RESPONSE OF FERROCEMENT CONFINEMENT ON BEHAVIOR OF SQUARE RC SHORT

COLUMN

Abstract: In recent years, the repair and strengthening RC member by external bonding such as ferrocement jacketing is
increasing. It has been reported that conventional ferrocement jacketing in form of single layer wire mesh (SL) cannot
provide lateral confinement effectively in restrengthening the square RC columns due to stress concentration at the corners.
So the present study is focused on improvising ferrocement jacketing technique. Two techniques for square columns viz. (i)
Providing single layer wire mesh after rounding off the column corners (RSL); (ii) Providing single layer wire mesh along
with two extra layers mesh at each corner (SLTL) are considered. The experimental and analytical investigations for
concentric loading are carried out on 8 scaled down non-jacketed (NJ) and ferrocement jacketed column specimens. Three
specimens i.e. NJ, SL, RSL shows same axial deflection for a given load whereas SLTL specimen shows reduction in the axial
deflection by about 10 % and the increment in ultimate load carried by SL, RSL and SLTL over NJ specimen is 12.90%,
26.73% and 75.12% respectively. Thus, jacketing technique used in SLTL specimen can be good alternative in case of
retrofitting of structural components rather jacketing after rounding off the column corners.
Keywords: Concentric loading, Deflection, Ferrocement confinement, RC square column, Wire mesh.

1. INTRODUCTION
Reinforced concrete (RC) is used extensively as a material for construction of structures in everywhere
in the world. The structures constructed using reinforced concrete material often suffer severe damages
due to overloading on structure, structure leads to fire, structure prone to natural calamities (like cyclone,
earthquake, flood, tsunami, etc.) and various environmental effects (like corrosion, acid rain, vegetation
growth on structure), changes in building utilization, etc., before reaching out their purposeful design
life. These damages may lead to failure of structural elements (like columns, beams, slabs, etc.) to meet
the expected functional requirements in its designed service life. In the earthquake or seismic design of
structures, ductility and strength are key factors that influence safety of structures. Ductility of the whole
building/structure totally depends upon individual ductility of each member (like beams, columns, or
floors)[1].
Failure or collapse of the structural elements like column which is most important, may lead to severe
collapse of a structural frame of building as it is the only structural element which transfers total vertical
loads of the various elements of building to the earth. This structural member could lose its strength,
stiffness, and ability to sustain the structural loads due to damages occurred in its designed service
life[2]. Repairing and retrofitting of RCC structures has become common in the civil construction
industry. One of the insufficiencies in RCC columns is the deficiencies of lateral confinement. Lateral
confinement by means of lateral reinforcement or continuous spiral in RCC column increased the
performance of axial as well as lateral loads. It is very necessary to provide lateral confinement to the
columns to avoid large deflection under load or failure under slenderness[3]. Sometimes additional more
confinement is necessary in the case of re-strengthening of existing substandard columns. The energy
absorption capacity, ductility, and strength of existing RCC columns can be increased by constructing
supplementary external confinement around the columns. There are numbers of retrofitting confinement
materials which are used for confining concrete columns such as RC, steel or FRP, ferrocement, etc. For
this study, ferrocement is used to strengthened RC columns[4].
Ferrocement consists of wire meshes and cement mortar. Applications of ferrocement in construction
are very vast due its low self-weight, lack of skilled workers, no need of framework around the structural
components etc. It was developed by P.L.Nervi, an Italian architect in 1940. Ferrocement has been used
as a strengthening and repairing material, especially for speedy repairs and strengthening measures for
civil engineering structures worldwide. Reinforced concrete (RC) columns can be easily, effectively and
conveniently strengthened using ferrocement jacket. Quality of ferrocement works is decided on site
because the components are manufactured on machinery set up and execution time at work site is less.
Cost of maintenance is low. This material has come into widespread use only in construction in the last
two decades.
From the review of literature, it is evident that among all jacketing techniques used to restrengthened
square RC columns, square jacketing is the most time saving and a low cost solution. But the problem
with square jacketing is that it only provides confinement pressure at the corners, thus only a portion of
the cross section gets effective confinement. Various experimental studies indicated that a smaller corner
radius can significantly reduce the ultimate strength of the ferrocement jacketing due to the stress
concentration around the column corner area. The stress concentration factor increases when the corner
radius decreases.On another hand by providing rounded column corners with single layer ferrocement
jacketing is not such effective because it required time &extra man work to shape the corners in proper
radius. To overcome the drawbacks of conventional square new jacketing technique is introduced in this
paper. In this paper finite element analysis is used to analyze behavior of RC columns as FEA is much
faster than the experimental method and is cost effective. It was focused to study RC Column Confined
with different type of jacketing technique by both experimental and Finite Element Analysis (FEA)
method[5,6,7,8].

