proceedings, 81(5), 431442, (SeptemberOctober 1984).
3. A. P. Boresi and O. M. Sidebottom, Advanced Mechanics of Materials, 4th edn., Wiley, New York, 1985, p.
763.
4. N. J. Gardner and E. R. Jacobson, Structural behavior of concrete filled steel tubes, J. American Concrete
Institute, Title No. 6438, Detroit, Michigan, pp. 404413, (July 1967).
5. R. S. Aboutaha, Seismic Retrofit of Non-Ductile Reinforced Concrete Columns Using Rectangular Steel
Jackets, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas at Austin, December, 1994, p. 373.
6. R. S. Aboutaha, M. D. Engelhardt, J. O. Jirsa and M. E. Kreger, Retrofit of concrete columns with inadequate
lap splices by the use of rectangular steel jackets, Earthquake Spectra, November 1996, EERI, California.
7. M. J. Priestley, F. Seible, Y. Xiao and R. Verma, Steel jacket retrofitting of reinforced concrete bridge
columns for enhanced shear strengthPart 1: Theoretical considerations and test design, J. American
Concrete Institute, 91(4), Detroit, Michigan, 394405 (JulyAugust 1994).
8. M. Tomii, K. Sakino and Y. Xiao, Ultimate moment of reinforced concrete short columns confined in steel
tube, Pacific Conf. on Earthquake Engineering, New Zealand, 58 August 1987.
9. M. Wakabayashi and K. Minami, Experimental studies on hysteretic characteristics of steel reinforced
concrete columns and frames, Proc. Int. Symp. on Earthquake Structural Engineering, University of
MissouriRolla, St. Louis, 1976.
10. M. D. Engelhardt and A. S. Husain, Cyclic-loading performance of welded flange-bolted web connections.
J. Struct. Eng., ASCE, 119(12), 35373550 (1993).
11. M. D. Engelhardt, T. A. Sabol and R. S. Aboutaha, Testing of steel frame joints, Proc. 1995 ASCE Structures
Congress, 25 April 1995, Boston, pp. 14111414.
12. M. D. Engelhardt, T. A. Sabol, R. S. Aboutaha and K. H. Frank, An overview of the AISC Northridge
moment connection test program, Proc. 1995 National Steel Construction Conf., American Institute of Steel
Construction, 1719 May 1995, San Antonio, Texas.
13. EERI (Earthquake Engineering Research Institute), Northridge, January 17, 1994Preliminary Reconnaissance Report, Technical Editor J. F. Hall, No. 94-01, Oakland, California, 1994, p. 104.
14. ACI Committee 318, Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary, ACI 318-95/95R,
American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills; MI 48333.

1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Struct. Design Tall Build. 7, 251260 (1998)