Thin-Walled Structures 140 (2019) 21–30

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thin-Walled Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tws

Full length article

Analytical behavior of concrete-filled aluminum tubular stub columns under T

axial compression
⁎
Fa-Cheng Wang , Hua-Yang Zhao, Lin-Hai Han
Department of Civil Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, PR China

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This paper presents finite element investigations on the structural behaviors of circular concrete-filled aluminum
Concrete-filled aluminum tubes tubular (CFAT) stub columns under axial compression. The finite element models are developed by considering
Ultimate strength the nonlinearities of concrete and aluminum materials and the interactions between the two components. The
Stub columns predicted ultimate strengths, load-axial strain relationships and failure modes are compared to those from
Compressive behavior
collected experimental data. Full range analysis on the load-deformation N-ε are conducted, where the in-
Finite element modelling
vestigations on the multi-axial stress conditions of the aluminum tube and the interaction stress between the
aluminum tube and concrete core are included. The verified finite element models are used to carry out a series
of parametric studies on key material and geometric properties. The ductility index DI and strain at ultimate
strength εscy are studied. Equations to determine εscy for circular CFAT stub columns are proposed. The ap-
plicability of the existing design method for CFST to CFAT stub columns is investigated.

1. Introduction
It has been well-known that concrete-filled steel tubular (CFST)
sections have advantages on strength, ductility and construction due to
the optimum usage of the two materials [1]. Aluminum alloys are being
increasingly employed in building facades, footbridges, roofs and other
structures in either humid or corrosive environments due to its ex-
cellence in anti-corrosion and esthetics [2,3]. It is expected that the
mechanical behaviors of CFAT columns may be in similar manner as
those of CFST columns and the existence of aluminum tube may provide
aesthetic appearance and low maintenance requirement. Similar to
CFST sections, concrete-filled aluminum tubular (CFAT) sections are
expected to take advantages of both materials to provide significant
cross-sectional resistance, fire resistance, maintenance efficiency and
appearance [4].
Zhou and Young [5,6] carry out experimental investigations on
circular, square and rectangular CFAT stub columns under axial com-
pressions. Zhou and Young [4] present finite element studies on the
axially loaded circular CFAT stub columns, where the measured stress-
strain material properties are used. These previous studies show that
aluminum columns filled with concrete can effectively take advantages
of these two materials providing high cross-sectional compressive re-
sistance with better anticorrosion ability. The existence of the concrete
core can significantly ease or delay the local buckling of the specimen.
Chen et al. [7] and Feng et al. [8] conduct experiments on concrete-
filled aluminum alloy thin-walled tubes subjected to in-plane bending.
The ultimate strengths, failure modes, flexural stiffness, ductility and
curves of test specimens are studied. The aluminum hollow sections
have been studied by Su et al. [9] on the compressive behavior and by
Gardner and Ashraf [10] on the material properties. The structural
response of square and rectangular aluminum tubes without concrete
core has been experimentally investigated by Zhu and Young [11]. It
shows that the local buckling, overall buckling and interaction of local
and overall buckling are the main failure modes of aluminum tube
without concrete.
Experimental studies indicate that circular CFAT specimens behave
in well load-carrying loads and in a ductile manner as conventional
CFST ones. The concrete core confined by the aluminum tube may have
higher ultimate strength and ductility. The aluminum tube stiffened by
the concrete core may be prevented from inward local buckling oc-
currence. By contrast to CFST specimens, the structural behavior of
CFAT ones may be influenced by the reduced ultimate strength and
Young’s modulus of the aluminum tube. Existing literature indicate that
systematic studies through finite element modelling are needed for a
better understanding of the fundamental structural behavior of the
axially loaded CFAT specimens, especially the composite action be-
tween the aluminum tube and the concrete core and the multi-axial
stress conditions of the aluminum tube. Only by doing so, one can

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: wangfacheng@tsinghua.edu.cn (F.-C. Wang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2019.03.019
Received 14 August 2018; Received in revised form 26 February 2019; Accepted 6 March 2019
0263-8231/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
F.-C. Wang, et al. Thin-Walled Structures 140 (2019) 21–30