2. MATERIAL PROPERTIES
Material tested are concrete, 8 mm steel bar and woven GI (Galvanized Iron) wire mesh of 12 mm
square opening. The results are used as input values for the finite element model (FEM). Concrete and
matrix both contain cement, sand, aggregates and water. The details of the components are given below:
(i) Cement: The cement used was ordinary portland cement (OPC), which was stored under dry
conditions, so that the cement used in the experiments was fresh and free of lumps and other
foreign matter.
(ii) Fine aggregates: Normal-weight natural river sand was used in the matrix.
(iii) Coarse aggregates: The coarse aggregate used was uncrushed gravel with a maximum particle
size of 10 mm.
(iv) Water: Clean and fresh potable tap water was used throughout, being free of organic matter and
acidic material.
2.1. Compressive test of concrete:
For the compressive test of concrete specimens 3 cubes are tested. The cubes are kept at center position
of the testing machine. A constant rate of 1 kN/sec loading is applied and the load is recorded. The
compressive strength of 3 cubes is shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Compressive test results

Sr. No. Failure load (kN) Compressive strength (N/mm2)
1 550 24.33
2 560 25.11
3 530 23.66

2.2. Test on reinforcing material

Two different types of reinforcing material are used for the reinforced concrete and ferrocement
specimens. Ribbed steel bar of 8 mm diameter and stirrups of 6 mm diameter and galvanized square
woven steel mesh with 1.6 mm wire diameter, 12 mm mesh openingare used. Table2 gives the
properties of these reinforcing materials.

Table 2. The properties of the reinforcing materials

Reinforcement Diameter (mm) Yield Strength(N/mm2) Young’s Modulus (N/mm2)
Main steel 8 550 210000
reinforcement
Stirrups 6 480 210000

Woven steel mesh 1.6 380 175000

3. EXPERIMENTAL WORK
The experimental work included casting, curing and testing the specimens. In general, the experiments
are based on the IS: 10262-2009[9].Experimental work is carried out on non-jacketed, conventional
ferrocement jacketed and improved ferrocement jacketed square RC short column specimens to see the
effect of improved ferrocement jacketing over the non-jacketed and conventional ferrocement jacketed
specimens. Entire study is done under increasing step loading. Eight column specimens (length, L = 600
mm, breadth, b = 100 mm with L: b = 6:1) with normal tie are tested under concentric mode of loading.
Two specimens are tested without any jacketing under concentric mode of loading. Three types of
ferrocement jacketing are taken into consideration in this study. These are: (i) Square jacketing with
single layer wire mesh (conventional square ferrocement jacketing); (ii) Square jacketing with single
layer wire mesh and rounded column corners; and (iii) Square jacketing with single layer wire mesh and
two extra layers mesh at each corner. Corner radius in type RSL is considered as approximately 12 mm.
The specimens nomination is shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Specimen nomination

Sr. No. Naming Description

1 NJ Non-jacketed

2 SL Single layer wire mesh

3 RSL Single layer wire mesh and rounded column corners

4 SLTL Single layer wire mesh and two extra layers mesh at each corner of column

(a) (b) (c)

Fig.1 Pattern of the layers mesh (a) SL, (b) RSL, and (c) SLTL

3.1. The concrete columns (RC)

Eight square reinforced concrete columns are casted. The column reinforcement shown in Fig.2
consists of four longitudinal 8 mm diameter ribbed steel bars and eight 6 mm diameter steel bar stirrups,
with 50 mm spacing in between the stirrups towards corners and 100 mm spacing in middle. All square
columns are cast in a horizontal position using steel moulds for the formwork. The steel moulds are
properly oiled on the inner sides for easy removal of the specimens at the time of demoulding. The
prepared reinforcement cage is held carefully in the moulds. Concrete spacers of 20 mm size are used to
maintain 20 mm concrete cover to the main reinforcement. The concrete is poured in three layers and
compaction of each layer is carried out using a hand compaction method to remove air voids. After 24
hours of casting, all columns were demoulded. Out of eight columns, two are cured for 28 days and six
are cured for 14 days in curing tank.

