materials

Article
Influence of Tension Stiffening on the Flexural
Stiffness of Reinforced Concrete Circular Sections
Francesco Morelli *, Cosimo Amico, Walter Salvatore, Nunziante Squeglia and Stefano Stacul
Department of Civil and Industrial Engineering, University of Pisa, 56126 Pisa PI, Italy;
cosimoamico86@gmail.com (C.A.); walter@ing.unipi.it (W.S.); squeglia@ing.unipi.it (N.S.);
stefano.stacul@gmail.com (S.S.)
* Correspondence: francesco.morelli@dic.unipi.it; Tel.: +39-329-887-5451

Received: 8 May 2017; Accepted: 14 June 2017; Published: 18 June 2017

Abstract: Within this paper, the assessment of tension stiffening effects on a reinforced concrete
element with circular section subjected to axial and bending loads is presented. To this purpose,
an enhancement of an analytical model already present within the actual technical literature
is proposed. The accuracy of the enhanced method is assessed by comparing the experimental results
carried out in past research and the numerical ones obtained by the model. Finally, a parametric
study is executed in order to study the influence of axial compressive force on the flexural stiffness
of reinforced concrete elements that are characterized by a circular section, comparing the secant
stiffness evaluated at yielding and at maximum resistance, considering and not considering the effects
of tension stiffness.

Keywords: tension stiffening; circular section; flexural behavior; concrete cracking; numerical model

1. Introduction
Reinforced concrete elements are characterized—even for low force values—by nonlinear behavior,
mainly due to the stress–strain relationship of the two forming materials: concrete and steel. The exact
modeling of such behavior can prove to be a very hard issue, and for this reason, several simplifications
are usually adopted in order to take into account only the most relevant nonlinear aspects affecting
the particular studied problem.
However, the low tensile strength of the concrete can be indicated as the most influencing
nonlinearity source. The idea of the composite material “reinforced concrete” (r.c.) itself was originally
developed to overcome such a limitation of the concrete. The low tensile strength does not influence
so much the ultimate resistance of a reinforced concrete element. On the contrary, it can modify
the element stiffness also for a high value of the external force due to the “tension stiffening”.
Tension stiffening can be defined as the phenomenon leading to an increase in the stiffness of
a concrete section due to the transmission of stresses from the reinforcing bar to the boundary concrete
in the tension between two adjacent cracks (Figure 1).
The way of modeling this phenomenon is currently codified by different standards, and several
studies have been carried out in the last decade.
Eurocode 2 [1] and CEB-fib Model Code 2010 [2] consider tension stiffening in terms of strain,
curvature, or deflection, and interpolate the computed parameter evaluated on the uncracked section
and on the fully cracked one using the following expressions.

α = ζα2 + (1 − ζ)α1 (1)

 
σ
ζ = 1 − β SF (2)
σS

Materials 2017, 10, 669; doi:10.3390/ma10060669 www.mdpi.com/journal/materials

Materials 2017, 10, 669 2 of 16

where α is the mean value of the parameter of interest (strain, curvature, or deflection) of the element
segment comprised between two consecutive cracks; α1 and α2 are the corresponding values computed
in the uncracked and fully cracked sections, respectively; ζ is the distribution coefficient, β is a factor
that takes into account long term effects (β = 1.0 for short term effects, β = 0.5 for sustained loads
or many cycles of repeated loading); σS is the stress in the reinforcement in tension calculated on
the cracked section; and σSF is the evaluated stress under the loading conditions causing first cracking.
Eurocode 2 [1] proposes also an expression for the evaluation of the crack’s interaxis mean value, srm :

Φs
srm = 50 + 0.25K1 K2 [in mm] (3)
ρp,eff

where:

− Φs is the mean value of the reinforcing bars’ diameter;

− K1 is a coefficient that takes into account the bond properties of bond reinforcement;
− K2 is a coefficient that takes into account the distribution of strain (pure tension or bending); and
− $p,eff = Ast /Act is the effective reinforcement ratio evaluated as the ratio between the area
of the reinforcing bars, Ast , contained within the concrete cross section portion effectively
influenced
Materials 2017, 10, 669 by the bars in the formation of cracks. 2 of 16

Figure 1. Effects
Effects of the tension stiffening on an isolated reinforcing bar.
bar.