rationally comprehend the interaction mechanism between the con- Table 1

stituent components and suggest design recommendations accordingly. Geometric properties and material properties.
This paper numerically investigates the analytical behaviors of cir- Specimen Diameter Thickness Length Aluminum tube fy Concrete fc
cular CFAT stub columns under axial compressions. The main objec- label D (mm) t (mm) L (mm) (MPa) (MPa)
tives of this study are four folds.
CHS1-C40 38.0 3.89 114 242.4 44.8
CHS1-C70 38.0 3.90 114 242.4 70.2
(1) To develop finite element models on circular CFAT stub columns CHS1-C100 38.0 3.92 114 242.4 106.0
under axial compressions and verify the models against experi- CHS2-C40 50.0 3.13 150 238.4 44.8
mental results. CHS2-C70 50.0 3.12 150 238.4 70.2
(2) To study the structural behaviors in terms of the failure modes, CHS2-C100 50.0 3.13 150 238.4 106.0
CHS3-C40 60.0 2.55 180 237.8 44.8
ultimate strengths, full load-deformation histories and the corre-
CHS3-C70 60.0 2.54 180 237.8 70.2
sponding composite actions including the interaction stress be- CHS3-C100 59.9 2.53 180 237.8 106.0
tween the aluminum tube and the concrete core and the concrete CHS4-C40 76.1 2.06 228 237.0 44.8
longitudinal stress distribution of circular CFAT specimens. To in- CHS4-C70 76.0 2.06 228 237.0 70.2
CHS4-C100 76.0 2.05 228 237.0 106.0
vestigate the aluminum tubes under multi-axial stress conditions by
CHS5-C40 99.7 2.02 300 244.3 44.8
considering the Mises yield criterion. CHS5-C70 99.8 2.06 300 244.3 70.2
(3) To research the effects of key parameters including material and CHS5-C100 100.0 2.05 300 244.3 106.0
geometric properties on the structural behaviors of the specimens, CHS6-C40 119.8 2.49 360 253.1 44.8
confinement factor ξ, ductility index DI and the strain at ultimate CHS6-C70 120.0 2.55 360 253.1 70.2
CHS6-C100 119.9 2.48 360 253.1 106.0
strength εscy are employed in the parametric studies. The confine-
CHS7-C40 150.1 2.53 450 267.9 44.8
ment factor ξ can be expressed by Eq. (1) CHS7-C70 150.1 2.54 451 267.9 70.2
CHS7-C100 149.9 2.53 450 267.9 106.0
Ao f yo
ξ= CHS8-C40 150.2 5.03 450 216.9 44.8
Ac fck (1) CHS8-C70 150.2 5.04 450 216.9 70.2
CHS8-C100 150.2 5.03 450 216.9 106.0
where Ao and Ac are the cross-sectional areas of the aluminum tube and CHS9-C40 160.1 4.03 480 254.2 44.8
concrete core, respectively, fyo denotes the yielding stress of aluminum CHS9-C70 160.5 4.07 480 254.2 70.2
CHS9-C100 160.5 4.06 480 254.2 106.0
tube and fck is the characteristic concrete strength (fck = 0.67 fcu for CHS10-C40 180.0 3.71 540 264.9 44.8
normal strength concrete, where fcu is concrete cube strength). CHS10-C70 180.4 3.69 540 264.9 70.2
To develop an equation calculating εscy for CFAT stub column and CHS10-C100 180.5 3.75 540 264.9 106.0
evaluate the applicability of the existing design approach suggested by
Han et al. [12] to circular CFAT stub columns.

2. Finite element modelling

A finite element modelling program using ABAQUS [13] is devel-

oped to simulate the structural behaviors of the CFAT stub columns
under axial compression. In the finite element models, the aluminum
tube and the concrete core are modeled with the corresponding inter-
face properties. The developed finite element models are verified
against the collected experimental results [5]. The geometric and ma-
terial properties of the specimens are given in Table 1. The cross-sec-
tions are illustrated in Fig. 1, where D and t represent the diameter and
thickness, respectively.

Fig. 1. Cross sections of CFAT stub columns.

2.1. Elements, boundary conditions and method of loading

The three-dimensional eight-node solid element (C3D8) and the

four-node shell elements with reduced integration (S4R) are selected to
model the concrete core and the aluminum tubes, respectively. The
mesh sizes are determined through convergence studies to achieve ac-
curate simulations with minimum increase on computational con-
sumptions. Element sizes are taken as 1(length):1(width):1(depth) to
achieve accurate results with minimum increase on the computation
complexity and are found consistent with Zhou and Young [4]. Typical
specimens with meshes are illustrated in Figs. 2 and 3(b).
The effects of local imperfections and residual stresses are mini-
mized by concrete filling, and are therefore ignored in the current finite
element modelling. Axial compression loadings are simulated by spe- Fig. 2. Schematic view of mesh configurations.
cifying uniaxial displacements at the ends of the CFAT specimens,
where all the degrees of freedom (DOFs) are fixed except the DOF of the
crack and the Poisson’s ratio of concrete core will increase accordingly.
displacement (clamped boundary conditions). In the finite element
The interaction stresses between aluminum tubes and concrete cores
modelling, the initial Poisson’s ratio of aluminum is greater than that of
arise and increases with further loading.
the concrete core at initial loading stage, and the aluminum tube has
larger lateral expansion than the concrete core. When the specimen
shortenings become larger than certain extents, the concrete cores will

22
F.-C. Wang, et al. Thin-Walled Structures 140 (2019) 21–30

Fig. 3. Comparisons between experimental and FEA results.

