Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 15

Numerical Simulation of Hybrid FRP-Concrete-Steel

Double-Skin Tubular Columns under


Close-Range Blast Loading
Weiqiang Wang, A.M.ASCE 1; Chengqing Wu 2; and Jun Li 3
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/16/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract: Hybrid fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP)-concrete-steel double-skin tubular columns (DSTCs) are a new form of composite col-
umns that consist of an outer FRP tube and an inner steel tube, with the space between them filled with concrete. Although many studies have
been conducted on the hybrid DSTCs, no studies have been conducted on their behavior under blast loading. This study presents the results of
a numerical study on the behavior of hybrid DSTCs under close-in blast loading. Numerical models of hybrid DSTCs are developed using
finite-element code LS-DYNA, and the reliability of the developed models are validated with available testing results. With the validated
models, numerical simulations are carried out to investigate the structural responses of hybrid DSTCs under blast loading. The simulation
results indicate that the hybrid DSTCs behave in a ductile manner under blast loading. The outer FRP tube can effectively provide confine-
ment to the infilled concrete, and the inner steel tube plays a key role in resisting the blast loading. Detailed parametric analyses are conducted
to investigate the influences of different parameters on the blast behavior of hybrid DSTCs. The blast resistance capacities of the hybrid
DSTCs, concrete-filled steel tubes (CFSTs), and concrete-filled double-skin steel tubes (CFDSTs) are compared and discussed based on the
simulation results. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000871. © 2018 American Society of Civil Engineers.
Author keywords: Fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) tube; Steel tube; Concrete; Double-skin tubular columns (DSTCs); Blast; Numerical
simulation.

Introduction that the hybrid DSTCs can exhibit superior performance when sub-
jected to different loading conditions, which makes hybrid DSTCs
Because of their properties of high strength and stiffness:weight a competitive substitution for traditional RC columns. Although
ratio as well as superior corrosion resistance, the use of fiber- many studies have been conducted on the hybrid DSTCs, few stud-
reinforced polymer (FRP) composites as external confinement for ies have been conducted on their behavior under impact or blast
concrete columns has received a great deal of attention in the last loading (Abdelkarim and ElGawady 2016; Wang et al. 2015a).
two decades. One popular application of FRP composites is to Wang et al. (2015a) and Abdelkarim and ElGawady (2016) carried
retrofit or strengthen existing concrete columns (ACI 2008b). More out experimental and numerical studies on the behavior of hybrid
recently, application of FRP composites in newly constructed con- DSTCs under lateral impact loading. The results indicated that the
crete columns, such as concrete-filled FRP tubes (CFFTs) and hy- hybrid DSTCs behave in a very ductile manner and have a long
brid FRP-concrete-steel double-skin tubular columns (DSTCs), has stabilized stage of impact force under lateral impact loading.
been of interest to some researchers (Fam and Rizkalla 2001; Hadi The main impact resistance of the hybrid DSTCs is provided by
et al. 2015; Mirmiran and Shahawy 1996; Teng et al. 2007; Wang the inner steel tube, whereas the FRP tube has only a moderate
et al. 2016, 2017; Yu and Teng 2011). influence on the lateral residual deflection of hybrid DSTCs. In
Hybrid DSTCs consist of an outer FRP tube and an inner steel addition, the influence of FRP tube thickness on the duration of
tube, with the space between them filled with concrete. Since hy- impact force is moderate. Until now, no studies have been con-
brid DSTCs were proposed by Teng et al. (2007), a number of stud- ducted on the behavior of hybrid DSTCs under blast loading.
ies have been conducted to investigate their compressive, flexural, A number of studies have investigated the blast behavior of
cyclic, and seismic behaviors (Han et al. 2010; Ozbakkaloglu and concrete-filled double-skin steel tubes (CFDSTs) in recent years
Idris 2014; Teng et al. 2007; Yu et al. 2006). These studies indicated (Zhang et al. 2015a, b, 2016a, b). Zhang et al. (2016a) experimen-
tally and numerically investigated the blast behavior of CFDSTs,
1
Research Associate, Center for Built Infrastructure Research, School and found that CFDSTs exhibit excellent performance under blast
of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Technology Sydney, loading. The CFDSTs exhibit similar blast behavior as concrete-
Sydney, NSW 2007, Australia. Email: Weiqiang.Wang@uts.edu.au filled steel tubes (CFSTs) if the hollowness ratio of CFDSTs is
2
Professor, Center for Built Infrastructure Research, School of Civil and no more than 0.5. Moreover, by replacing normal-strength concrete
Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW with ultrahigh performance concrete, the blast behavior of CFDSTs
2007, Australia (corresponding author). Email: Chengqing.Wu@uts.edu.au can be remarkably improved by mitigating the concrete tensile
3
Lecturer, Center for Built Infrastructure Research, School of Civil and cracking and reducing the residual deflection. Zhang et al. (2015a)
Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW
investigated the residual axial load–carrying capacity of CFDSTs
2007, Australia. Email: Jun.Li-2@uts.edu.au
Note. This manuscript was submitted on July 14, 2017; approved on after blast loading.
April 18, 2018; published online on July 17, 2018. Discussion period Studies were also conducted on the blast behavior of RC columns
open until December 17, 2018; separate discussions must be submitted strengthened with FRP composites (Crawford 2013; Crawford et al.
for individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Composites 1997; Jacques et al. 2015; Malvar et al. 2007; Mutalib and
for Construction, © ASCE, ISSN 1090-0268. Hao 2011; Rodriguez-Nikl et al. 2012). The RC columns can be

© ASCE 04018036-1 J. Compos. Constr.

J. Compos. Constr., 2018, 22(5): 04018036


strengthened using FRP composites with fibers in both the lon-  1.026α
fc ε̇ s

gitudinal and transverse directions. Transverse FRP wrapping is pro- ¼ for ε̇s ≤ 30 s−1 ð1Þ
f cs ε̇s
vided to increase the shear resistance and deformation capacity,
whereas the longitudinal FRP strip is provided to enhance the flexu-  1=3
fc ε̇
ral resistance capacity. These studies suggested that FRP strengthen- ¼ γs for ε̇s > 30 s−1 ð2Þ
ing is an effective way of improving RC column blast performance f cs ε̇s
by preventing shear failure (Crawford 2013). However, due to the
complexity of blast behavior, most of these studies only provided where fc = dynamic compressive strength at ε̇; f cs = static com-
qualitative rather than quantitative results. Moreover, many studies pressive strength at ε̇s ; ε̇ = strain rate in the range 30 × 10−6 to
lacked essential information (e.g., charge weights and standoff dis- 300 s−1 ; ε̇s = static strain rate of 30 × 10−6 ; log γ s ¼ 6.156α − 2;
α ¼ 1=ð5 þ 9f cs =f co Þ; and f co ¼ 10 MPa.
tances), which prevented a better understanding of the blast resis-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/16/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Malvar and Crawford (1998) developed the formulation used for