The effects
The way of of
modeling this phenomenon
tension stiffening is currently
on the flexural codified
behavior byelements
of r.c. differentare
standards, andinseveral
considered many
studies have been carried out in the last decade.
other studies. The first ones can be attributed to Vecchio and Collins [3], Collins and Mitchell [4],
Eurocode
and Belarbi 2 [1]
and Hsuand CEB-fib
[5,6]. The Model
resultsCode 2010
of such [2] consider
studies tension stiffening
are compared, and theirindifferences
terms of strain,
well
explained by the research of Bentz [7], which proposes also the use of an expression the
curvature, or deflection, and interpolate the computed parameter evaluated on thatuncracked
takes into
section and
account the on the fully
different cracked
bond one using
conditions, theleads
and following expressions.
to a better estimation of the crack’s width and
stiffness at service load of r.c. elements. αSalvatore= ζα 2 + (et1 −al.ζ [8]
)α1studied its effect on flexural behavior, (1)
with particular attention to a ductility evaluation of rectangular concrete sections reinforced with
special, dual-phase [9], steel bars. Shukri et al. [10] studied the tension stiffening contribution of
σ 
near-surface mounted Carbon Fiber Reinforced ζ = 1 −Polymer
β  SF (CFRP) to the behavior of strengthened (2)
r.c. beams. Shukri et al. [11] introduced tension stiffening  σ S effects
 to develop a mechanical model for
the simulation of r.c. hinges under reversed cyclic loading. Sato et al. [12] extended the results to
where
the α is the mean
r.c. members value of bonded
with externally the parameter of interest
fiber-reinforced (strain,providing
polymers, curvature, or deflection)
models to estimateofcrack
the
element segment comprised between two consecutive cracks; α 1 and α2 are the corresponding values
spacing and the influence of tension stiffening effects. Stramandinoli et al. [13] developed a model
computed
in which the intensile
the uncracked and curve
stress–strain fully cracked sections,
of concrete displays respectively;
an exponentialζ is the distribution
decay coefficient,
in the post-cracking
β is a factor that takes into account long term effects (β = 1.0 for short term
range, defined by a parameter that depends on the reinforcement ratio and on the steel-to-concrete effects, β = 0.5 for
sustained loads or many cycles of repeated loading); σ S is the stress in the reinforcement in tension
modular ratio. The numerical results obtained by the model showed good agreement with several
calculated onresults
experimental the cracked section;
on simply and σbeams
supported SF is the evaluated stress under the loading conditions
with rectangular cross sections tested under 4-point
causing first cracking. Eurocode 2 [1] proposes also an expression for the evaluation of the crack’s
interaxis mean value, srm:

Φs
srm = 50 + 0.25K1 K 2 [in mm] (3)
ρ p ,eff
4-point bending. Lee et al. [14] presented a tension stiffening model able to calculate average tensile
stresses in concrete after the yielding of reinforcement in the r.c. elements has been subjected to
uniaxial tension, shear, or flexure. Kaklauskas et al. [15] studied the effects of shrinkage on tension
stiffening onMaterials 2017, 10, 669 sections with symmetrical or asymmetrical reinforcement,
rectangular 3 of 16 providing

free-of-shrinkage tension stiffening relationships. Soltani et al. [16] developed a computational