2.2. Aluminum tubes 2.3. Concrete core

Aluminum generally exhibits a rounded stress-strain behavior. This The uniaxial compressive strength and the corresponding strain of
behavior could be modeled by adopting Ramberg–Osgood formulations concrete is expected to be enhanced due to lateral confining pressure.
and extensions thereof. The model proposed by Gardner and Ashraf The enhancement due to the confinement effect provided by the steel
[10] is adopted in this study due to its compression concern and ex- tubes has been well simulated through the concrete model suggested by
tensive usage [2,9,14]. The model can be expressed by Eq. (2) Han et al. [17,18]. It is expected that the concrete confined by an
aluminum tube may have the same behavior as that confined by a steel
n
f f tube [5]. The model for CFST specimens is subsequently used in this
ε= +0.002 ⎛⎜ ⎞⎟ forf ≤ f0.2
E0 study and the expression is given in Eq. (5).
⎝ f0.2 ⎠ (2a)
2
⎧ 2x − x x≤1
′
n 0.2,1.0 y= x
f − f0.2 f − f0.2 ⎞ ⎛ f − f0.2 ⎞ ⎨ β0 (x − 1) η + x x > 1 (5)
ε= + ⎛0.008 − 1.0
⎜ ⎜
⎟ ⎟ + ε0.2 for f > f0.2 ⎩
E0.2 ⎝ E0.2 ⎠ ⎝ f1.0 − f0.2 ⎠
where x = ε/ε0, y = f/fc’; ε is the strain of concrete, ε0 denotes the
(2b)
strain where the maximum equivalent concrete stress is attained; f is the
where ε and f are the strain and stress of aluminum tubes respectively, stress of concrete, fc’ is the concrete cylinder compressive strength;
f0.2 and f1.0 are the 0.2% and 1% proof stress respectively, ε0.2 is the η = 2 for circular section; β0 is the model parameter and for circular
strain at f0.2, E0 is the material’s Young’s modulus, E0.2 is the tangent section the expression is given as follows:
stiffness at f0.2 and n’0.2,1.0 is the strain hardening coefficient char- 7
acterizing the nonlinearity extent of the stress-strain response beyond β0 = 0.5(2.36 × 10−5)[0.25 + (ξ − 0.5) ] (fc′ )0.5 ≥ 0.12 (6)
f0.2. Young’s modulus of 70,000 N/mm2 and Poisson’s ratio of 0.3
where ξ is the confinement factor.
suggested by EN 1999-1-1 [3] are used. The determined nominal stress-
The damage plasticity model available in the material library in-
strain curves according to Eq. (2) are converted to true stress-log plastic
tegrated in ABAQUS is utilized. The model adopts a unique yield
strain responses for finite element modelling concerns [15,16] by
function with non-associated flow and a Drucker-Prager hyperbolic
means of Eqs. (3) and (4).
flow potential function to describe the plasticity of concrete. The elastic
ftrue = fnom (1 + εnom) (3) modulus and initial Poisson’s ratio of concrete can be defined as
4730 fc′ and 0.2, respectively, according to ACI 318 [19]. For the finite
element model of CFAT stub columns in tension, fracture energy based
εlnpl = ln (1+εnom) − ftrue / E0 (4) approach developed by Hillerborg et al. [20] is adopted in this analysis
and the expression is shown in Eq. (7).
where ftrue and fnom are the true stress and nominal stress of aluminum
tubes respectively, εnom and εlnpl are the nominal strain and log plastic GF = 73(fcm )0.18 (7)
strain respectively.
where fcm is the mean concrete compressive strength in MPa.