tance mechanism of FRP-strengthened RC columns (Buchan and
concrete DIF in tension, which was a modification of the CEB
Chen 2007). More recently, the blast behavior of concrete-filled FRP
Code (Béton 1993) and is given by
tubes has been investigated (Echevarria et al. 2016; Qasrawi et al.
2015, 2016). It was found that the CFFT specimens performed  δ
ft ε̇
significantly better than the conventional RC specimens, showing ¼ for ε̇s ≤ 1 s−1 ð3Þ
fts ε̇s
greater robustness with decreased localized damage and reduced
residual deflection.  1=3
ft ε̇
This study investigated the behavior of hybrid DSTCs under ¼β for ε̇s > 1 s−1 ð4Þ
close-in blast loading by undertaking a wide range of numerical sim- fts ε̇s
ulations using finite-element code LS-DYNA. Numerical models
of the hybrid DSTCs were developed and validated by comparing where ft = dynamic tensile strength at ε̇; f ts = static tensile strength
the simulation results with available testing results. The structural at ε̇s ; ε̇ = strain rate in the range 10−6 –160 s−1 ; ε̇s = static
responses of the hybrid DSTCs under blast loading, such as midspan strain rate of 10−6 ; log β ¼ 6δ − 2; δ ¼ 1=ð1 þ 8f cs =fco Þ; and
deflection-time history and concrete effective plastic strain, were fco ¼ 10 MPa.
analyzed. Detailed parametric analyses were carried out to investi-
gate the influence of different parameters on the behavior of hybrid Steel Tube Material Model
DSTCs under blast loading.
The MAT_PLASTIC_KINEMATIC (MAT_003) model was used
to simulate the behavior of steel tube. The DIF for the steel tube
was calculated by the Cowper and Symonds model (Hallquist
Finite-Element Modeling
2007), which multiplies the yield stress by a factor given by
Finite-element code LS-DYNA was used to carry out the numerical  1=P
ε̇
simulations. The infilled concrete and the inner steel tube were DIF of steel ¼ 1 þ ð5Þ
modeled using eight-node solid hexahedron elements with a single- C
point integration algorithm. The FRP tube was modeled using the
where ε̇ = strain rate of steel. As suggested by Deng and Tuan
Belytschko-Tsay shell element. The AUTOMATIC_SURFACE_to_
(2013), C ¼ 40.4 s−1 and P ¼ 5.
SURFACE card was activated to simulate the interaction between
the inner steel tube and the infilled concrete and between the outer
FRP tube and the infilled concrete (Abdelkarim and ElGawady FRP Tube Material Model
2016). Viscous-type hourglass control was used during the blast
The MAT_ENHANCED_COMPOSITE_DAMAGE (MAT_054)
simulation to avoid element distortion and zero energy modes. The
model was used to model the FRP tube as an orthotropic material.
LS-DYNA/Implicit solver was used for the static analysis, whereas
This material model simulates the FRP tube by specifying the vari-
the LS-DYNA/Explicit solver was used for the dynamic analysis.
ous failure criteria in compression, tension, or shear using a Chang
matrix (Chang and Chang 1987). The criterion accounts for non-
Concrete Material Model linear shear stress–strain behavior and the poststress degradation.
Moreover, the strength enhancement of FRP composites under high
The Karagozian and Case (K&C) concrete model (MAT_72_ strain rate is observed to be insignificant compared to concrete
REL3) was adopted to model the static and dynamic behaviors and steel (Kimura et al. 2001; Mutalib and Hao 2011; Welsh and
of infilled concrete in the hybrid DSTCs. It is a plasticity-based Harding 1985). Therefore, this study did not consider the strain rate
model that accepts either user-specified inputs or internal parameter effect on the FRP tube.
generation. Previous studies suggested that the K&C concrete
model can provide a robust representation of the complex behaviors
of FRP-confined concrete under both static and dynamic loadings Model Validation
(Abdelkarim and ElGawady 2016; Youssf et al. 2015, 2014). The
loading strain rate plays an essential role in the structural response This section validates the developed numerical model against
and should be considered in the dynamic analysis. This study used the axial compression tests conducted by Teng et al. (2007) and
the dynamic increase factor (DIF) to represent the compressive and the four-point bending tests conducted by Idris and Ozbakkaloglu
tensile strength increases of concrete under blast loading. For con- (2014) to demonstrate the capability of the model to predict the
crete in compression, the European Committee for Concrete (CEB) compressive and flexural behaviors of hybrid DSTCs. Because no
code (Béton 1993), which has been widely used as an accurate rep- blast tests have been conducted on hybrid DSTCs, the model was
resentation of concrete compressive behavior, was adopted. The validated against the blast testing results by Qasrawi et al. (2015) to
DIF of the concrete compressive strength is given by predict the blast performance of concrete-filled FRP tubes.

© ASCE 04018036-2 J. Compos. Constr.

J. Compos. Constr., 2018, 22(5): 04018036


Axial Compression Tests (Teng et al. 2007) diameter and 305 mm in height. The inner diameter of the steel
tube was 76.3 mm and the thickness was 3.3 mm. The steel tube
Teng et al. (2007) tested hybrid DSTCs wrapped with one, two,
had a yield stress of 352.7 MPa with an elastic modulus of
and three layers of glass fiber–reinforced polymer (GFRP) under
207.3 GPa. They used normal-strength concrete with an average
axial compression. All hybrid DSTCs were 150 mm in outer
compressive strength of 39.6 MPa. The GFRP had an average ten-
sile strength of 1,825.5 MPa and an average Young’s modulus
of 80.1 GPa. The simulation in the present study used the
LS-DYNA/Implicit solver. Fig. 1 shows the numerical model
for the hybrid DSTCs under axial compression. In the numerical
model, the bottom plate was constrained with all degrees of free-
dom, whereas the top loading plate could only move along the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/16/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

longitudinal direction. The displacement was applied by the


BOUDARY_PRESCRIBED_MOTION_RIGID card. Forty meshes
were divided along the transverse direction, and 30 meshes were
divided along the longitudinal direction. The convergence test indi-
cated that by adopting this mesh size, accurate simulation results
with a reasonable calculation time can be obtained. Fig. 2 compares
the experimental and the predicted axial load-axial strain behavior.
In general, the simulation results matched the experimental results
well. The numerical model not only accurately predicted the
behavior of hybrid DSTCs with a strain hardening response (suf-
ficiently confined with two and three layers of GFRP), but it also
reasonably predicted the strain softening response (insufficiently
confined with one layer of GFRP). Therefore, the model can ac-
Fig. 1. Numerical model of hybrid DSTCs under axial compressive
curately characterize the concrete strength improvement due to
loading: (a) hybrid DSTCs; and (b) hybrid DSTCs with loading plates.
FRP confinement.

1000 1200

1000
800
Axial load (kN)

Axial load (kN)

800
600
600
400
400
DS1A DS2A
200 DS2B
DS1B 200
Prediction Prediction

0 0
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.02 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.02
(a) Axial strain (b) Axial strain

1400

1200

1000
Axial load (kN)

800

600

400
DS3A
DS3B
200 Prediction

0
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025
(c) Axial strain
Fig. 2. Comparisons of experimental and predicted axial load–axial strain behavior of hybrid DSTCs: (a) Specimens DS1A and DS1B;
(b) Specimens DS2 and DS2B; and (c) Specimens DS3A and DS3B.

© ASCE 04018036-3 J. Compos. Constr.

J. Compos. Constr., 2018, 22(5): 04018036


180

150

120

Load (kN)
90

60

30
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/16/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

DSTB-1
Prediction
0
0 20 40 60 80
(a) Mid-span Deflection (mm)
180

150

120

Load (kN)
90

60

30 DSTB-4
Prediction
0
0 20 40 60 80
Fig. 3. Numerical model of hybrid DSTCs under four-point bending (b) Mid-span Deflection (mm)
loading: (a) cross section of hybrid DSTCs under four-point bending;
and (b) setup of four-point bending test. Fig. 4. Comparisons of numerical results and test results: (a) DSTB-1;
and (b) DSTB-4.

Four Point Bending Tests


(Idris and Ozbakkaloglu 2014) compressive strength of standard concrete cylinders (ACI 2008a);
The model also was validated by comparison with previous tests (ACI 2008b). This difference is mainly attributed to the size effect,
conducted by Idris and Ozbakkaloglu (2014), who designed the shape, and concrete casting quality. As a result, an overestimation
hybrid DSTCs as a flexural beam with a 150 mm outer diameter. may be obtained by using the concrete strength obtained from the
The span measured between the center lines of the bottom supports standard concrete cylinders. Fig. 5 shows the failure mode of spec-
imens. Two major vertical cracks were formed right below or very
was 1,300 mm, and the length of the pure-bending region between
close to the two loading points, and one less-prominent vertical
the center lines of two loading heads was 300 mm. The inner steel
crack was observed within the pure-bending region of the specimen.
tube was 114.3 mm in diameter and 6.02 mm in thickness. The
The predicted failure mode matched well with the experimental fail-
yield stress and ultimate stress of the steel tube were 436 MPa and
ure mode in Idris and Ozbakkaloglu (2014). Therefore, the devel-
490 MPa, respectively. The concrete strength at the testing date was
oped model can accurately predict the flexural behavior of hybrid
92 MPa for Specimen DSTB-1 and 42 MPa for Specimen DSTB-4.
DSTCs.
The aramid FRP (AFRP) tube was manufactured by wrapping two
layers of AFRP sheet in the transverse direction using a manual
wet-layup process. Based on the flat FRP coupon tests, the AFRP Blast Test on Concrete-Filled FRP Tubes
sheet had an average tensile strength of 2,390 MPa and an average (Qasrawi et al. 2015)
Young’s modulus of 128.5 GPa. Fig. 3 shows the numerical model Because no blast tests were available on the hybrid DSTCs, the
for the hybrid DSTCs under four-point bending. model was validated by comparison with previous blast tests by
Fig. 4 compares the experimental and the predicted load– Qasrawi et al. (2015), who investigated the behavior of concrete-
midspan deflection behavior of the hybrid DSTCs. Good agreement filled FRP tubes under blast loading. The specimen was 220 mm
was achieved between the experimental and simulation results. The in outer diameter and 4,000 mm in length. The longitudinal steel
numerical model not only provided accurate predictions of the load reinforcement included four 10-mm longitudinal steel bars, and
carrying capacity, but it also accurately predicted the midspan de- 6-mm continuous steel spiral was used as transverse reinforcement
flection capacities of the specimens. The predicted load-carrying with 100 mm spiral pitch. Fig. 6 shows the numerical model for the
capacities of the specimens were slightly higher than those of ex- CFFTs under blast loading. The 10-mm steel bars had a yield
perimental results. One possible explanation for such behavior is strength of 430 MPa and an ultimate strength of 577 MPa with
that the concrete strength used for the simulation was obtained by an elastic modulus of 170 GPa. The 6-mm steel bars had a yield
testing standard concrete cylinders under axial compression. How- strength of 645 MPa and an ultimate strength of 713 MPa with an
ever, the in-place concrete strength is always lower than the elastic modulus of 194 GPa. The outer GFRP tube had a thickness