3.2. Reinforced concrete column strengthened using ferrocement jacket (RFC)

After 14 days of the six reinforced concrete columns are strengthened using ferrocement jacket, two
columns have single-layers of woven steel mesh, two has single layer wire mesh and rounded column
corners and two has single layerwire mesh and two extra layers mesh at each corner of column. The
fabrication method for the mesh skeleton in the ferrocement columns is as under:
1. Cutting of mesh is done using electric shears cutter.
2. These were then bent at right angle.
3. Each layer of the mesh is tied using plastic ties placed with 10 cm spacing.
The fresh matrix is cast in same manner to the ferrocement columns, where the cement to sand ratio is
1:2 and the water to cement ratio 0.4. The layers woven steel meshes are wrapped over the square
concrete column. Then a steel trowel is used and force applied to ensure full penetration of the matrix
into mesh. The final dimensions of the column are 140 x 140 mm. A steel float is used to make the
surface of the ferrocement flat. During the plastering process, tape is used to ensure each individual size
is close to 140 mm. The strengthened reinforced concrete columns are then cured for 14 days in curing
tank.

3.3. Test procedure and instrumentation

After completing the curing of the test specimens, all specimens are kept in dry place for few hours for
attaining surface dry condition. Thereafter, tests are carried out in a hydraulic compression testing
machine. The load is applied at the top of the specimen until failure. The axial deflection is measured
using dial gauge and reported in Table 7.

(a) (b) (c)

(d)

Fig.2 Details of column: (a) Cross-section A–A (b) Cross-section B–B (c) Cross-section C–C (d) Longitudinal section of non-
jacketed column & jacketed column.

4. FINITE ELEMENT ANALYTICAL WORK

Various experimental analyses have been carried out to study the performance of ferrocement
confinement on RC columns and check the concrete strength under various loading conditions like
concentric and eccentric. Experimental method provides the actual behavior of the column specimens,
but it is more time consuming and expensive as compared to analytical study. Finite element analysis is
used to analyze these types of structural components. Finite element analysis (FEA) is a method used for
the evaluation of structures, providing an accurate prediction of behavior of the structural components
and their response subjected to various structural loads. The use of FEA has been the preferred method to
study the behavior of concrete as it is much faster than the experimental method and is cost effective.
With the invention of modern sophisticated numerical tools for analysis like the finite element method
(FEM), it has become possible to model the complex behavior of RC columns using finite element
modeling. RC column confined with different type of jacketing technique in both experimental and finite
element analysis (FEA) method are studied and reported.
ANSYS software is used which is based on non-linear finite element analysis. In this software,
Newton-Raphson method is implemented. The ANSYS computer program is a general purpose finite
element modelling package for numerically solving a variety of engineering problems. These problems
include static and dynamic structural analysis (both linear and non-linear), steady state and transient heat
transfer problems, mode frequency and buckling analyses, acoustic and electromagnetic problems and
various types of field and coupled field applications[10].
4.1. Element types
Selection of proper element types is an important criterion in finite element analysis. For column the
concrete portion is modelled by using a special element available in the package particularly for concrete
namely SOLID 65 elements. The reinforcement is modelled by using Link 180 element. Finite element
ANSYS program is used to study theoretically the behavior of the column up to failure. Solid 65
elements are used in the modelling of GI Wire Mesh and Mortar. The Solid 65 element is defined by
eight nodes. The type of elements used for various material for modelling purpose in ANSYS is shown in
Table4.
Table 4.Details of the elements
Sr. No. Material Element type
1 Concrete Solid 65
2 Steel Link 180
3 GI wire mesh Link 180
4 Mortar Solid 65