23
F.-C. Wang, et al. Thin-Walled Structures 140 (2019) 21–30

2.4. Modelling of aluminum tube-concrete core interface element models are capable of accurately replicating the failure modes,
load-deformation response and ultimate strength observed in the tests.
The interaction behavior between the aluminum tube and the con-
crete core is simulated by surface-to-surface interaction model. Hard 3. Analysis and discussion
contact model and isotropic Coulomb friction model are used along the
normal direction and the tangential direction, respectively. None or Full-range analyses are carried out and one typical circular CFAT
little slip between the aluminum tube and the concrete core is expected stub column [5] is employed, where the diameter D, thickness t, yield
since both the components are loaded simultaneously. Therefore, the strength of aluminum tube fyo and concrete cube strength fcu are
friction coefficient has minor influence on the structural behavior of the 400.0 mm, 9.3 mm, 240.0 MPa and 60.0 MPa, respectively. The con-
CFAT column. For CFST, the values of μ are taken as 0.25 by Schneider finement factor ξ of the column is 0.56. The length of the specimen is
[21], 0.3 by Lam et al. [22] and 0.6 by Han et al. [17]. Owing to the three times of the section diameter. The elements, boundary conditions,
minor effect of the actual bond between aluminum tube and concrete method of loading, modelling of aluminum tube and concrete core of
core on the performance and the limited bond tests on this mechanism the column are the same as those of the validated columns, and the
for CFAT structures, μ = 0.25 is adopted considering that aluminum confinement factor ξ and D/t ratio of the column are also within the
may have more smooth surface than carbon steel. range of the validated columns [4]. Full histories of the corresponding
load N - deformation ε response, interaction stress between aluminum
2.5. Verification of finite element model tube and concrete core p - deformation ε curves and specimen ductility
are studied.
The developed finite element models for circular CFAT columns are
verified by comparing the numerically determined failure modes, ulti- 3.1. Load-deformation histories
mate strengths and load-deformation histories with those from the tests
[5]. Typical failure modes observed in tests and finite element simu- N-ε curves for circular CFAT stub columns are given in Fig. 4(a),
lations are presented in Fig. 3(a-c) and the good agreements in-between where the N-ε responses of the constituent aluminum tubes and con-
are observed. The load-deformation responses of two typical specimens crete core are also included. There are four characteristic points marked
labeled CHS2-C40 and CHS7-C70 as presented in Table 1 are presented in the curves and the curves can be generally divided into four regions
in Fig. 3(d) and (e). As can been seen in Fig. 3(d) and (e), the initial depending on the stiffness.
stiffness, specimen ultimate strengths and post-ultimate behavior from Stage 1: Elastic region (Points O-A). In this stage, the columns re-
the finite element simulations are generally consistent with those from main elastic behavior. There is no evident interaction between the
the experiments. The ultimate strengths determined from the finite aluminum tube and the concrete core. Since the Poisson’s ratios of the
element simulations NFE are compared with the ultimate strengths aluminum tube and the concrete core are still 0.3 and 0.2 respectively,
measured in the tests Nu, as presented in Table 2, where a mean value the tube has larger lateral expansion than the core accordingly. As can
(NFE/Nu) of 0.971 and coefficient of variation (COV) of 0.090 are ob- been seen in Fig. 4(a), the aluminum tube and the concrete core
tained. The comparisons generally indicate that the developed finite withstand 21% and 79% of the specimen compressive strength at Point
A, respectively.
Table 2 Stage 2: Elastic-plastic region (Points A-B). The confined concrete
Verification of finite element model. cracks and significant transverse deformation starts. The interaction
stress p between the aluminum tube and the concrete core increases due
Specimen D/t Nu NFE NFE/Nu
label (kN) (kN) to the increasing of the confinement effect. Owing to the even con-
finement effect along the perimeter for circular CFAT section and the
CHS1-C40 9.8 158.9 184.0 1.158 relatively minor confinements in this stage, the loading carrying pro-
CHS1-C70 9.7 167.2 194.0 1.160
portions of the aluminum tube and the concrete core generally remain
CHS1-C100 9.7 171.5 208.5 1.216
CHS2-C40 16.0 217.0 227.9 1.050 and are 23% and 77% at Point B, respectively.
CHS2-C70 16.0 238.9 242.8 1.016 Stage 3: Plastic region (Points B-C). During this stage, the aluminum
CHS2-C100 16.0 327.5 287.0 0.876 stress exceeds its corresponding yield limit fyo and the stress of concrete
CHS3-C40 23.5 244.1 246.9 1.011 is higher than its cylinder strength fc’ due to the significant confinement
CHS3-C70 23.6 292.4 289.8 0.991
CHS3-C100 23.7 412.6 362.5 0.879
provided by the aluminum tube, as shown in Fig. 5. Compared with
CHS4-C40 36.9 329.9 319.5 0.968 CFST specimens, CFAT stub columns may have limited plastic regions
CHS4-C70 36.9 415.7 404.2 0.972 due to generally less aluminum yield strength fyo resulting in lower
CHS4-C100 37.1 611.4 539.1 0.882 confinement factor ξ.
CHS5-C40 49.4 543.6 496.8 0.914
Stage 4: Softening or hardening region (C-D). The N-ε curve gen-
CHS5-C70 48.4 712.0 655.9 0.921
CHS5-C100 48.8 995.8 902.1 0.906 erally starts declining unless significant confinement factor exists,
CHS6-C40 48.1 822.8 745.3 0.906 where the ε dramatically increases with minor increase of N [23].
CHS6-C70 47.1 1010.3 978.4 0.968 Similar to CFST specimens, N-ε curves of axially loaded CFAT stub
CHS6-C100 48.3 1388.7 1327.5 0.956 columns can be categorized by three types: declining, perfectly-plastic
CHS7-C40 59.3 1111.1 1107.0 0.996
and hardening, as shown in Fig. 4(b). As can been seen in Fig. 4, the
CHS7-C70 59.1 1496.4 1495.4 0.999
CHS7-C100 59.2 2057.8 2057.1 1.000 general shapes of N-ε curves including the elastic region (Points O-A)
CHS8-C40 29.9 1481.9 1326.9 0.895 where no interaction occurs, the elastic-plastic region (Points A-B) with
CHS8-C70 29.8 1740.6 1671.0 0.960 gradually reduced stiffness after the confinement effect initiates, the
CHS8-C100 29.9 2666.1 2191.9 0.822
plastic region (Points B-C) with significant confinement effect and the
CHS9-C40 39.7 1494.1 1454.5 0.973
CHS9-C70 39.4 1974.4 1841.2 0.933 declining or hardening region (Points C-D) from the axially loaded
CHS9-C100 39.5 2797.3 2458.0 0.879 CFAT stub columns are found consistent with those from circular CFST
CHS10-C40 48.5 1690.2 1695.0 1.003 specimens. This may be attributed to the similar Poisson’s ratio between
CHS10-C70 48.9 2274.2 2208.8 0.971 the aluminum and carbon steel and similar confinement effects pro-
CHS10-C100 48.1 3139.2 2992.8 0.953
vided by the metal tube to the concrete core. The failure modes of
Mean 0.971
COV 0.090 circular CFAT specimens are also found consistent with those from
CFST ones.