© ASCE 04018036-4 J. Compos. Constr.

J. Compos. Constr., 2018, 22(5): 04018036


Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/16/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 5. Failure mode for hybrid DSTCs under four-point bending.

Fig. 6. Numerical model for CFFTs under blast loading: (a) finite-element model; and (b) cross section of CFFTs.

of 5.5 mm. The tube had a transverse tensile strength of 128 MPa explosive was spherical and equivalent to 59.5 kg trinitrotoluene
with a transverse tensile modulus of 21.6 GPa. The longitudinal (TNT) (Qasrawi et al. 2015).
tensile strength was 48.3 MPa with a longitudinal tensile modulus A three-node beam element (BEAM_161) with 2 × 2 Gauss
of 10.1 GPa. The specimen was subjected to 50 kg C4 explosives quadrature integration was used to model the steel reinforcement.
with a standoff distance of 2.20 m above the midspan. The The numerical model included 80 meshes along the transverse

© ASCE 04018036-5 J. Compos. Constr.

J. Compos. Constr., 2018, 22(5): 04018036


200
Present study
Measured residual deflection
160
Mid-span Deflection (mm)
120

80
Residual deflection=31.2 mm
40

0
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/16/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

-40
0 30 60 90 120 150
Time (ms)

Fig. 7. Midspan deflection-time history.

direction and 500 meshes along the longitudinal direction, resulting


in a total of 318,500 elements and 303,733 nodes. The 318,500
elements included 4,000 beam elements, 274,500 solid elements,
and 40,000 shell elements, respectively. The element size was
8 mm. The convergence test results indicated that by adopting this
element size, the simulation results were quite close to those with Fig. 8. Cross section of hybrid DSTCs under blast loading.
smaller element sizes. Fig. 7 compares the experimental and the
predicted midspan deflection-time history of CFFTs under blast
loading. Because of damage to the data acquisition system during
Table 1. Properties of steel tube
the blast loading, Qasrawi et al. (2015) recorded only the residual
deflection. The predicted residual deflection was 32 mm, which Property Value
was close to the recorded residual deflection of 20 mm. Consider- Mass density (kg=m3 ) 7,830
ing many uncertainties during the blast loading, this prediction was Yield stress (MPa) 360
considered to be reliable for the representation of the blast perfor- Fracture strain 18%
mance of CFFTs. Elastic modulus (GPa) 200
In summary, the developed model can not only accurately pre- Poisson’s ratio 0.28
dict the compressive and flexural behaviors of hybrid DSTCs, but
can also predict the blast behavior of FRP tube–strengthened con-
crete columns. Therefore, it is believed that the developed model Table 2. Properties of FRP composites
can reliably predict the blast performance of hybrid DSTCs. Property Value
3
Mass density (kg=m ) 1,580
Numerical Simulation of Hybrid DSTCs under Blast Longitudinal modulus, E1 (GPa) 181
Loading Transverse modulus, E2 (GPa) 10.2
In-plane shear modulus, G21 (GPa) 7.2
Minor Poisson’s ratio, υ21 0.016
Model Description Longitudinal tensile strength (MPa) 2,700
Transverse tensile strength (MPa) 40
Based on the preceding model validations, this section develops In-plane shear strength (MPa) 71
the numerical model of hybrid DSTCs under blast loading. The Maximum strain for fiber tension 0.015
circular hybrid DSTCs had an outer diameter of 200 mm and an
inner diameter of 100 mm (Fig. 8). The clear span length of hybrid
DSTCs was 2,500 mm. As suggested by Teng et al. (2007), the FRP
tube in hybrid DSTCs is mainly for confinement purpose and The infilled concrete had a compressive strength of 40 MPa,
should not be used to carry axial load. Therefore, all the fibers in whereas other parameters were automatically generated. Tables 1
the FRP tube were aligned along the transverse direction to maxi- and 2 list the properties of the steel tube and the FRP tube, respec-
mize the confinement effect. This study manufactured the FRP tube tively. The properties of the FRP composites were obtained from
by wrapping three layers of carbon FRP (CFRP) sheet in the trans- software The Laminator version 3.7. The Laminator was developed
verse direction. The thickness of each layer of CFRP sheet was based on the classical laminate theory and provides an enriched
0.168 mm. The thickness of the inner steel tube was 5 mm. The FRP material database collected from the existing literature. The
interfaces between the inner steel tube and the infilled concrete and hybrid DSTCs were subjected to 10-kg-equivalent TNT explosives
between the FRP tube and the concrete were modeled using the with a standoff distance of 1.5 m, and the scaled distance was
AUTOMATIC_SURFACE_TO_SURFACE card (Abdelkarim and 0.70 m=kg1=3 . The explosives were placed right above the midspan
ElGawady 2016). Moreover, to ensure a higher fidelity of the boun- of the specimen. A built-in function CONWEP was used to sim-
dary constraints, a footing and a head were modeled. The outer ulate the blast loading in LS-DYNA. The CONWEP model is an
surface of the head and the footing were fully constrained to sim- implementation of the Kingery–Bulmash blast model (Kingery and
ulate the fixed–fixed support condition. Bulmash 1984). Karlos et al. (2016) determined that when the

© ASCE 04018036-6 J. Compos. Constr.

J. Compos. Constr., 2018, 22(5): 04018036


scaled distance is no less than 0.4 m=kg1=3 , the blast parameters and energy disequilibrium and cause incorrect predictions. Tang
predicted by Kingery–Bulmash model are accurate enough to be and Hao (2010) suggested using the principal tensile strain–based
used. The numerical model included 80 meshes along the transverse erosion criterion, and suggested a value of 0.1. Li et al. (2017) used
direction and 400 meshes along the longitudinal direction, resulting a principal tensile strain of 0.1 as the erosion criterion to simulate
in a total of 363,770 elements and 402,194 nodes. The 363,770 concrete fragmentation and obtained reliable predictions. There-
elements included 331,770 solid elements and 32,000 shell ele- fore, this study also used a principal tensile strain of 0.1 as the ero-
ments. The element size was 6.25 mm. The mesh size convergence sion criterion. Fig. 10 shows the midspan deflection-time histories
test results indicated that smaller elements result in very close results of specimens with or without outer FRP tube. With a scaled dis-
but greatly increase the calculation time. Therefore, this mesh size tance of 0.70 m=kg1=3 [Fig. 10(a)], application of FRP tube did not
was adopted for further analysis. affect the overall blast performance of hybrid DSTCs. This was
because all the fibers were aligned along the transverse direction
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/16/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