4.2. ANSYS input data

ANSYS requires input data for material properties are used as shown in Table 5 & 6.
1) For concrete and mortar: -
a) Elastic modulus (Ec) and b) Poisson’s ratio (μ)
The modulus of elasticity was based on the equation,
Ec = 5000√fck ….….……………… (1)
Flexural strength, fcr = 0.7√fck ….................................. (2)
Where, fck is the characteristic compressive strength of concrete. Here the value of ultimate compressive
strength, fck is equal to be 25 MPa

Table 5.Properties of Concrete& Mortar

Properties Concrete Mortar
Density 2300 kg/m3 2300 kg/m3
Modulus of elasticity, Ec 23000 N/mm2 14143 N/mm2
Poisson’s ratio (μ) 0.2 0.2

2) For steel reinforcement and GI wire mesh

Both the longitudinal and lateral reinforcements used in test specimens is of grade Fe500 (Yield strength
480 MPa). Weld mesh was arranged in different layers in ferrocement jacket instead of reinforcement.
The used wire mesh in this study is 20 BWG (British Standard Wire Gauge) with woven GI (Galvanized
Iron) wire mesh of 12 mm square opening. The average yield stress and Young’s modulus of elasticity
of wire mesh are 380 N/mm2 and 1.75 x 105 N/mm2, respectively.

Table 6. Properties of Steel reinforcement& GI wire mesh

Properties Steel reinforcement GI wire mesh
 Density 78500 N/m3 78500N/m3
Modulus of elasticity, Ec 2.1 x 105 N/mm2 1.75 x 105 N/mm2
Poisson’s ratio (μ) 0.3 0.3
Ultimate Tensile Strength 550 N/mm2 380 N/mm2

4.4. Loading and boundary condition

The force P, applied at the steel plate is applied across the entire centre line of the plate. Equal force is
applied at each node on the plate. Concentric type of loading is applied to the column specimen, which
acts as compressive force in downward direction.
4.5. Type of Analysis
In order to predict the nonlinear material behavior, the load is sub divided into series of load
increments. The load increment can be applied over several load steps. The number of load steps
required for the study is given and the time for each load step is mentioned.

5. DISCUSSION OF RESULT
The results obtained from both the experimental and finite element studies of tested both non-jacketed
(NJ) and ferrocement jacketed (SL, RSL & SLTL) column specimens.The average ultimate load capacity
of column specimens and the average axial deflection observed are shown in these tables. During the test
of all column specimens for various jacketing techniques, it is seen that all column specimens are broken
at ultimate loads which vary within 12 % to 75 %. The gradually increasing values of all tested
specimens for each type of jacketing technique are shown in Table 7 & 8.

Table 7. Experimental results for ultimate load and axial deflection of tested specimens
NJ EXP SL EXP RSL EXP SLTL EXP
Load(kN) Deflection(mm) Load(kN) Deflection(mm) Load(kN) Deflection(mm) Load(kN) Deflection(mm)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
20 0.35 20 0.27 20 0.3 20 0.2
40 0.56 40 0.51 40 0.58 40 0.39
60 0.81 60 0.77 60 0.75 60 0.67
80 1.1 80 0.98 80 1.12 80 0.88
100 1.33 100 1.3 100 1.38 100 1.05
120 1.62 120 1.55 120 1.62 120 1.46
140 1.97 140 1.88 140 1.96 140 1.79
160 2.2 160 2.15 160 2.35 160 1.97
180 2.63 180 2.65 180 2.78 180 2.33
200 2.95 200 3.1 200 3.15 200 2.67
210 3.2 220 3.43 220 3.47 220 3.12
217 3.3 230 3.87 240 3.88 240 3.46
- - 240 4.06 260 4.16 260 3.69
- - 245 4.2 270 4.43 280 3.91
- - - - 275 4.6 300 4.23
- - - - - - 320 4.67
- - - - - - 340 4.83
- - - - - - 360 5.13
- - - - - - 370 5.36
- - - - - - 380 5.5