model for thebending. Lee et al.
analysis of[14]
r.c.presented
membrane a tension stiffening model
elements that able
have to calculate average tensile
been subjected to stresses
general inplane
in concrete after the yielding of reinforcement in the r.c. elements has been subjected to uniaxial
stresses, considering the effects of tension stiffening, the stress transfer across cracks due to
tension, shear, or flexure. Kaklauskas et al. [15] studied the effects of shrinkage on tension stiffening
aggregate interlock,
on rectangular andsections
dowel withaction with orconsideration
symmetrical to the kinking
asymmetrical reinforcement, effect
providing of reinforcements at
free-of-shrinkage
tension stiffening relationships. Soltani et al. [16] developed
the crack plane. The comparison of the method through a comparison with some a computational model for the analysisexperimental
of
r.c. membrane elements that have been subjected to general inplane stresses, considering the effects
results demonstrated the accuracy of the proposed model.
of tension stiffening, the stress transfer across cracks due to aggregate interlock, and dowel action
An important aspect to
with consideration to the
consider in the
kinking effect study of the
of reinforcements tension
at the stiffening
crack plane. phenomenon
The comparison of is the
definition ofthe
the "effective
method through area", definedwith
a comparison as some
the portion of concrete
experimental surrounding
results demonstrated the reinforcing
the accuracy of bar
the proposed model.
involved in the transmission of stresses from the bar to the concrete itself.
An important aspect to consider in the study of the tension stiffening phenomenon is the definition
Eurocode 2 [1]
of the defines
"effective thedefined
area", effective
as thearea,
portion only for typical
of concrete rectangular
surrounding sections,
the reinforcing as the area having
bar involved
the same width
in theof the section
transmission and afrom
of stresses height hc,eff
the bar to equal to the
the concrete minimum among 2.5(h − d), (h − x)/3 and
itself.
Eurocode 2 of
h/2, where the meaning [1] defines the effective
the symbols area, only
is well for typicalby
explained rectangular
Figure sections, as theModel
2. CEB-fib area having
Code 2010 [2]
the same width of the section and a height hc,eff equal to the minimum among 2.5(h − d), (h − x)/3
suggests similar values, stating that, in the absence of a more refined model, the effective concrete
and h/2, where the meaning of the symbols is well explained by Figure 2. CEB-fib Model Code 2010 [2]
area in tension can similar
suggests be assessed as 2.5(h
values, stating that, −
ind)
the<absence
(h − x)/3.
of a more refined model, the effective concrete area
in tension can be assessed as 2.5(h − d) < (h − x)/3.

Figure 2. Effective area for rectangular section defined by Eurocode 2 [1].

Figure 2. Effective area for rectangular section defined by Eurocode 2 [1].
Several authors have proposed different expressions for the evaluation of the effective area.
SeveralManfredi
authorsand Pecceproposed
have [17] recommended
differenta refined fiber modelfor
expressions for the
theanalysis of r.c. beams,
evaluation of thewhich
effective area.
includes an explicit formulation of the bond–slip relationship that employs an effective area around
Manfredi and Pecce [17] recommended a refined fiber model for the analysis of r.c. beams, which
the reinforcement that occupies the whole width of the section and has a height hc,eff = (c + 8.5ϕ),
includes an with
explicit
c being formulation of the
the concrete cover andbond–slip relationship
ϕ the reinforcing bar diameter. thatBraga
employs anstudied
et al. [18] effective area around
a slip
the reinforcement
model that thatalso
occupies
takes intothe whole
account widthphenomena.
hardening of the section Kwakand andhasSonga[19],
height hc,eff
in their = (con
study + 8.5ϕ), with
an analytical model which can simulate the post-cracking behavior and tension stiffening effect
c being the concrete cover and ϕ the reinforcing bar diameter. Braga et al. [18] studied a slip model
in a r.c. tension member, proposed that the effective area of concrete in tension can be represented
that also takes into
by Ac,eff account
≈ 1/4(1 + n$)bh, hardening
with b and hphenomena.
the width and height Kwak and
of the Song
section, [19], in ntheir
respectively, study on an
= Es/Ec,
analytical model
and $ thewhich can
ratio of steelsimulate the(As/bh).
reinforcement post-cracking
Castel et al.behavior
[20] came up andwithtension stiffening
the following effect in a r.c.
expression
for A , which is based on a multi-linear stress profile in the full depth of
tension member, proposed that the effective area of concrete in tension can be represented by Ac,eff ≈
c,eff the concrete section between
the flexural cracks:
1/4(1 + nρ)bh, with b and h the width and height of the section,  respectively,  n = Es/Ec, and ρ the ratio
b( d - x - a/2) b(h - d - a/2)
of steel reinforcement A (As/bh).
ct,eff = Castel et+al. b · a[20]
+ b(hcame up
- d - a/2 ) 1with
− the following− As expression (4) for Ac,eff,
2 2(d - x - a/2)
which is based on a multi-linear stress profile in the full depth of the concrete section between the
flexural cracks: The meaning of the symbols is explained in Figure 3.
 b ( d − x − a / 2)  b ( h − d − a / 2) 
Act ,eff = + b ⋅ a + b ( h − d − a / 2 ) 1 −  − As
2  2 ( d − x − a / 2 ) 
he meaning Materials
of the2017,
symbols
10, 669 is explained in Figure 3. 4 of 16

Figure 3. Geometrical parameters

Figure 3. Geometrical used
parameters used in equation
in Equation (4). (4).