of the FRP tube, and the FRP tube cannot contribute to the increase
General Observations
of the flexural resistance capacity of the hybrid DSTCs and thus
Fig. 9 shows the damage evolution of the infilled concrete under cannot resist the blast loading directly. Nevertheless, with a scaled
blast loading. The number of the fringe indicates the damage level: distance of 0.55 m=kg1=3 [Fig. 10(b)], the existence of an outer
0 indicates no damage; 1 indicates initiation of softening behavior; FRP tube can influence the blast performance of hybrid DSTCs to
and 2 indicates total damage. Because of the low tensile strength of some extent. There might be two reasons for this: (1) although the
concrete, damage can easily occur at the rear surface of hybrid FRP tube cannot resist the blast loading directly, the confinement
DSTCs. With the continuous propagation of the blast-induced stress provided by the FRP tube can improve the behavior of the infilled
wave, damage began to occur at the front surface of hybrid DSTCs. concrete under blast loading; moreover, with the increase of blast
The concrete damage was fully developed at 15 ms and did not loading, the confinement effect becomes more significant, and thus
propagate afterward. Although the infilled concrete was seriously the performance improvement of the infilled concrete can be more
damaged and lost all shear strength during the blast loading, it could significant; and (2) with the increase of blast loading, the FRP tube
still contribute to the blast resistance by providing dynamic com- can prevent the possible occurrence of shear deformation. As a re-
pressive forces if it was under compression during the reciprocating sult, the FRP tube can prevent performance deterioration of hybrid
motion. DSTCs due to shear behavior. This explanation can be validated
To investigate the effect of the outer FRP tube on the blast using observations reported by Crawford et al. (1997) and Malvar
resistance of hybrid DSTCs, specimens without outer FRP tubes et al. (2007). In these studies, the nonstrengthened RC columns
were modeled and subjected to blast loading. Because no FRP tube experienced severe shear failure damage, and wrapping of FRP
was provided for the protection of infilled concrete, the infilled con- was very effective in improving the shear resistance capacity and
crete served as the cover concrete and was subject to fragmentation
and spall damage (Li and Hao 2014; Li et al. 2017). In order to
represent the fragmentation and spalling of infilled concrete under 40
With FRP tube
blast loading, the erosion algorithm was adopted. The erosion al- Without FRP tube
30
Mid-span Deflection (mm)

gorithm is not a material or physics-based property. However, it can


simulate concrete spalling phenomena and produce visualizations
which are representative of the actual events (Li and Hao 2014; 20
Li et al. 2017). The erosion criteria must be used with caution, be-
cause early and premature erosion of the elements can lead to mass 10

-10

-20
0 20 40 60 80
(a) Time (ms)

80
With FRP tube
Without FRP tube
Mid-span Deflection (mm)

60

40

20

-20
0 20 40 60 80
t=2.5 ms t=5 ms t=10 ms t=15 ms t=50 ms (b) Time (ms)

Fig. 9. Damage evolution of infilled concrete under blast loading Fig. 10. Midspan deflection-time histories for DSTCs with and with-
(Z ¼ 0.70 m=kg1=3 ). out FRP tube: (a) Z ¼ 0.70 m=kg1=3 ; and (b) Z ¼ 0.55 m=kg1=3 .

© ASCE 04018036-7 J. Compos. Constr.

J. Compos. Constr., 2018, 22(5): 04018036


thus reducing the deflections of specimens under blast loading. 750 mm from the midspan, the hoop strain of the FRP tube was
However, before definitive conclusions can be given, more studies nearly zero during the blast loading, which suggests that no con-
should be conducted regarding this issue. finement was provided. When the point location was close to the
specimen end (Point E), the hoop strain of FRP tube was higher
than those of Points C and D, which was due to the boundary con-
Hoop Strain Distribution of FRP Tube straint effect. The maximum hoop strain was 0.0036 at Point A.
The hoop strain distributions of FRP tube in both the longitu- Considering the maximum tensile strain of around 0.015 for the
dinal and transverse directions were investigated. Fig. 11 shows CFRP sheet, the confinement effect of FRP tube was less used.
the locations of selected points, and the scaled distance was Fig. 13 shows the hoop strain distribution of FRP tube in the
0.70 m=kg1=3 . Points A–E were located on the front surface of the transverse direction. All selected points were located on the mid-
FRP tube, and the distance between neighboring points was span of the FRP tube. The FRP tube confinement was rather non-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/16/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

250 mm. Points A and F–I were uniformly located on the midspan uniform along the transverse direction of specimen. The maximum
of the FRP tube. Fig. 12 shows the hoop strain distribution of FRP hoop strain was found at the rear surface of the specimen (Point I)
tube in the longitudinal direction. The largest hoop strain occurred with a maximum value of 0.005. This was followed by the hoop
at the midspan region (Point A), and the hoop strain continuously strain at the front surface (Point A) with a maximum value of
decreased as the distance to the midspan increased. At Point D, 0.0036. The hoop strain significantly decreased between Points A
and I. Considering the relatively low hoop strain values, the FRP
confinement may not significantly improve the performance of in-
filled concrete when subjected to blast loading with a scaled dis-
tance of 0.70 m=kg1=3 .
Fig. 14 shows the hoop strain values of FRP tube at Points A
and I when subjected to different TNT explosives (1, 3, 5, 10, and
20 kg TNT). The standoff distance was kept as 1.5 m. Therefore,

0.006

0.005
I
0.004
A
0.003
Hoop Strain

H
0.002 G
F
0.001
Point A
0.000 Point F
Point G
-0.001 Point H
Point I
-0.002
0 20 40 60 80
Time (ms)
Fig. 11. Locations of selected points from FRP tube (all units in
Fig. 13. Hoop strain distribution along transverse direction of FRP
millimeter): (a) longitudinal direction; and (b) transverse direction
tube (Z ¼ 0.70 m=kg1=3 ).
(midspan).

0.004 0.010
A
0.003
0.008

0.002 B
Hoop Strain

Hoop strain

E 0.006
0.001
C
0.004
D
0.000
Point A
Point B 0.002
-0.001 Point C
Point A
Point D
Point I
Point E
-0.002 0.000
0 20 40 60 80 0 5 10 15 20
Time (ms) TNT charge (kg)

Fig. 12. Hoop strain distribution along longitudinal direction of FRP Fig. 14. Hoop strain distribution of FRP tube under different charge
tube (Z ¼ 0.70 m=kg1=3 ). weights (standoff distance is kept 1.5 m).

© ASCE 04018036-8 J. Compos. Constr.

J. Compos. Constr., 2018, 22(5): 04018036


the corresponding scaled distances were 1.50, 1.04, 0.88, 0.70, and increases were more significant. In this case, the infilled concrete
0.55 m=kg1=3 . In all cases, the hoop strain at the rear surface was experienced severe lateral expansion and the FRP confinement was
higher than the hoop strain at the front surface. Moreover, with activated, thus the hoop strain values were higher.
the decrease of scaled distances, the hoop strain values increased,
which indicated higher confinement levels. When subjected to
blast loadings with scaled distances of 1.50 and 1.04 m=kg1=3 , the Parametric Analyses and Discussions
infilled concrete remained elastic and the lateral expansion was
less. Because the FRP confinement is passive and highly depends This section conducts parametric analyses to investigate the influ-
on the lateral expansion of concrete, the confinement cannot be ac- ences of different parameters on the behavior of hybrid DSTCs
tivated. Therefore, the hoop strain values were less. However, when under blast loading. The investigated parameters included concrete
the hybrid DSTCs were subjected to blast loadings with smaller strength, charge weight, outer FRP tube thickness, inner steel tube
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/16/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

scaled distances (0.88, 0.70, and 0.55 m=kg1=3 ), the hoop strain thickness, composite column type (hybrid DSTCs, CFSTs, and