24
F.-C. Wang, et al.
Fig. 4. N-ε curves for CFAT stub column.
3.2. Interaction between aluminum tube and concrete core
As illustrated in Figs. 2 and 6(c), total of 4 different circumferential
locations around the perimeter are selected to record the interaction
stress p-axial strain ε curves. To acquire the contact pressure between
aluminum tube and concrete core, CPRESS-contact pressure in ABAQUS
is used to acquire the interaction stress p. All the points around concrete
core are at the mid-height of the columns. As presented in Fig. 6(c), the
interaction stress p for the circular CFAT stub columns are consistent at
the 4 variant locations. This is due to the even confinement effect of-
fered by the circular aluminum tubes. This is consistent with the ob-
served general uniform concrete longitudinal stress distribution across
the cross-section, as presented in Fig. 5. Fig. 6(c) shows that in the
elastic stage (Point O-A) there is no evident p between the aluminum
tube and the concrete core. p arises in the elastic-plastic stage (Point A-
B) where concrete cracks and deform significantly in transverse direc-
tion. There are gradual reductions on the stiffness of p-ε curves with
further loading. This may be attributed to the yielding of the aluminum
tube and the Mises yield criterion. To further clarify this, multi-axial
stress conditions of the aluminum tube is studied.
3.3. Multi-axial stress condition of aluminum tube
As shown in Fig. 6(a), the aluminum tube is expected to work under
longitudinal stress fl, tangential (hoop) stress ft and the interaction
stress p. The stresses are obtained from the verified finite element
models. Fig. 6(d) shows the histories of fl, ft and the corresponding von
Mises stress fMises. Fig. 6(e) shows the Mises yield criterion and the
aluminum tube stress developments of the elastic (Point O-A) and
elastic-plastic stages (Point A-B). As can be seen in Fig. 6(d-e), alu-
minum tube is in uniaxial stress condition until ε = 1671 με, where the
confinement of the concrete core provided by the aluminum tube arises.
Afterwards, ft increases with increasing of ε. Due to the Mises yield
criterion, fl-ε stiffness gradually decreases until fMises= 240 MPa being
reached at ε = 4573 με (Point B), as shown in Fig. 6(d-e). At the first
yielding of the aluminum tube, fl= 0.8fyo and ft = 0.3fyo. One alu-
minum circular hollow section with the same material and geometric
properties is numerically simulated for contrastive analysis and the
Fig. 5. Concrete longitudinal stress distributions for circular columns (Unit: MPa).
25
Thin-Walled Structures 140 (2019) 21–30
ultimate strength is attained at fl= 0.75fyo due to local buckling oc-
currence. The existence of the interaction stress at the interface can
provide supports to the aluminum tube, the local buckling occurrence
of the tube may be subsequently delayed or prevented. The analyses on
the tri-axial stress condition and the interaction stress in Fig. 6 show
good composite behaviors between the aluminum tube and the concrete
core.
4. Parametric studies
Upon on validation of the finite element models, the parametric
studies are carried out to investigate the influence of concrete strengths
fcu, aluminum tube strengths fyo, aluminum ratio a (diameter-to-thick-
ness ratio D/t) and confinement factors ξ on the N-ε responses of cir-
cular CFAT specimens. Similar to steel ratio [12], aluminum ratio a is
defined as the cross-section area of the aluminum tube Ao normalized
by the cross-section area of the concrete core Ac (a=Ao/Ac). A basic
calculation model with D= 400 mm, a= 0.1, fyo= 240 MPa and
fcu= 60 MPa is adopted. A wide range of parameters including fcu
= 30–80 MPa, fyo= 110–240 MPa and a= 0.03–0.2 (D/t = 23–138) are
studied. By varying the material and geometric parameters, confine-
ment factor ξ ranges from 0.2 to 2.0.
4.1. Concrete core strength fcu
The N-ε curves of circular CFAT stub columns with variant concrete
strengths are presented in Fig. 7. It shows that the ultimate strength
increase as increasing the concrete strength. Since the concrete consists
the dominant cross sectional area of the CFAT column, the ultimate
strength of the specimen can be enhanced significantly by increasing
the concrete strength. By taking into account of the fact that the alu-
minum yield strength are significantly lower than carbon steel yield
strength according to EN 1999-1-1 [3] and EN 1993-1-1 [24], normal
strength concrete is suggested for CFAT section design to provide rea-
sonable confinements, which prompts sufficient strengths and ductility.
Both the concrete core and aluminum tube components are expected to
attain their ultimate strength simultaneously at the ultimate limit state,
fcu ≤ 80 MPa are subsequently suggested according to the preliminary
F.-C. Wang, et al. Thin-Walled Structures 140 (2019) 21–30

Fig. 6. Composite actions of CFAT stub column under axial compression.

26
F.-C. Wang, et al. Thin-Walled Structures 140 (2019) 21–30

Fig. 7. Effect of concrete strength for circular columns (fyo=240 MPa).

analysis results, the aluminum material properties and the confinement

factor range. Further investigations are advised.

4.2. Aluminum tube strength fyo

Circular columns with variant aluminum tube strengths are simu-

lated and the corresponding N-ε curves are presented in Fig. 8. It shows
that the ultimate strength increases as increasing the aluminum tube
strength. Higher strength of aluminum tube is advised as it enables
reasonable confinement factor and ductility accordingly.

4.3. Aluminum ratio a

The N-ε curves of specimens with different aluminum ratio a are Fig. 9. Effect of aluminum ratio for circular columns.
presented in Fig. 9, where the ultimate strength increases as increasing
the aluminum ratio. This is because the larger the aluminum ratio a, the
larger the area of the aluminum tube Ao. With larger a, N-ε curves
hardens after the plastic stage as shown in Fig. 4(b) since the increased
a results in larger ξ. This is consistent with CFST columns [12].

4.4. Ductility index DI

Ductility index DI is defined to quantify section ductility and it can

be expressed as:
ε85%
DI =
εue (8)

where ε85% is the strain when the strength falls to 85% of the ultimate
strength and εue is the strain at the ultimate strength. Fig. 10. DI versus D/t response.
The ductility index DI determined through parametric studies are
plotted against D/t in Fig. 10. As can been seen in Fig. 10, DI generally
4.5. Strain corresponding to the ultimate strength εscy
increase as decreasing D/t when the material properties are consistent.
This is due to the fact that the confinement factor ξ increases with
The strain corresponding to the ultimate strength εscy, can reflect
decrease of D/t and the confinement effects become less accordingly.
the deformation ability and ductility of a CFST stub column to a certain
extent [25], which may be beneficial to designers, and is adopted in this
study. For CFAT stub columns, εscy can be determined through the three
considerations as below [12]:

(1) For both strength and deformation concerns, εscy is generally de-
fined as the strain corresponding to the ultimate strength for the
declining type of N-ε curves and the strain at Point B for the other
two perfectly-plastic or hardening types of N-ε curves [12], as
shown in Fig. 4(b);
(2) The aluminum attains the tube yield strength fyo, while the concrete
reaches the concrete cylinder strength fc’;
(3) When ε < εscy, the strength sharply increase as increasing the axial
strain, while the strength increases relatively slowly, or even de-
cline with further increase of the axial strain when ε > εscy.
Fig. 8. Effect of aluminum strength for circular columns (fcu=60 MPa).

