~1

B. D. Scott completed his BE and ME degrees in civil engineering at the

Universíty of Canterbury, New Zealand. This paper describes the experimental
research work conducted for his ME in 1980-81. He is currently in the United
16mm d1a
Kingdom gaining further experience in structural design. 16mm d1a---J!F"""*"'"""'tt ,...__
51.f)pOrt
-
1

Supparr
bar
bar

R. Psrk, FACl, is professor and head of the civil engineering department at ;;omm d1a.
24mm dlO
the University of Canterbury, New Zealand. His research interests include the o
~ o
inelastic behavior of reinforced and prestressed concrete beams, columns,
frames, and slabs, and earthquake engineering. He is a member of joint ACl-
ASCE Committees 352, Joints and Connections in Monolithic Concrete Struc-
10 or t:2mm dio.

Hoopsrts -lfl=,J==;!!·~=='1:t I
'º or 12mm dio
Hoopsl!ts_
•¡ . ~

tures; 428, Inelastic Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Structures; 441, Rein- ~

forced Concrete Columns; and of the ACI lnternational Activities Committee. Table 1 shows
¡
o
hoop spacmg o

M. J. N. Priestley is a reader in civil engineering at the University of Canter- "'

bury, New Zealand, and was formerly in charge of the Structural Research Twelvl! 20mm d1a
E1gh1 24 mm. día
Laboratory of the New Zealand Ministry of Works and Development. His Grad• 380 Gradl! 2 75 ar 380
-~-~~
research interests include earthquake resistance of bridges, masonry sttuctures
1O or 12mm d1a
and building frames, and thermal effects in concrete bridges and water-retain- Gradl! 275
ing structures. Hoopsrts Hoopsers

draft New Zealand concrete design code requirements'

for special transverse reinforcement for seismic design
will result in available displacement ductility factors of
NOTE. Al/ d1mens1ons in mm
at least eight in columns. ( lmm : 0.0394 in)

This paper presents the results of an investigation in

Fig. 1 - Typical detaíls oí test units
which a range of nearly full-size specimens were tested
under conditions that simulated seismic conditions.
Twenty-five concrete units containing either 8 or 12
longitudinal steel bars and different arrangements of
square or octagonal steel hoops were subjected to
either concentric or eccentric loading to failure at dif-
ferent strain rates. Full details of the tests may be seen
reported elsewhere. 10

DETAILS OF TEST UNITS

The test units had a section that was 450 mm (17. 7
in.) square and 1200 mm (47.2 in.) high. Twenty-five
units were tested. 8-bar column
Two distributions of longitudinal reinforcement,
each representative of current practice, were used. The
arrangement of longitudinal bars in the section is of
interest because it has been shown that the presence of
well-tied intermediate column bars between the comer
bars significantly improves the confinement of the con-
crete. •.s The draft New Zealand concrete design code'
requires that in the potential plastíc hinge regions of
columns in seismic design, the center-to-center spacing
of longitudinal bars across the section shall not exceed
one-third of the section dimension in that direction or
200 mm (7. 9 in.), w hichever is larger. The two arrange-
ments of longitudinal reinforcement used in the tests
are shown in Fig. 1 and 2. The arrangements consisted
of either 8 24 mm (0.94 in.) diameter bars giving e, =
0.0186 from Grade 380 steel (specified f, = 55 ksi), or 12-bar column
12 20 mm (O. 79 in.) diameter bars giving e, = O. O179 Fig. 2 - Typical reinforcement cages
from Grade 275 or 380 steel (specified f, = 40 or 55
ksi). design code' for a range of axial load levels. The quan-
The arrangements of transverse hoop reinforcement tities also varied between about 60 and 140 percent of
used are also shown in Fig. 1 and 2. These arrange- those required by the UBC 11 provisions. Ali transverse
ments are typical for 8-bar and 12-bar columns. The reinforcement was from plain round bars of Grade 275
quantities of transverse reinforcement were varied by steel (specified f, = 40 ksi). The hoop bars were an-
adjusting the spacing of the hoop sets and are typical chored normally by a 135 deg bend around a longi-
of those required by the draft New Zealand concrete tudinal bar plus an extension beyond the bend of at
14 ACI JOURNAL / January-February 1982