Table 3. Maximum and residual deflections for hybrid DSTCs with varying parameters
Concrete Charge FRP tube Steel tube Axial Fiber Maximum Residual
strength, fco weight, W thickness, tf thickness, ts Hollowness load level, orientations, Column deflection deflection
Group (MPa) (kg) (mm) (mm) ratio, φ λ β types (mm) (mm)
1 (concrete strength) 25 10 0.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 28.7 4.9
40 10 0.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 27.2 3.6
55 10 0.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 26.0 2.4
2 (charge weight) 40 1 0.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 4.2 0.4
40 3 0.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 10.2 0.4
40 5 0.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 15.3 0.8
40 10 0.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 27.2 3.6
40 20 0.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 56.0 21.3
3 (FRP tube thickness) 40 10 0.17 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 27.8 3.5
40 10 0.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 27.2 3.6
40 10 1.00 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 26.5 3.5
40 10 1.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 25.9 2.7
4 (steel tube thickness) 40 10 0.50 3.5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 32.5 5.2
40 10 0.50 5.0 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 27.2 3.6
40 10 0.50 6.5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 24.4 2.7
40 10 0.50 8.0 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 21.4 1.4
5 (hollowness ratio) 40 10 0.50 5 0.35 0 WLT DSTCs 35.3 6.2
40 10 0.50 5 0.45 0 WLT DSTCs 30.6 4.3
40 10 0.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 27.2 3.6
40 10 0.50 5 0.65 0 WLT DSTCs 25.1 2.6
6 (axial load level) 40 10 0.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 27.2 3.6
40 10 0.50 5 0.55 0.1 WLT DSTCs 27.2 5.1
40 10 0.50 5 0.55 0.3 WLT DSTCs 26.4 4.3
40 10 0.50 5 0.55 0.5 WLT DSTCs 27.9 5.5
40 10 0.50 5 0.55 0.7 WLT DSTCs 31.2 11.0
40 30 0.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 94.6 58.0
40 30 0.50 5 0.55 0.1 WLT DSTCs 94.8 53.0
40 30 0.50 5 0.55 0.2 WLT DSTCs 95.0 57.0
40 30 0.50 5 0.55 0.3 WLT DSTCs 96.9 74.0
40 30 0.50 5 0.55 0.4 WLT DSTCs 103.0 100.3
40 30 0.50 5 0.55 0.5 WLT DSTCs Fail —
7 (fiber orientation) 40 10 0.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 27.2 3.6
40 10 0.50 5 0.55 0 FWT DSTCs 24.7 1.5
40 20 0.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 56.0 21.3
40 20 0.50 5 0.55 0 FWT DSTCs 50.8 16.4
40 10 1.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 25.9 2.7
40 10 1.50 5 0.55 0 FWT DSTCs 21.6 1.6
40 20 1.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 50.1 14.4
40 20 1.50 5 0.55 0 FWT DSTCs 39.8 6.4
8 (column type) 40 10 0.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 27.2 3.6
40 10 0.50 5 0.55 0 — CFSTs 27.1 2.3
40 10 0.50 5 0.55 0 — CFDSTs 24.5 3.3
40 10 1.50 5 0.55 0 WLT DSTCs 25.9 2.7
40 10 1.50 5 0.55 0 — CFSTs 18.9 1.8
40 10 1.50 5 0.55 0 — CFDSTs 19.1 1.9
Note: WLT = wet-layup FRP tube with fibers along transverse direction of FRP tube; and FWT = filament-wound FRP tube with fibers in both longitudinal
and transverse directions of FRP tube.

© ASCE 04018036-9 J. Compos. Constr.

J. Compos. Constr., 2018, 22(5): 04018036


CFDSTs), hollowness ratio, axial load level, and fiber orientations. shows the midspan deflection-time histories of the hybrid DSTCs
If the properties of the hybrid DSTCs are not described in this sec- with different scaled distances. The decrease of scaled distance re-
tion, they were the same as in the previous section. Table 3 lists the sulted in significant increases in both the maximum and residual
maximum and residual deflections for the hybrid DSTCs in the deflections of hybrid DSTCs. Fig. 17 shows the effective plastic
parametric analyses. strain distribution for the infilled concrete with different scaled dis-
tances. When the hybrid DSTCs were subjected to blast loadings
Influence of Concrete Strength with scaled distances of 1.50 and 1.04 m=kg1=3 , a small proportion
of the infilled concrete within the midspan region was damaged.
Three different concrete strengths were considered (25, 40, and However, most infilled concrete experienced severe damage when
55 MPa) while other parameters were kept constant. Fig. 15 shows the scaled distance was no more than 0.88 m=kg1=3 . A scaled dis-
the midspan deflection-time histories of the hybrid DSTCs with tance of 0.88 m=kg1=3 might not cause excessive damage to tradi-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/16/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

different concrete strengths. Increasing the concrete strength only tional RC columns (Li et al. 2017). For the hybrid DSTCs, even
slightly decreased the maximum and residual deflections. Although though the infilled concrete was protected by the FRP tube, the
higher concrete compressive strength was used, the increase in the damage easily propagated during the blast loading. One reason
concrete tensile strength was much less, and the contribution from for such behavior is the low tensile resistance of concrete; concrete
the infilled concrete to resist the dynamic tensile force induced by damage can be easily developed if the concrete dynamic tensile
the blast loading did not increase. Similar observations were made strength is approached. The other reason is that, unlike solid RC
for concrete-filled steel tubes and concrete-filled double-skin steel columns, in which the concrete core and concrete cover are well
tubes (Zhang et al. 2015b, 2016a). integrated with each other, the integration between the infilled
concrete and inner steel tube is weak (e.g., insufficient bonding
Influence of Scaled Distance strength), and slip easily occurs between the infilled concrete and
inner steel tube (Idris and Ozbakkaloglu 2014; Yu et al. 2006).
The influence of scaled distance on the blast resistance of hybrid Therefore, the infilled sandwiched concrete is more likely to expe-
DSTCs was investigated by varying the scaled distance from 0.55 rience premature failure than is intact solid concrete (Li and Hao
to 1.50 m=kg1=3 while keeping other parameters constant. Fig. 16 2014; Yu et al. 2006).

40 Influence of Outer FRP Tube Thickness


25 MPa
To investigate the influence of outer FRP tube thickness on the blast
40 MPa
30 resistance of hybrid DSTCs, FRP tubes manufactured with one
Mid-span Deflection (mm)

55 MPa
layer, three layers, six layers, and nine layers of CFRP sheets were
20 used. The scaled distance was 0.70 m=kg1=3 . Fig. 18 illustrates the
midspan deflection-time histories of hybrid DSTCs with varying
FRP tube thickness. An increase in FRP tube thickness did not re-
10
sult in significant decreases of the maximum and residual deflec-
tions of the hybrid DSTCs. Because all the fibers were aligned
0 along the transverse direction of the FRP tubes, the FRP tubes
did not contribute to the increase of the flexural resistance capacity
-10 of hybrid DSTCs and thus did not resist the longitudinal tensile

-20
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time (ms)
Fig. 15. Influence of concrete strength.

60
1/3
Z=1.50 m/kg
1/3
50 Z=1.04 m/kg
1/3
Mid-span Deflection (mm)

Z=0.88 m/kg
40 Z=0.70 m/kg
1/3

1/3
Z=0.55 m/kg
30

20

10

-10
Z=1.50 Z=1.04 Z=0.88 Z=0.70 Z=0.55
-20
1/3 1/3 1/3 1/3
0 10 20 30 40 50 m/kg m/kg m/kg m/kg m/kg1/3
Time (ms)
Fig. 17. Effective strain distribution of infilled concrete under different
Fig. 16. Influence of scaled distance. blast loadings.

© ASCE 04018036-10 J. Compos. Constr.

J. Compos. Constr., 2018, 22(5): 04018036


40
steel tube thicknesses. The maximum and residual deflections de-
1 layer
3 layers creased with the increase of inner steel tube thickness. This was due
Mid-span Deflection (mm) 30 6 layers to the isotropic properties of steel, which made the steel tube very
9 layers effective in resisting the longitudinal dynamic tensile force of the
20 specimens. Compared with the outer FRP tube, the inner steel tube
plays a key role in resisting the blast loading directly.
10

Influence of Composite Column Type (Hybrid DSTCs,


0
CFSTs, and CFDSTs)
The hybrid DSTCs, concrete-filled steel tubes, and concrete-filled
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/16/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

-10
double-skin steel tubes were compared to investigate their blast re-
-20 sistance capacities. Figs. 20(a and b) shows the midspan deflection-
0 10 20 30 40 50 time histories for the composite columns with different outer tube
Time (ms) thicknesses (0.5 and 1.5 mm, respectively). Because of the exist-
ence of both outer and inner steel tubes, the maximum and residual
Fig. 18. Influence of FRP tube thickness. deflections of CFDSTs were lower than those of DSTCs in both
cases. The maximum deflection of hybrid DSTCs and CFSTs was
very close when the outer steel tube thickness was small (0.5 mm).
force (Fam et al. 2005; Idris and Ozbakkaloglu 2014; Wang et al. With a relatively larger outer steel tube thickness (1.5 mm), the
2015b; Yu et al. 2006). This conclusion is similar to that observed blast resistance of the inner steel tube became less significant than
by Wang et al. (2015a) and Abdelkarim and ElGawady (2016). that of outer steel tube. Therefore, even with both inner and outer
They reported that the transverse impact behavior of hybrid DSTCs steel tubes, the maximum deflection of CFDSTs was very close
cannot be significantly improved by increasing FRP layers. Never- to the maximum deflection of CFSTs. Both CFDSTs and CFSTs
theless, Crawford et al. (1997) and Malvar et al. (2007) reported experienced significantly lower maximum deflections than hybrid
contradicting conclusions. Crawford et al. (1997) and Malvar et al. DSTCs. This comparison indicates that under the selected blast
(2007) found that the blast resistance capacity of FRP strengthened loading in this study, using a steel tube as an external jacket for
RC columns can be significantly improved by using more FRP
layers. There might be a reason for this difference. The present 40
study designed the blast loading to produce moderate damage to DSTCs (t=0.5 mm)
CFST (t=0.5 mm)
the hybrid DSTCs. Therefore, shear failure and flexural failure 30
Mid-span Deflection (mm)