27
F.-C. Wang, et al.
Fig. 11. Load versus strain response.
εscy for circular CFST stub columns can be calculated as:
εscy = 1300 + 12.5fc′+(600 + 33.3fc′ ) ξ 0.2 (9)
where the unit for fc’ is MPa.
N-ε curves with different confinement factor ξ are presented in
Fig. 11. Due to more ductile behavior of aluminum which has only
about 1/3 Young’s modulus of carbon steel, CFAT is expected with
larger εscy. As can be seen in Fig. 11, εscy generally increases with in-
creasing fc’ and ξ. According the three considerations above, the ex-
pression of εscy is determined by regression analysis through the finite
element simulations. The simulations are conducted by considering the
parameters as follow: fyo= 110–240 MPa, fcu= 30–80 MPa,
a= 0.03–0.2 (D/t = 23–138). By considering the formation of the ex-
isting Eq., Eq. (10) is proposed predicting εscy for circular CFAT stub
columns accordingly:
εscy = 1300 + 12.5fc′+3000ξ 0.4 (10)
’
where the unit for fc is MPa.
εscy calculated by Eq. (10) is plotted in Fig. 11 and compared with N-
ε curves. The results show that for CFAT stub columns εscy can accu-
rately reflect the minimum ductility required to achieve the ultimate
strength. The calculation method of the specimen ultimate strengths
presented in Section 5.2.
4.6. Confinement factor ξ
Figs. 11 and 12 show the N-ε and p-ε curves of circular CFAT stub
columns, respectively, where ξ ranges from 0.2 to 2.0 and fcu= 30 MPa
or 60 MPa. As can be seen in Fig. 11, specimens with larger ξ are as-
sociated with hardening or perfectly plastic types of N-ε curves. This
may be attributed to that higher confinement effects on the concrete
provided by the aluminum tube can significantly enhance the strength
and ductility of the concrete core, as illustrated by corresponding p-ε
28
Thin-Walled Structures 140 (2019) 21–30
Fig. 12. Effects of confinement factors on interaction stress (fcu=30 MPa).
curves for fcu= 30 MPa in Fig. 12(a).
4.7. Difference between CFST and CFAT stub columns
To clarify the difference between CFAT and CFST stub columns, the
aluminum tubes of CFAT stub columns are replaced by S235 according
to EN 1993-1-1 [24], where bi-linear material model according to EN
1999-1-5 [26] is adopted to form CFST specimens. The aluminum tube
yield strength and carbon steel tube yield strength are 240 MPa and
235 MPa, respectively. A total of 4 specimens with two confinement
factors ξ of 0.5 or 2.0 are considered and the interaction stresses p
between tubes and concrete cores are presented in Fig. 12(b). Since the
Young’s Modulus of steel is approximately 3 times that of aluminum,
during the initial stage with ε approximately ranging 0–2500 με, in-
teraction stresses p of CFST stub columns are significantly higher than
that of the CFAT ones. Beyond this region, at εscy, there are minor
difference on p between CFST and CFAT specimens due to Mises yield
criterion. This may indicate the existing design approach suggested by
Han [12] which is based on the consideration of the confinement effects
for CFST stub column can apply for CFAT specimens.
5. Applicability of existing design method
5.1. Existing design method
The design method of the “Nominal yielding strength” of the com-
posite cross-section fscy suggested by Han [12] has been widely adopted
by researchers and design code GB 50936-2014 [27]. fscy is defined as
follows:
Nu
fscy =
A (11)
where A is the cross-sectional area of the specimen (=Ao+Ac), Nu is the
ultimate strength corresponds to the peak load for declining type of N-ε
curve and the loads at εscy for perfectly-plastic or hardening type of N-ε
curve, as illustrated in Fig. 4(b).
The ratio fscy/fck of the finite element results determined in the
parametric studies, where fyo= 110–240 MPa, fcu= 30–80 MPa and
F.-C. Wang, et al. Thin-Walled Structures 140 (2019) 21–30

Fig. 13. fscy/fck versus ξ response.

a= 0.03–0.2 (D/t = 23–138), are plotted in Fig. 13 against ξ. Fig. 13

generally shows that the larger the confinement factor ξ the higher the
ratio fscy/fck. The relationship between ξ and fscy/fck for circular CFST
specimen can be expressed [12] as:
fscy
= 1.14 + 1.02ξ
fck (12)

The comparisons between the predictions by Eq. (12) and the de-
termined results are presented in Fig. 13. It shows Eq. (12) can accu-
rately predict fscy/fck with minor scatters.