All of these works deal with the definition of the effective area on rectangular r.c. sections.
ll of these works deal
Very little workwith
has been the
donedefinition of the
on circular sections, eveneffective area
if they represent on rectangular
important r.c. sections. V
elements in the field
work has been done
of r.c. on circular
construction. It is in sections,
fact sufficienteven
to thinkifabout
theytherepresent
bridge piers or important
pile foundationselements
that in the fi
are realized with circular sections: bridge piers are often realized this way, while pile foundations
construction.practically
It is inalways
fact are.
sufficient to supplied
Wiese et al. think about the for
an expression bridge piers or ofpile
the determination foundations that
the effective
d with circular sections: bridge
area of symmetrically piers sections,
reinforced circular are often realized
idealizing this way,
the reinforcement whilering.
as a continuous pile foundatio
J. F. Carbonell-Marquez et al. [21] presented a definition of the effective area in circular cross sections
cally always forare.bothWiese
symmetric etandal.asymmetric
supplied an expression
layouts, and demonstrated forthe the determination
validity of the effective a
of the proposed expression
mmetrically reinforced
by comparing itcircular sections,results
with the experimental idealizing the subjected
on r.c. members reinforcement as Mondal
to pure flexure. a continuous
and ring. J
Prakash [22] came up with an improved analytical model for r.c. circular columns under combined
nell-Marquez et al. [21]load
axial-torsional presented a definition
conditions, demonstrating thatof the effective
neglecting area in
tension stiffening cancircular
lower sensiblycross sections
ymmetric and asymmetric
the accuracy layouts, and models
of the numerical/analytical demonstrated
used in predictingthetest validity
data. of the proposed express
The influence of tension stiffening on the global behavior of elements with a circular cross section
mparing it with the experimental
and subjected results onaction
to the combined axial–flexural r.c.hasmembers
not, however, subjected to pure
as far as the authors flexure. Mon
know,
rakash [22] been
came ever up withThe
quantified. anquestion
improved analytical
of if, or in which conditions, model for r.c.
it is necessary circular
to model tensioncolumns un
stiffening still remains without clear answers. Moreover, the influence on tension stiffening effects
ned axial-torsional
of the axialload conditions,
force, to which circular demonstrating
cross section elements that such asneglecting
bridge piers and tension stiffening can low
pile foundations
ly the accuracy of the
are usually numerical/analytical
subjected, models
or of the reinforcement ratio, used
has never beenin predicting test data.
quantified.
Within the present paper, the modeling approach adopted by Salvatore et al. [8] for rectangular
he influencesections
of tension
is enhanced stiffening
and adapted to on the symmetrically
circular, global behavior of elements
reinforced, cross with a circular cr
sections. The reliability
n and subjectedof the to the results
model’s combined axial–flexural
is then tested, comparing themaction with the has not, however,
experimental results of testsas far as the auth
carried
out on circular elements characterized by different reinforcement ratios, and subjected to a combined
been ever quantified. The moment.
axial force and bending question ofa parametric
Finally, if, or inanalysiswhich usingconditions,
the proposed model it isisexecuted,
necessary to mo
n stiffening still remains
to estimate without
the influence clear
of various answers.
parameters Moreover,
(axial force, reinforcementthe ratio)influence on tension stiffen
on the global behavior
of r.c. elements having a circular cross section.
of the axial force, to which circular cross section elements such as bridge piers and p
2. Modeling Tension Stiffening
ations are usually subjected, or of the reinforcement ratio, has never been quantified.
Salvatore et al. [8] proposed a model based on the CEB-fib Model Code 1998 [23] approach,
Within the present paper, the modeling approach adopted by Salvatore et al. [7] for rectangu
upholding the classical hypotheses of plane cross-sections and perfect adherence between steel bars
ns is enhanced andand adaptedconcrete,
the surrounding to circular, symmetrically
even after reinforced,
cracking, in all sections (cracked and cross sections.
uncracked ones). The reliabi
The bond–slip relation is assumed to be rigid–plastic, as illustrated in Figure 4a, where τb1 is the bond
model’s results is then tested, comparing them with the experimental results of tests carr
stress in the elastic phase, and τb2 is the bond stress at yielding. The bond and steel tensile stresses,
n circular elements characterized by different reinforcement ratios, and subjected to
ned axial force and bending moment. Finally, a parametric analysis using the proposed mo
uted, to estimate the influence of various parameters (axial force, reinforcement ratio) on
Materials 2017, 10, 669 5 of 16

together with the steel tensile strain resulting from the application of an increasing force to the steel
bar, are schematically
Materials 2017, 10, 669 shown in Figure 4b. 5 of 16

(a) (b)
Figure 4. (a) Bond–slip relation for the steel–concrete interface; (b) adherence, stress, and strain in the
Figure 4. (a) Bond–slip relation for the steel–concrete interface; (b) adherence, stress, and strain
steel.
in the steel.