CFDST (t=0.5 mm)


did not occur. However, in the studies conducted by Crawford et al.
(1997) and Malvar et al. (2007), the nonstrengthened RC columns 20
experienced severe shear failure damage. In this case, wrapping
more FRP layers in the transverse directions can be very effective
10
in improving the shear resistance capacity and thus preventing the
excessive deflection of specimens under blast loading (Crawford
0
2013; Crawford et al. 1997; Malvar et al. 2007).
-10
Influence of Inner Steel Tube Thickness
The influence of the inner steel tube thickness was investigated -20
0 10 20 30 40 50
by varying the steel tube thickness from 3.5 to 8 mm while keep- (a) Time (ms)
ing other parameters constant. Fig. 19 illustrates the midspan
deflection-time histories for the hybrid DSTCs with different inner 40
DSTCs (t=1.5 mm)
CFST (t=1.5 mm)
40 30
Mid-span Deflection (mm)

CFDST (t=1.5 mm)


3.5 mm
5 mm
30 20
Mid-span Deflection (mm)

6.5 mm
8 mm
20 10

10 0

0 -10

-10 -20
0 10 20 30 40 50
(b) Time (ms)
-20
0 10 20 30 40 50
Time (ms) Fig. 20. Blast resistance of different types of composite columns:
(a) outer tube thickness ¼ 0.5 mm; and (b) outer tube thickness ¼
Fig. 19. Influence of inner steel tube thickness. 1.5 mm.

© ASCE 04018036-11 J. Compos. Constr.

J. Compos. Constr., 2018, 22(5): 04018036


concrete columns can be more effective in resisting blast loading, hollowness ratios. This difference may have some influence on the
especially when a larger outer steel tube thickness is selected. blast response of hybrid DSTCs. To exclude this influence, numeri-
cal simulations were carried out on the hybrid DSTCs that had the
same mass but different hollowness ratios. Fig. 21(b) shows the mid-
Influence of Hollowness Ratio span deflection-time histories. Similarly, for hybrid DSTCs with the
The influence of hollowness ratio φ ¼ Di =Do , where Di indi- same mass but different hollowness ratios, the blast resistance sig-
cates the inner diameter of the steel tube and Do indicates the outer nificantly increased with the increase of hollowness ratio. Therefore,
diameter of the FRP tube, was investigated by varying the hollow- the conclusion that the increase of hollowness ratio can improve
ness ratio from 0.35 to 0.65 while keeping other parameters con- the blast resistance of hybrid DSTCs is independent of the mass of
stant. Fig. 21 shows the midspan deflection-time histories for the hybrid DSTCs.
hybrid DSTCs with different hollowness ratios. Within the chosen
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/16/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

range of hollowness ratio, the maximum and residual deflections Influence of Axial Load Level
decreased with the increase of hollowness ratio. Moreover, the
period of oscillation decreased with increasing hollowness ratio. Concrete columns are always subjected to static loading during
Increasing the hollowness ratio can obtain a larger steel reinforce- their service life. To investigate the influence of axial load level
ment ratio and a lower slenderness ratio of the inner steel tube. on the blast behavior of hybrid DSTCs, numerical simulations were
These two factors are beneficial for the increase of the flexural carried out on axially loaded hybrid DSTCs. Different magnitudes
resistance capacity of the columns, and therefore a higher blast of axial loads, ranging from 0% to 70% of the ultimate load of
resistance can be obtained (Bambach 2008; Zhang et al. 2016a). hybrid DSTCs, were investigated. The ultimate load of hybrid
Nevertheless, for CFDSTs under blast loading, the hollow core DSTCs, Pu , can be obtained by the following equation (China
had little effect on the overall structural responses when the hollow- Architecture and Building 2012):
ness ratio was less than 0.5 (Zhang et al. 2016b). As discussed pre-
Pu ¼ 0.85f cc Ac þ f y As ð6Þ
viously, the main blast resistance for CFDSTs comes from the outer
steel tube if the outer steel tube thickness is large. Therefore, the where f cc = ultimate strength of infilled concrete; Ac = cross-
contribution from the inner steel tube is less and does not affect the sectional area of infilled concrete; fy = yield stress of steel tube;
overall performance. and As = cross-sectional area of the steel tube.
On the other hand, because of the variation of hollowness ratios, Because of the confinement provided by the FRP tube, the
the total masses were different for the hybrid DSTCs with different ultimate compressive strength of the infilled concrete can be much
higher than its unconfined compressive strength. Teng et al. (2009)
proposed equations to predict the ultimate compressive strength
40
of FRP-confined concrete. Yu et al. (2010) adopted these equations
ϕ =0.35
ϕ =0.45
to predict the ultimate compressive strength of infilled concrete in
Mid-span Deflection (mm)

30 hybrid DSTCs
ϕ =0.55
ϕ =0.65 
20 0
f cc 1 ρK < 0.01
0 ¼ ð7Þ
f co 1 þ 3.5ðρK − 0.01Þρε ρK ≥ 0.01
10
where ρK ¼ 2Efrp t=ðEsec dÞ is confinement stiffness ratio, where
0 Efrp = elastic modulus of FRP tube in transverse direction, t = thick-
ness of FRP tube, and d = outer diameter of infilled concrete; and
-10 ρε ¼ εh;rup =εco is strain ratio, where εh;rup = hoop rupture strain of
FRP tube.
-20 Fig. 22 illustrates the midspan deflection-time histories of hy-
0 10 20 30 40 50 brid DSTCs with different axial load levels. Under a lower axial
(a) Time (ms) load level, the maximum and residual deflections did not increase
with the increase of axial load. However, when the axial load level
40 continued increasing beyond a critical value, the maximum and
ϕ =0.35
ϕ =0.45
residual deflections increased noticeably. This effect was more sig-
Mid-span Deflection (mm)

30 nificant when the specimen was subjected to larger quantities of


ϕ =0.55
ϕ =0.65 explosives. For the hybrid DSTCs with a combined axial load level
20 of 0.5 and 30 kg TNT explosives, structural instability was ob-
served. With a combined blast loading and higher axial load level,
10 plastic hinges developed near the midspan and the fixed ends. Be-
cause of the second-order bending moment effect (P − Δ effect),
0 a much larger deflection of the columns was observed after the oc-
currence of plastic hinges, even when only a small amount of axial
-10 load increase was applied (Wang et al. 2015a, 2016; Zhang et al.
2015b).
-20
0 10 20 30 40 50
(b) Time (ms) Influence of Fiber Orientations
Most existing studies on hybrid DSTCs have been generally limited
Fig. 21. Influence of hollowness ratio: (a) hybrid DSTCs with different
to wet-layup FRP tubes (WLTs), in which all the fibers were
masses; and (b) hybrid DSTCs with same mass.
aligned in the transverse direction. Few studies have been

© ASCE 04018036-12 J. Compos. Constr.