5.2. Comparisons of test and finite element results with calculated strength

The existing design approach based on confinement factor ξ sug-

gested by Han et al. [12] and current design code [27] has been widely
used by researchers [28,29] for concrete-filled steel tubular stub col-
umns. These approaches have evaluated their applicability for circular
CFAT stub columns through the comparisons of test and finite element
ultimate strengths with the calculated strengths. The calculated ulti-
mate strength Nuc can be expressed given as follows:
Nuc = fscy (Ao + Ac ) (13)
where fscy can be determined by Eq. (12).
The collected test and generated finite element ultimate strengths
are compared with those from the calculations and the comparisons are
presented in Fig. 14(a) and (b), respectively. The ultimate strengths
determined from calculated results Nuc are compared with the ultimate
strengths measured in the tests Nu, as presented in Table 3, where only
test data with aluminum ratio a= 0.03–0.2 collected from [5] is used in
this study according to the design approach applicable range. A mean
value (Nuc/Nu) of 0.960 and coefficient of variation (COV) of 0.050 are
achieved. By comparing the test and predicted ultimate strengths as
shown in Fig. 14(a), a mean value (Nuc/Nu) of 0.960 with coefficient of
variation (COV) of 0.050 is achieved. There are a few distinct under-
estimations of the ultimate strengths. This may be attributed to the fact
that the ultimate strength limit definition associated with εscy in this
study may be different from that of the test measurements, especially
for specimens with larger confinement factors ξ. The numerically de-
termined ultimate strengths at εscy are compared with predictions and
presented in Fig. 14(b). A mean value of 0.952 with COV of 0.033 is
obtained, where significantly reduced scatter is observed compared
with Fig. 14(a).
The experimental and numerical data are used to assess the partial
safety factor γM according to EN 1990-Annex D [30]. The partial safety
factor γM is taken as an indicator of the design safety level for cross-
section resistance. For all the data, a mean value of 0.956 with COV
equal to 0.042 are obtained and γM of 1.04 is determined. The com-
parisons show that the existing design approach for CFST can provide
reasonable and conservative predictions with excellent reliability on
the ultimate strengths of axially loaded CFAT stub columns.
Fig. 14. Comparisons of ultimate strengths between measurements and pre-
dictions.
6. Conclusions
The following conclusions can be drawn within the limitation of this
current research:
(1) Finite element models of CFAT stub columns under axial com-
pression are developed using the finite element modelling package
ABAQUS. The model consists of three main components: the alu-
minum tube, concrete core and the interface between the aluminum
tube and the concrete core. Good agreements have been achieved
between the experimental and finite element results in terms of the
ultimate strengths, the load-axial strain relationship and the failure
modes.
(2) Structural behaviors of the load-deformation N-ε responses are
analyzed, where N-ε curves are divided into four regions and each
of them is discussed. The composite behaviors including the inter-
action stress-deformation p-ε curves and the concrete longitudinal
stress distribution at characteristic loading stages are carefully in-
vestigated. The multi-axial stress conditions of the aluminum tubes
are analyzed by considering the Mises yield criterion.
(3) Parametric studies are carried out on key material and geometric
parameters of aluminum strengths, concrete strengths and alu-
minum ratios. The ultimate strength increases as increasing either
the concrete strength or the aluminum yield strength. The column
ultimate strength and ductility increase as the aluminum ratio de-
creases due to the increasing of the confinement provided by the
aluminum tube. The effects of the Ductility index DI, strain at ul-
timate strength εscy and confinement factor ξ on the structural be-
haviors are studied. Equations to determine εscy for CFAT stub
columns are proposed.

29
F.-C. Wang, et al. Thin-Walled Structures 140 (2019) 21–30

Table 3 structure rules, Brussels, CEN, 2013.