To consider the deformational effects consequent to sliding between the steel and the concrete
and theconsider
To the deformational
consequent redistributioneffects consequent
of stresses, to sliding
a fictitious between
elasticity the steelEctand
modulus, , forthe concrete
the concreteandin
the consequent redistribution of stresses,
tension in the post-cracking phase is defined. a fictitious elasticity modulus, E ct , for the concrete in tension
in theThe
post-cracking
definition phase
of Ect isis derived
defined.from the equilibrium equation of an infinitesimal length of bar
surrounded by the portion ofderived
The definition of Ect is concrete from the equilibrium
involved equation of
in the transmission ofstresses
an infinitesimal
from the length of
bar to the
bar surrounded by the portion of concrete involved in the transmission of
concrete itself. On the base of the stress condition of the steel bar, Salvatore et al. [8] derived the stresses from the bar to
the concrete
following itself. Onofthe
expression Ect:base of the stress condition of the steel bar, Salvatore et al. [8] derived
the following expression
for σscr ≤ σs,max < fy : of Ect :
for σscr ≤ σs,max < fy :
44 AAs s 11
EE (x()x )== ττb1b1xxσs,max (5)
ctct
ΦΦs sAAc c σ − Φs4Es4τb1 x (5)
Ess ,max − τ b1 x
Es Φ s Es
for σs,min ≤ fy < σs,max and x ≥ xy :
for σs,min ≤ fy < σs,max and x ≥ xy :  
4 4
Φs τb1 x − Φs (τb1 + τb2 )xy As
Ect (x) =   4 4   (6)
σs,max
− τ4 b1 (xτ− + τ(τ b)1 x+yτ+b 2 )4xτy  xAs Ac
Ect ( x ) =
Es
 Φ sΦs Es b1 Φs b2 Φs b1

(6)
 σ 4 4 
for fy < σs,min or σs,min ≤ fy < σs,max and s ,max
x <−xy : (τ b1 + τ b 2 ) x y + τ b1 x  Ac
 Es Φ s Es Φs 
4 As
Φ s Ac τ b2 x
for fy < σs,min or σs,min ≤ fE
y <
ct (σxs,max
) =and x < xy : (7)
σs,max (ε u −ε y ) 4( ε u − ε y ) (ε u −ε y )
εy + − τ x − fy
fu −fy 4Φs (Afu −fy ) b2 (fu −fy )
s
τ b2 x
Φ s Ac
where σs,min and σs,max x ) =the minimum and maximum
Ect (are stresses in the bar occurring respectively
in the midline section and in the cross-sections
εy +
(
σ s ,max ε u − εof ) (
y the element
−
)
4 ε u − ε where
y (
the crack
τ b2 x − f y
)
ε u forms; (7)
− ε y σscr is the stress
in the steel upon first cracking; and, finally, (
f u − xfyy is the distance
Φ s f u −from ) ( )
f y the crackedf usection − f y where the stress
in the steel begins to be lower than the yield stress.
where σs,min and σs,max are the minimum and maximum stresses in the bar occurring respectively in
the midline section and in the cross-sections of the element where the crack forms; σscr is the stress in
the steel upon first cracking; and, finally, xy is the distance from the cracked section where the stress
in the steel begins to be lower than the yield stress.

Observations
The modelling approach adopted by Salvatore et al. [8] briefly described in the previous
paragraph suffers, however, from some inaccuracies. In the case of the reinforcing bar subjected to
 Materials 2017, 10, 669 6 of 16

Observations
The modelling
Materials 2017, 10, 669 approach adopted by Salvatore et al. [8] briefly described in the previous paragraph 6 of 16
suffers, however, from some inaccuracies. In the case of the reinforcing bar subjected to stresses
lowerlower
stresses than the yield
than ones,
the the ones,
yield elasticity
themodulus in tension
elasticity modulus Ect in
would be defined
tension by Equation
Ect would (5), by
be defined
but the following observations can be made:
Equation (5), but the following observations can be made:
,
− −
for for −
σs,max = 0, ( ) → ∞. This result is unrealistic given that the upper limit of
Es − Φs Es τb1 x = 0, Ect (x) → ∞ . This result is unrealistic given that the upper limit of
4