Table 8. FEA (Analytical) results for ultimate load and axial deflection of tested specimens
NJ (FEA) SL (FEA) RSL (FEA) SLTL (FEA)
Load(kN) Deflection(mm) Load(kN) Deflection(mm) Load(kN) Deflection(mm) Load(kN) Deflection(mm)
Actual x 5.5 Actual x 5.5 Actual x 5.5 Actual x 5.5
0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00
8 0.10 16 0.16 25 0.14 33 0.18
16 0.20 42 0.49 50 0.41 67 0.47
42 0.52 67 0.66 75 0.60 83 0.74
 65 0.81 87 0.85 100 0.88 110 0.96
87 1.08 108 1.06 125 1.05 133 1.16
108 1.34 133 1.30 150 1.32 150 1.47
133 1.65 150 1.47 175 1.60 175 1.72
150 1.86 175 1.72 195 1.76 200 1.90
167 2.07 195 1.91 217 2.09 220 2.18
183 2.27 217 2.13 240 2.31 242 2.41
200 2.48 245 2.40 257 2.59 267 2.66
217 2.69 267 2.62 283 2.92 290 2.92
233 2.89 292 2.86 305 3.19 315 3.15
250 3.10 317 3.11 325 3.30 333 3.25
269 3.30 330 3.24 340 3.41 359 3.40
- - 338 3.31 361 3.58 378 3.74
- - - - - - 395 3.96
- - - - - - 402 4.07
400
500
350
300 400
250
300
Load(kN)

200
Load(kN)

150 200
SLTL Ansys
SLTL Exp
100 RSL Exp 100 RSL Ansys
SL Ansys
50 SL Exp
NJ Ansys
NJ Exp 0
0
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00
0 2 4 6
Axial Deflection(mm) Axial Deflection(mm)

Fig.4 Load vs axial deflection (Experimental results) Fig.5load vs axial deflection (Analytical results)

300 400
350
250
300
200
250
Load(kN)

150
Load(kN)

200

100 150
100
50 NJ Ansys
NJ Exp 50 SL Ansys
0 SL Exp
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 0
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00
Axial Deflection(mm) Axial Deflection(mm)
Fig.6 Comparison for load deflection curve between Fig.7 Comparison for load deflection curve between
experimental results and FEA results for control non jacketed experimental results and FEA results for single layer GI wire
RC column mesh jacketed RC column
 400 450
400
350
350
300
300
250
250

Load(kN)
200 200
Load(kN)

150 150
100 100
RSL Ansys SLTL Ansys
50 50
RSL Exp SLTL Exp
0 0
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00
Axial Deflection(mm) Axial Deflection(mm)
Fig.8 Comparison for load deflection curve between Fig.9 Comparison for load deflection curve between
experimental results and FEA results for single layer GI wire experimental results and FEA results for triple layer GI wire
mesh jacketed RC column with rounded corners mesh jacketed RC column

5.1. Ultimate load response

From Table 7 to 8 &Fig.4to9and it can be seen that the ferrocement jacketed column specimens are
showing good over non jacketed column specimen, the axial load carrying capacity of all jacketed
specimens is higher than those obtained from the non-jacketed specimens tested under concentric mode
of loading according to both experimental and finite element studies. The increments in ultimate load
carried by SL, RSL and SLTL specimens over non-jacketed specimen for experimental study are found
to be 12.90 %, 26.73 % and 75.12 % respectively. The values of ultimate load in case of experimental
study for NJ, SL, RSL and SLTL type specimens are found to be 217 kN, 245 kN, 275 kN and 380 kN
respectively. The increments in ultimate load carried by SL, RSL and SLTL specimens over non-
jacketed specimen for finite element study are found to be 25.65 %, 34.20 % and 49.44 % respectively.
The values of ultimate load in case of experimental study for NJ, SL, RSL and SLTL type specimens are
found to be 269 kN, 338 kN, 361 kN and 402 kN respectively.

5.2. Axial deflection response

From Fig.4 &Fig.5 in case of experimental and finite element study, it can be seen that NJ, SL & RSL
jacketed specimens showssimilar nature whereas SLTL types jacketing specimens show reduction in
axial deflection than other types jacketing by 10.49 %.