J. Compos. Constr., 2018, 22(5): 04018036


40 60
0 3 layers WLT@ 0.70 m/kg
1/3

0.1 50 3 layers FWT@ 0.70 m/kg


1/3

30
Mid-span Deflection (mm)

Mid-span Deflection (mm)


0.3 1/3
3 layers WLT@ 0.55 m/kg
0.5 40 1/3
0.7 3 layers FWT@ 0.55 m/kg
20 30

10 20

10
0
0
-10
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/16/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

-10

-20
-20 0 10 20 30 40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50
(a) Time (ms)
(a) Time (ms)
60
180 1/3
0 9 layers WLT@ 0.70 m/kg
0.1
50 9 layers FWT@ 0.70 m/kg
1/3

Mid-span Deflection (mm)


1/3
150 0.2 9 layers WLT@ 0.55 m/kg
Mid-span Deflection (mm)

0.3
40 1/3
9 layers FWT@ 0.55 m/kg
0.4
120 0.5
30

20
90
10
60 0

-10
30
-20
0 10 20 30 40 50
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 (b) Time (ms)
(b) Time (ms)
Fig. 23. Influence of fiber orientation: (a) FRP tube thickness ¼
Fig. 22. Influence of axial load level: (a) Z ¼ 0.70 m=kg1=3 ; and 0.5 mm; and (b) FRP tube thickness ¼ 1.5 mm.
(b) Z ¼ 0.48 m=kg1=3 .

conducted on hybrid DSTCs with the FRP tube having fibers in


both the longitudinal and transverse directions (Zhang et al. 2017).
In practical applications, filament-wound FRP tubes (FWTs) with
different fiber orientations can act as both the stay-in-place form-
work and the confinement material, which is more advantageous
for the construction of hybrid DSTCs (Yu and Teng 2011; Zhang
et al. 2017).
FRP tubes with different fiber orientations were used to inves-
tigate the influence of fiber orientation on the blast behavior of hy-
brid DSTCs. One tube scheme had all the fibers along the transverse
direction (WLT), and the other tube scheme had one-third of the
fibers along the longitudinal direction of the FRP tube (FWT). In
the second tube scheme, the longitudinal strips were covered by the
transverse wrapping, because Jacques et al. (2015) proved that the
cover of transverse FRP wrapping on longitudinal strips can signifi-
cantly improve the bond behavior between the longitudinal FRP
strips and the concrete surface. In LS-DYNA, using the MAT_054
3 layers FWT 3 layers FWT 9 layers FWT 9 layers FWT
material model and the Belytschko-Tsay shell element, each layer of
(0.70 m/kg1/3) (0.55 m/kg1/3) (0.70 m/kg1/3) (0.55 m/kg1/3)
FRP was defined with a different fiber orientation and thickness.
Figs. 23(a and b) show the midspan deflection-time histories of hy- Fig. 24. Axial strain distribution of longitudinal FRP strip.
brid DSTCs with FRP tubes having three and nine layers of FRP,
respectively. In all cases, the maximum and residual deflections
were decreased by using fibers in the longitudinal direction, because
the application of longitudinal FRP strips improved the flexural re- Fig. 24 shows the axial strain distribution of the longitudinal
sistance capacity of the hybrid DSTCs. Moreover, by using three strips at the time of the maximum midspan deflection. With the
layers of longitudinal strips (one-third of nine layers), the decreases same tube scheme, the contribution from the longitudinal strips to
in the maximum and residual deflections were more significant than resist the flexural deflection was more significant with the decrease
by using only one layer of longitudinal strips (one-third of three of scaled distance. Moreover, for the two hybrid DSTCs under blast
layers). loading with a scaled distance of 0.55 m=kg1=3 , applying three

© ASCE 04018036-13 J. Compos. Constr.

J. Compos. Constr., 2018, 22(5): 04018036


layers of longitudinal strips was more effective in resisting the Chang, F. K., and K. Y. Chang. 1987. “A progressive damage model
blast loading than applying one layer of longitudinal strips. For for laminated composites containing stress concentrations.” J. Compos.
specimens with one layer of longitudinal strips and two layers of Mater. 21 (9): 834–855. https://doi.org/10.1177/002199838702100904.
transverse wrapping under blast loading with scaled distance of China Architecture and Building. 2012. Technical code for infrastructure
application of FRP composites. GB 50608. Beijing: China Architecture
0.55 m=kg1=3 (3 layers FWT), the maximum axial tensile strain was
and Building.
0.013 in the midspan region, which was very close to the maximum Crawford, J. E. 2013. “State of the art for enhancing the blast resistance of
tensile strain of 0.015 for the FRP composites. Therefore, even reinforced concrete columns with fiber-reinforced plastic.” Can. J. Civ.
though the longitudinal strips can improve the blast behavior of hy- Eng. 40 (11): 1023–1033. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjce-2012-0510.
brid DSTCs, the potential brittle rupture of longitudinal strips can be Crawford, J. E., L. J. Malvar, J. W. Wesevich, J. Valancius, and A.
an adverse factor which may result in a sudden blast performance Reynolds. 1997. “Retrofit of reinforced concrete structures to resist
deterioration of hybrid DSTCs. blast effects.” ACI Struct. J. 94 (4): 371–377.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/16/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Deng, Y., and C. Y. Tuan. 2013. “Design of concrete-filled circular steel


tubes under lateral impact.” ACI Struct. J. 110 (4): 691–701.
Echevarria, A., A. E. Zaghi, V. Chiarito, R. Christenson, and S. Woodson.
Conclusions
2016. “Experimental comparison of the performance and residual
capacity of CFFT and RC bridge columns subjected to blasts.” J. Bridge
This study conducted numerical simulations to investigate the
Eng. 21 (1): 04015026. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592
behavior of hybrid FRP-concrete-steel double-skin tubular columns .0000762.
under blast loading. The reliability of the developed numerical Fam, A., S. Mandal, and S. Rizkalla. 2005. “Rectangular filament-wound
model was validated with available testing results, and the blast glass fiber reinforced polymer tubes filled with concrete under flexural
response of the hybrid DSTCs was investigated. The results of this and axial loading: Analytical modeling.” J. Compos. Constr. 9 (1):
study indicate that hybrid DSTCs behave in a very ductile manner 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2005)9:1(34).
under blast loading. The FRP tube provides confinement during the Fam, A. Z., and S. H. Rizkalla. 2001. “Behavior of axially loaded concrete-
blast loading, and the confinement effect is more significant when filled circular fiber-reinforced polymer tubes.” ACI Struct. J. 98 (3):
the hybrid DSTCs are subjected to large blast loading. 280–289.
The influence of different parameters on the blast behavior of Hadi, M. N. S., W. Wang, and M. N. Sheikh. 2015. “Axial compressive
hybrid DSTCs were investigated. The inner steel tube thickness, behaviour of GFRP tube reinforced concrete columns.” Constr. Build.
Mater. 81: 198–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.02.025.
hollowness ratio, axial load level, and fiber orientations significantly
Hallquist, J. O. 2007. LS-DYNA keyword user’s manual. Livermore, CA:
influenced the blast resistance of hybrid DSTCs, whereas concrete Livermore Software Technology.
strength and the outer FRP tube thickness had less-significant influ- Han, L.-H., Z. Tao, F.-Y. Liao, and Y. Xu. 2010. “Tests on cyclic perfor-
ence. In addition, comparisons of the hybrid DSTCs, concrete-filled mance of FRP–concrete–steel double-skin tubular columns.” Thin-
steel tubes, and concrete-filled double-skin steel tubes indicated that Walled Struct. 48 (6): 430–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2010.01
the blast resistance capacity of hybrid DSTCs is less than that of .007.
CFDSTs when a large outer steel tube thickness is used. Based on Idris, Y., and T. Ozbakkaloglu. 2014. “Flexural behavior of FRP-HSC-steel
the results of the parametric studies, it is recommended to increase composite beams.” Thin-Walled Struct. 80: 207–216. https://doi.org/10
the hollowness ratio and inner steel tube thickness in order to .1016/j.tws.2014.03.011.
improve the blast-resistance capacity of hybrid DSTCs. Jacques, E., A. Lloyd, P. Imbeau, D. Palermo, and J. Quek. 2015. “GFRP-
retrofitted reinforced concrete columns subjected to simulated blast
loading.” J. Struct. Eng. 141 (11): 04015028. https://doi.org/10.1061
/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001251.
Acknowledgments Karlos, V., G. Solomos, and M. Larcher. 2016. Analysis of blast parameters
in the near-field for spherical free-air explosions. EUR 27823EN.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support from Luxembourg: European Union.
the Australian Research Council under ARC Discovery Project Kimura, H., M. Itabashi, and K. Kawata. 2001. “Mechanical charac-
DP160104661. terization of unidirectional CFRP thin strip and CFRP cables under
quasi-static and dynamic tension.” Adv. Compos. Mater.: Off. J. Soc.
Compos. Mater. 10 (2–3): 177–187.
Kingery, C. N., and G. Bulmash. 1984. Air blast parameters from
References
TNT spherical air burst and hemispherical burst. Technical Rep. No.
Abdelkarim, O. I., and M. A. ElGawady. 2016. “Performance of hollow- ARBRL-TR-02555. Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD: US Army Ballistic
Research Laboratory.
core FRP–concrete–steel bridge columns subjected to vehicle colli-
Li, J., and H. Hao. 2014. “Numerical study of concrete spall damage to
sion.” Eng. Struct. 123: 517–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct
blast loads.” Int. J. Impact Eng. 68: 41–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
.2016.05.048.
.ijimpeng.2014.02.001.
ACI (American Concrete Institute). 2008a. Building code requirements for
Li, J., H. Hao, and C. Wu. 2017. “Numerical study of precast segmental
structural concrete and commentary. ACI 318. Farmington Hills, MI:
column under blast loads.” Eng. Struct. 134: 125–137. https://doi.org
ACI. /10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.12.028.
ACI (American Concrete Institute). 2008b. Guide for the design and con- Malvar, L. J., and J. E. Crawford. 1998. “Dynamic increase factors for con-
struction of externally bonded FRP systems for strengthening concrete crete.” In Proc., 28th DoD Explosives Safety Seminar. Washington, DC:
structures. ACI 440.2R. Farmington Hills, MI: ACI. Dept. of Defense.
Bambach, M. R. 2008. “Behaviour and design of aluminium hollow sec- Malvar, L. J., J. E. Crawford, and K. B. Morrill. 2007. “Use of composites
tions subjected to transverse blast loads.” Thin-Walled Struct. 46 (12): to resist blast.” J. Compos. Constr. 11 (6): 601–610. https://doi.org/10
1370–1381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2008.03.010. .1061/(ASCE)1090-0268(2007)11:6(601).
Béton, C.-I. 1993. CEB-FIP model code 1990: Design code. London: Mirmiran, A., and M. Shahawy. 1996. “A new concrete-filled hollow FRP
Thomas Telford. composite column.” Composites Part B 27 (3–4): 263–268.
Buchan, P. A., and J. F. Chen. 2007. “Blast resistance of FRP composites Mutalib, A. A., and H. Hao. 2011. “Development of P-I diagrams for FRP
and polymer strengthened concrete and masonry structures—A state-of- strengthened RC columns.” Int. J. Impact Eng. 38 (5): 290–304. https://
the-art review.” Composites Part B 38 (5–6): 509–522. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2010.10.029.