Ect(x),
EctE(x),
ct,limEshould be atbeleast
ct,lim should equal
at least to to
equal the
theelastic
elasticmodulus of the
modulus of theconcrete
concretein in compression,
compression, Ec . Ec.
, σs,max 4
for for E−s − Φs Es τb1<x 0,
− − < 0, (Ect)(x<) 0.
< 0.
ThisThisresult
result has
has no
nophysical
physical meaning,
meaning, too.too.
The The
lowerlower

limit of Ect should be equal to zero (corresponding to the cracked section).
limit of Ect should be equal to zero (corresponding to the cracked section).
In Figure 5, Equation
In Figure 5, Equation(5)
(5)isisplotted
plotted for differentvalues
for different valuesof of σ.scr.
σscr

Figure 5. Elasticity
Figure modulus
5. Elasticity modulusinintension,
tension, E ct, as a function of the distance from the cracked section, x,
Ect , as a function of the distance from the cracked section, x,
for different values of the stress in the steel uponfirst
for different values of the stress in the steel upon firstcracking,
cracking,
σscrσ.scr.

It isIt is
immediate
immediate to understand
to understand that,
that, in order
in order to real
to obtain obtain real meaning,
physical physicalthe
meaning, the fictitious
fictitious elasticity
elasticity
modulus modulus in tension
in tension Ectrespect
Ect should shouldtherespect the limits:
following following limits:
0 ≤ E ( x) < E (8)
0 ≤ Ect’ (ctx) < Ect,lim
ct ,lim (8)
where Ect,lim represents the likely maximum value of the elasticity modulus in tension, assumed, in
where Ect,lim represents the likely maximum value of the elasticity modulus in tension, assumed,
the present study,
in the present to betoequal
study, to the
be equal concrete
to the concreteelasticity
elasticitymodulus incompression.
modulus in compression.
ForFor
thisthis
reason, we
reason, weassumed,
assumed,for
for σ
σscr ≤ σs,max < fy,:
scr ≤ σs,max < fy ,:

 4
 A4s τAs τxb1 x σs,max 1 14
σ Es ,max
Φ Φ s Es
 Φs Abc 1 < σs,max
f or xfor xs < 4τs b1s

Ect (x) =Φ s Ac σ s ,max

E − Φ τ
s s4
E b1 x E
Φs EE
. 4τ b1 (9)
 
s
Ect,lim − τ b1fxor x ≥ σs,max ss

Ect ( x ) =  Es Φ s Es Es 4τb1
. (9)
 the elasticity modulus in tension, Ect , evaluatedσby adopting
In Figure 6, the trend of s ,max Φ s E s Equation (9)
 E ct ,lim for x ≥
is shown.  E s 4τ b1

In Figure 6, the trend of the elasticity modulus in tension, Ect, evaluated by adopting Equation
(9) is shown.
Materials 2017, 10, 669 7 of 16
Materials 2017, 10, 669 7 of 16
Materials 2017, 10, 669 7 of 16