5.3. Failure mode of column specimens tested under concentric loading

The columns specimens after carrying out test in laboratory under concentric mode of loading are
shown in Fig.10 This figures shows the nature of failure of column specimens with failure patterns of
specimens at breaking load. It can be seen that non-jacketed column specimens (NJ) as shown in Fig.10
(a), start to fail by bursting of concrete at the point where load is applied on it and the reinforced bars are
also expose due to breaking of concrete cover. It can be seen that all jacketed column specimens (SL,
RSL & SLTL) starts to fail from the top of ferrocement jacketing, especially from the middle of faces
and corners of specimens. In SL type of column specimen tested under concentric mode of loading,
corner cracks are observed due to stress concentration at corners edges. In RSL type of column
specimens, cracks are observed along the length at the middle of each face of column. For SLTL type of
column specimen, cracks observed similar to RSL type of specimen. Jacketed mesh separation is
observed in SL & SLTL type of column specimens
 (a) (b) (c) (d)
(a) NJ; (b) SL; (c) RSL and (d) SLTL
Fig.10 Typical failure patterns of tested specimens under concentric mode of loading

6. CONCLUSION
Based on the results obtained from both experimental and finite element studies of non-jacketed and
various types of ferrocement jacketed RC column specimens, the following conclusions could be made:
1. Confinement with the ferrocement encasement improves the ultimate load carrying capacity and
increases the axial deflection of square RC column.
2. The increment in ultimate load carried by SL, RSL and SLTL specimens over non-jacketed specimen
for experimental study are found to be 12.90%, 26.73% and 75.12% respectively.
3. The increment in ultimate load carried by SL, RSL and SLTL specimens over non-jacketed specimen
for finite element study are found to be 25.65%, 34.20% and 49.44% respectively.
4. All improved square ferrocement jacketing schemes introduced in this study are effective to
overcome the drawbacks of conventional square ferrocement jacketing of square RC column and
could be used effectively for re-strengthening of square RC column subjected to concentric loadings
after taking proper care in jacketing schemes.
5. Type SLTL jacketing showed highest load carrying capacity over all other improved types of
jacketing as well as non-jacketed specimens under the concentric mode of loading.
Based on the study carried it can be seen that ferrocement jacketing technique can be good alternative for
GFRP, CFRP, etc. in case of retrofitting of structural components.

REFERENCES
[1] A. B. M. AmrulKaish, M. R. Alam, M. Jamil and M. A. Wahed, Ferrocement Jacketing for
Restrengthening of Square Reinforced Concrete Column under Concentric Compressive Load,
Procedia Engineering 54 (2013), pp. 720-728.
[2] KaminskiMieczyslaw,TrapkoTomasz,
ExperimentalbehaviourofreinforcedconcretecolumnmodelsstrengthenedbyCFRPmaterials, JCivilEng.
Manage, 2006:12,pp.109-115.
[3] AbdullahA,TakiguchiK.Aninvestigationintothe behaviour
andstrengthofreinforcedconcretecolumnsstrengthenedwith ferrocement jackets, Cement Concrete
Compos2003;25: pp. 233-42.
[4] B. Kondraivendhan, Bulu Pradhan, Effect of ferrocement confinement on behavior of concrete,
Construction and Building Materials 23 (2009), pp. 1218–1222.
[5] G.J. Xiong, X.Y. Wu, F.F. Li, Z. Yan, Load carrying capacity and ductility of circular concrete
columns confined by ferrocement including steel bars, Construction and Building Materials 25
(2011), pp. 2263–2268.
[6] Mohammad TaghiKazemi, Reza Morshed, Seismic shear strengthening of R/C columns with
ferrocement jacket, Cement & Concrete Composites 27 (2005), pp. 834–842.
[7] S.M. Mourad, M.J. Shannag, Repair and strengthening of reinforced concrete square columns using
ferrocement jackets, Cement & Concrete Composites 34 (2012), pp. 288– 294.
[8] Piyush sharma, Analytical research on ferrocement:design, strength and serviceability aspects,
Engineering and Technology IJSRSET (2016).
[9] _____Indian standard guidelines for concrete mix design proportioning, IS 10262:2009, Bureau of
Indian Standards, New Delhi.
[10]http://research.me.udel.edu/~lwang/teaching/MEx81/ansys56manual.pdf,ANSYS Manual, ANSYS
Mechanical APDL Element Reference.