© ASCE 04018036-14 J. Compos. Constr.

J. Compos. Constr., 2018, 22(5): 04018036


Ozbakkaloglu, T., and Y. Idris. 2014. “Seismic behavior of FRP-high- Welsh, L. M., and J. Harding. 1985. “Dynamic tensile response of unidirec-
strength concrete-steel double-skin tubular columns.” J. Struct. Eng. tionally reinforced carbon epoxy and glass epoxy composites.” In Proc.,
140 (6): 04014019. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X 5th Int. Conf. on Composite Materials, edited by W. C. Harrigan, Jr., J.
.0000981. Strife, and A. K. Dhingra. 1517–1531. San Diego, CA: TMS Composite
Qasrawi, Y., P. J. Heffernan, and A. Fam. 2015. “Performance of concrete- Committee.
filled FRP tubes under field close-in blast loading.” J. Compos. Constr. Youssf, O., M. A. ElGawady, and J. E. Mills. 2015. “Displacement and
19 (4): 04014067. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614 plastic hinge length of FRP-confined circular reinforced concrete col-
.0000502. umns.” Eng. Struct. 101: 465–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct
Qasrawi, Y., P. J. Heffernan, and A. Fam. 2016. “Numerical modeling of .2015.07.026.
concrete-filled FRP tubes’ dynamic behavior under blast and impact Youssf, O., M. A. ElGawady, J. E. Mills, and X. Ma. 2014. “Finite element
loading.” J. Struct. Eng. 142 (2): 04015106. https://doi.org/10.1061 modelling and dilation of FRP-confined concrete columns.” Eng.
/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001370. Struct. 79: 70–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.07.045.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad on 02/16/19. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Rodriguez-Nikl, T., C.-S. Lee, G. A. Hegemier, and F. Seible. 2012. “Ex- Yu, T., and J. G. Teng. 2011. “Design of concrete-filled FRP tubular col-
perimental performance of concrete columns with composite jackets umns: Provisions in the Chinese technical code for infrastructure appli-
under blast loading.” J. Struct. Eng. 138 (1): 81–89. https://doi.org/10 cation of FRP composites.” J. Compos. Constr. 15 (3): 451–461. https://
.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000444. doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000159.
Tang, E. K. C., and H. Hao. 2010. “Numerical simulation of a cable-stayed Yu, T., J. G. Teng, and Y. L. Wong. 2010. “Stress-strain behavior of
bridge response to blast loads, Part I: Model development and response concrete in hybrid FRP-concrete-steel double-skin tubular columns.”
calculations.” Eng. Struct. 32 (10): 3180–3192. https://doi.org/10.1016 J. Struct. Eng. 136 (4): 379–389. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST
.1943-541X.0000121.
/j.engstruct.2010.06.007.
Yu, T., Y. L. Wong, J. G. Teng, S. L. Dong, and E. S. S. Lam. 2006. “Flexu-
Teng, J. G., T. Jiang, L. Lam, and Y. Z. Luo. 2009. “Refinement of a design-
ral behavior of hybrid FRP-concrete-steel double-skin tubular mem-
oriented stress-strain model for FRP-confined concrete.” J. Compos.
bers.” J. Compos. Constr. 10 (5): 443–452. https://doi.org/10.1061
Constr. 13 (4): 269–278. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943
/(ASCE)1090-0268(2006)10:5(443).
-5614.0000012.
Zhang, B., J. G. Teng, and T. Yu. 2017. “Compressive behavior of double-
Teng, J. G., T. Yu, Y. L. Wong, and S. L. Dong. 2007. “Hybrid FRP– skin tubular columns with high-strength concrete and a filament-wound
concrete–steel tubular columns: Concept and behavior.” Constr. Build. FRP tube.” J. Compos. Constr. 21 (5): 04017029. https://doi.org/10
Mater. 21 (4): 846–854. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2006.06 .1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000800.
.017. Zhang, F., C. Wu, Z.-X. Li, and X.-L. Zhao. 2015a. “Residual axial capac-
Wang, R., L.-H. Han, and Z. Tao. 2015a. “Behavior of FRP–concrete–steel ity of CFDST columns infilled with UHPFRC after close-range blast
double skin tubular members under lateral impact: Experimental study.” loading.” Thin-Walled Struct. 96: 314–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
Thin-Walled Struct. 95: 363–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2015.06 .tws.2015.08.020.
.022. Zhang, F., C. Wu, H. Wang, and Y. Zhou. 2015b. “Numerical simulation of
Wang, W., M. N. Sheikh, and M. N. S. Hadi. 2015b. “Behaviour of perfo- concrete filled steel tube columns against BLAST loads.” Thin-Walled
rated GFRP tubes under axial compression.” Thin-Walled Struct. Struct. 92: 82–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2015.02.020.
95: 88–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2015.06.019. Zhang, F., C. Wu, X.-L. Zhao, A. Heidarpour, and Z. Li. 2016a. “Exper-
Wang, W., M. N. Sheikh, and M. N. S. Hadi. 2016. “Experimental study on imental and numerical study of blast resistance of square CFDST col-
FRP tube reinforced concrete columns under different loading condi- umns with steel-fibre reinforced concrete.” Eng. Struct. 149: 50–63.
tions.” J. Compos. Constr. 20 (5): 04016034. https://doi.org/10.1061 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.06.022.
/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000690. Zhang, F., C. Wu, X.-L. Zhao, H. Xiang, Z.-X. Li, Q. Fang, Z. Liu,
Wang, W., M. N. Sheikh, M. N. S. Hadi, D. Gao, and G. Chen. 2017. Y. Zhang, A. Heidarpour, and J. A. Packer. 2016b. “Experimental
“Behaviour of concrete-encased concrete-filled FRP tube (CCFT) col- study of CFDST columns infilled with UHPC under close-range blast
umns under axial compression.” Eng. Struct. 147: 256–268. https://doi loading.” Int. J. Impact Eng. 93: 184–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.05.061. .ijimpeng.2016.01.011.

© ASCE 04018036-15 J. Compos. Constr.

J. Compos. Constr., 2018, 22(5): 04018036

Вам также может понравиться