Figure 6. Trend of the elasticity modulus in tension, Ect, as a function of the crack distance assumed
Trendthis
Figure 6.within of work.
the elasticity modulus in tension, Ect , as a function of the crack distance assumed
withinFigure 6. Trend of the elasticity modulus in tension, Ect, as a function of the crack distance assumed
this work.
3.within thisBehavior
Flexural work. of a Circular Section Considering Tension Stiffening
3. Flexural Behavior of a Circular
TheBehavior
moment–rotation SectionofConsidering
behavior Tension Stiffening
3. Flexural of a Circular Section the circular cross
Considering section
Tension portion of an element that is
Stiffening
Thecomprised between two consecutive cracks can be obtained by integrating the moment–curvature
moment–rotation behavior of the circular cross section portion of an element that is comprised
The moment–rotation
relationship along the length behavior
of theofelement
the circular crossadopting
itself, and section for portion of an element
the concrete in tensionthat
the is
between two consecutive
comprised
fictitiousbetween
elasticitytwo
cracks can
consecutive
modulus
becracks
given by
obtainedcan by
Equations
integrating
be(6),
obtained
(7), andby
the moment–curvature
(9).integrating the as
Alternatively,
relationship
moment–curvature
assumed in the
alongrelationship
thepresent
lengthstudy,
of thethethe
along element
lengthitself,
element of be
can theand adopting
element
discretized itself,forand
in smaller theelements,
concrete
adopting inthe
for
and tension the fictitious
thecurvature
concrete in tensionelasticity
considered the
to
modulus given
be by
constant Equations
within each (6), (7),
element.and
The(9). Alternatively,
rotation, Θ , as
betweenassumed
the two
fictitious elasticity modulus given by Equations (6), (7), and (9). Alternatively, as assumed
A-B in the present
consecutive study,
cracked the
in element
sectionsthe
can be
can bepresent
discretized so evaluated
study,inthe
smaller as elements,
element follows: and the curvature
can be discretized in smaller considered
elements, andto betheconstant
curvaturewithin each element.
considered to
be constant
The rotation, ΘA-B
within each element.
, between the two The rotation,
λ
consecutive Θ λA-B, between
cracked theλ two
λsections can consecutive
be cracked
λ so evaluated sections
as follows:
can be so evaluated as follows:Θ A − B = χ A 8 + χ λ A 4 + χ λ 4 + χ λ B 4 + χ B 8 (10)
4 2 4
λ λ λ λ λ
Θ −B = χA λ+ χ λ A λ+ χ λ λ + χ λ B λ + χB λ (10)
where χA, χλ/4A, χ λ/2, χAλ/2B
Θ A − B = χ 8A + χ4 λ 4 + χ2λ 4 + χ λ4 4 + χ B 8the curvature evaluated
, and χ B are, with reference to Figure 8, (10)
respectively at the cracked section A,8 at a 4distance 4 4 4 8
A B
2equal to 4 λ/4 from section A, in the middle
where χA , χλ/4Athe
between , χtwo
λ/2 ,consecutive
χλ/2B , and χB are,
cracked with
sections reference
A and to Figure
B, at a distance 7, tothe
equal λ/4curvature
from sectionevaluated
A,
where χA, χλ/4A, χ λ/2, χ λ/2B, and χB are, with reference to Figure 8, the curvature evaluated
respectively
and atat the
thecracked
cracked section
section B. A, at a distance equal to λ/4 from section A, in the middle between
respectively at the cracked section A, at a distance equal to λ/4 from section A, in the middle
the two To evaluate
consecutive the moment–curvature
cracked sections A and relationship, each section
B, at a distance wastosoλ/4
equal discretized into a finite
from section A, and at
between the two consecutive cracked sections A and B, at a distance equal to λ/4 from section A,
number
the cracked of
section longitudinal
B. section B. fibers (Figure 7), distinguishing the confined and unconfined concrete
andzones
at theincracked
compression and the concrete part influenced by the tension stiffening. The hypotheses of
To evaluate
To evaluatethe moment–curvature relationship, eachsection
sectionwas
was soso discretized into a finite
plane sections the
and moment–curvature
absence of slip between relationship, each
steel bars and the surrounding discretized
concrete wereinto a finite
adopted.
number of
number longitudinal
of longitudinal
The effective fibers (Figure
fibers in(Figure
area of concrete 7),
tension7), distinguishing
wasdistinguishing the confined
the the
obtained following confined
Eurocode and
and2 [1] unconfined
unconfined concrete
approach. concrete
zoneszones in compression
in compression and and theconcrete
the concrete part
part influenced
influencedbyby thethe
tension stiffening.
tension The hypotheses
stiffening. of
The hypotheses
plane
of plane sectionsand
sections andabsence
absence of
of slip
slip between
between steel
steelbars
barsand
andthe
thesurrounding
surrounding concrete werewere
concrete adopted.
adopted.
The effective
The effective areaarea of concrete
of concrete in tension
in tension wasobtained
was obtained following
following the
theEurocode
Eurocode 2 [1] approach.
2 [1] approach.

Figure 7. Element portion comprised between two consecutive cracks: (a) Fibers of the circular
section; (b) sections studied for the evaluation of the total rotation.

Figure 7. Element portion comprised between two consecutive cracks: (a) Fibers of the circular
Figure 7. Element portion comprised between two consecutive cracks: (a) Fibers of the circular section;
section; (b) sections studied for the evaluation of the total rotation.
(b) sections studied for the evaluation of the total rotation.