Comparison of Nu and Nuc. [4] F. Zhou, B. Young, Numerical analysis and design of concrete-filled aluminum
circular hollow section columns, Thin-Walled Struct. 50 (2012) 45–55, https://doi.
Specimen D/t Nu Nuc Nuc/Nu org/10.1016/j.tws.2011.10.002.
label (kN) (kN) [5] F. Zhou, B. Young, Concrete-filled aluminum circular hollow section column tests,
Thin-Walled Struct. 47 (2009) 1272–1280, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2009.03.
CHS1-C40 9.8 158.9 210.0 1.321a 014.
CHS1-C70 9.7 167.2 236.2 1.413a [6] F. Zhou, B. Young, Tests of concrete-filled aluminum stub columns, Thin-Walled
CHS1-C100 9.7 171.5 274.4 1.600a Struct. 46 (2008) 573–583, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2008.01.003.
CHS2-C40 16.0 217.0 227.8 1.050a [7] Y. Chen, R. Feng, J. Xu, Flexural behaviour of CFRP strengthened concrete-filled
aluminium alloy CHS tubes, Constr. Build. Mater. 142 (2017) 295–319, https://doi.
CHS2-C70 16.0 238.9 271.7 1.137a
org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.03.040.
CHS2-C100 16.0 327.5 336.3 1.027a
[8] R. Feng, Y. Chen, W. Gong, Flexural behaviour of concrete-filled aluminium alloy
CHS3-C40 23.5 244.1 250.5 1.026
thin-walled SHS and RHS tubes, Eng. Struct. 137 (2017) 33–49, https://doi.org/10.
CHS3-C70 23.6 292.4 313.9 1.073 1016/j.engstruct.2017.01.036.
CHS3-C100 23.7 412.6 404.4 0.980 [9] M.-N. Su, B. Young, L. Gardner, Testing and design of aluminum alloy cross sections
CHS4-C40 36.9 329.9 318.0 0.964 in compression, J. Struct. Eng. 140 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.
CHS4-C70 36.9 415.7 420.0 1.010 1943-541X.0000972 (04014047).
CHS4-C100 37.1 611.4 567.2 0.928 [10] L. Gardner, M. Ashraf, Structural design for non-linear metallic materials, Eng.
CHS5-C40 49.4 543.6 491.3 0.904 Struct. 28 (2006) 926–934, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.11.001.
CHS5-C70 48.4 712.0 672.7 0.945 [11] J.H. Zhu, B. Young, Tests and design of aluminum alloy compression members, J.
CHS5-C100 48.8 995.8 930.2 0.934 Struct. Eng. 132 (2006) 1096–1107, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-
CHS6-C40 48.1 822.8 725.0 0.881 9445(2006)132:7(1096).
CHS6-C70 47.1 1010.3 989.5 0.979 [12] L.-H. Han, G.-H. Yao, X.-L. Zhao, Tests and calculations for hollow structural steel
(HSS) stub columns filled with self-consolidating concrete (SCC), J. Constr. Steel
CHS6-C100 48.3 1388.7 1348.5 0.971
Res. 61 (2005) 1241–1269, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2005.01.004.
CHS7-C40 59.3 1111.1 1076.5 0.969
[13] ABAQUS, ABAQUS Standard User’s Manual, Version 6.14, Dassault Systemes Corp.,
CHS7-C70 59.1 1496.4 1478.4 0.988
Providence, RI (USA), 2014.
CHS7-C100 59.2 2057.8 2048.9 0.996 [14] F.-C. Wang, L.-H. Han, Analytical behavior of carbon steel-concrete-stainless steel
CHS8-C40 29.9 1481.9 1317.2 0.889 double-skin tube (DST) used in submarine pipeline structure, Mar. Struct. 63 (2019)
CHS8-C70 29.8 1740.6 1719.5 0.988 99–116, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marstruc.2018.09.001.
CHS8-C100 29.9 2666.1 2295.9 0.861 [15] F. Wang, L. Han, W. Li, Analytical behavior of CFDST stub columns with external
CHS9-C40 39.7 1494.1 1402.3 0.939 stainless steel tubes under axial compression, Thin-Walled Struct. 127 (2018)
CHS9-C70 39.4 1974.4 1871.7 0.948 756–768, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2018.02.021.
CHS9-C100 39.5 2797.3 2529.8 0.904 [16] F.-C. Wang, W. Li, L.-H. Han, Interaction behavior between outer pipe and liner
CHS10-C40 48.5 1690.2 1658.4 0.981 within offshore lined pipeline under axial compression, Ocean Eng. 175 (2019)
CHS10-C70 48.9 2274.2 2239.3 0.985 103–112, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.02.025.
CHS10-C100 48.1 3139.2 3086.2 0.983 [17] L.H. Han, G.H. Yao, Z. Tao, Performance of concrete-filled thin-walled steel tubes
Mean 0.960 under pure torsion, Thin-Walled Struct. 45 (2007) 24–36, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.tws.2007.01.008.
COV 0.050
[18] L. Han, Concrete Filled Steel Tubular Structures - Theory and Practice, Third, China
Science Publishing & Media Ltd., 2016 (In Chinese).
since the aluminum ratios are beyond a= 0.03–0.2. [19] American Concrete Institute, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete
a
not considered in the mean and COV calculations. (ACI 318-11) and Commentary. 〈https://doi.org/10.1016/0262-5075(85)90032-
6〉, 2011.
[20] A. Hillerborg, M. Modéer, P.-E. Petersson, Analysis of crack formation and crack
(4) The applicability of the existing design suggested by Han et al. [12] growth in concrete by means of fracture mechanics and finite elements, Cem. Concr.
to CFAT columns is verified through the studies on fscy/fck - ξ re- Res. 6 (1976) 773–781, https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-8846(76)90007-7.
sponses and the comparisons of the test and finite element results [21] S.P. Schneider, Axially loaded concrete-filled steel tubes, J. Struct. Eng. 125 (1998)
1202–1206, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1999)125:10(1202).
with the ultimate strength calculations. The analysis shows that the
[22] D. Lam, X.H. Dai, L.H. Han, Q.X. Ren, W. Li, Behaviour of inclined, tapered and STS
existing design method can accurately predict the ultimate square CFST stub columns subjected to axial load, Thin-Walled Struct. 54 (2012)
strengths of CFAT stub columns with minor scatter and well relia- 94–105, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2012.02.010.
bility. [23] F.-C. Wang, L.-H. Han, Analytical behavior of special-shaped CFST stub columns
under axial compression, Thin-Walled Struct. 129 (2018) 404–417, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.tws.2018.04.013.
Acknowledgements [24] EN 1993-1-1, Eurocode 3 — Design of steel structures — Part 1-1: General rules and
rules for buildings, European S, 2005.
[25] Z.-B. Wang, Z. Tao, L.-H. Han, B. Uy, D. Lam, W.-H. Kang, Strength, stiffness and
This work is part of National Key R&D Program of China (No. ductility of concrete-filled steel columns under axial compression, Eng. Struct. 135
2018YFC0807600). The financial support is gratefully acknowledged. (2017) 209–221, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.12.049.
[26] EN 1993-1-5, Eurocode 3 — Design of steel structures — Part 1-5: Plated structural
elements, 2006.
References [27] GB 50396-2014, Technical code for concrete filled steel tubular structures, 2014.
[28] B. Uy, Z. Tao, L.H. Han, Behaviour of short and slender concrete-filled stainless steel
[1] L.-H. Han, W. Li, R. Bjorhovde, Developments and advanced applications of con- tubular columns, J. Constr. Steel Res. 67 (2011) 360–378, https://doi.org/10.1016/
crete-filled steel tubular (CFST) structures: members, J. Constr. Steel Res. 100 j.jcsr.2010.10.004.
(2014) 211–228, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.04.016. [29] C. Hou, L.-H. Han, X.-L. Zhao, Concrete-filled circular steel tubes subjected to local
[2] M.N. Su, B. Young, L. Gardner, The continuous strength method for the design of bearing force: finite element analysis, Thin-Walled Struct. 77 (2014) 109–119,
aluminium alloy structural elements, Eng. Struct. 122 (2016) 338–348, https://doi. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2013.12.006.
org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.04.040. [30] G. Sedlacek, C. Müller, The European standard family and its basis, J. Constr. Steel
[3] Eurocode 9（EC9）EN 1999-1-1:2007, Design of aluminum structures-General Res. 62 (2006) 1047–1059, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2006.06.027.

30