The concrete behavior in compression was modeled using the Mander [24] approach for
the confined zone and the Popovics [25] one for the unconfined concrete. For the concrete in tension
Materials 2017, 10, 669 8 of 16
Materials 2017, 10, 669 8 of 16
The concrete behavior in compression was modeled using the Mander [24] approach for the
confined zone and the Popovics [25] one for the unconfined concrete. For the concrete in tension a
abrittle
brittlelinear
linearelastic
elasticbehavior,
behavior,as as proposed
proposed by by CEB-fib
CEB-fib Model
Model CodeCode 2010
2010 [2],
[2], was
was used.
used. A A bilinear
bilinear
hardening
hardening behavior was assumed for the steel reinforcing bars. An example of the resulting
behavior
Materials 2017, 10, 669 was assumed for the steel reinforcing bars. An example of the 8 of 16
resulting
moment-curvature
moment-curvature curve, curve, evaluated
evaluated in in correspondence
correspondence of of aa cracked
cracked section,
section, isis shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 8a.8a.
The The concrete
effects of behavior
tension in compression
stiffening are waswhen
evident modeled
the using the Mander [24]
moment-curvature approach
curve, for the on
evaluated
The effects of tension stiffening are evident when the moment-curvature curve, evaluated on the
confined zone and the Popovics [25] one for the unconfined concrete. For the concrete in tension a
the cracked
cracked section
section at at
λ/4λ/4
and and
at at λ/2,
λ/2, is compared
is compared (Figure8b).
(Figure 8b).ItItcan
canbebeseen
seenthat,
that,thanks
thanks toto the
the presence
presence
brittle linear elastic behavior, as proposed by CEB-fib Model Code 2010 [2], was used. A bilinear
of concrete
ofhardening
concrete inin tension between
tensionwas between the two cracks,
the two the
cracks, ultimate bending moment of the λ/4 and λ/2 sections
behavior assumed for the steelthe ultimate bars.
reinforcing bendingAn moment
example of of the
the λ/4 and λ/2
resulting
is greater
sections than
is the
greater cracked
than the section’s
cracked one, meaning
section’s one, that the
meaning plastic
that rotation
the plastic of the
rotation element
of thetends
elementto
moment-curvature curve, evaluated in correspondence of a cracked section, is shown in Figure 8a.
accumulate
tends within thewithin
cracked thesections.
The to accumulate
effects of tension stiffening cracked sections.
are evident when the moment-curvature curve, evaluated on the
The displacement of a circular
cracked section at λ/4 and at λ/2, is compared cross section
(Figureelement in bending
8b). It can wasthanks
be seen that, then to easily estimated,
the presence
byofsubdividing it into blocks. The length of each block in the cracked
concrete in tension between the two cracks, the ultimate bending moment of the λ/4 and portion of the element
λ/2
wassections is greater than the cracked section’s one, meaning that the plastic rotation of the element to
assumed to be equal to the crack’s distance. In the uncracked portion it was assumed
betends
the maximum
to accumulate blockwithin
lengththe observed
cracked in the cracked zone.
sections.

(a) (b)
Figure 8. Examples of the moment-curvature curve computed for the circular pile studied by
Teherani [16]: (a) typical shape for the cracked section; (b) comparison between the computed
behaviors at cracked, λ/4,
(a) and λ/2 sections. (b)
Figure 8. Examples of the moment-curvature curve computed for the circular pile studied by
The displacement
Figure 8. Examplesof ofathecircular cross sectioncurve
moment-curvature element in bending
computed was
for the then easily
circular estimated,
pile studied by by
Teherani [16]: (a) typical shape for the cracked section; (b) comparison between the computed
subdividing it into
Teherani [16]: blocks.
(a) typical Theforlength
shape of each
the cracked block
section; in the cracked
(b) comparison portion
between of thebehaviors
the computed element was
behaviors at cracked, λ/4, and λ/2 sections.
at cracked,
assumed to beλ/4, and to
equal sections.
λ/2the crack’s distance. In the uncracked portion it was assumed to be the
maximum block length observed
The displacement in the
of a circular crosscracked
sectionzone. element in bending was then easily estimated, by
The
The relative
subdividing displacement
it intodisplacement between
between
blocks. The length two
of each sections,
twoblock in theΔtot
sections, ∆,totwas
, was
cracked computed
computed
portion by element
of the summing
by was the
summing
displacements,
theassumed to beδiequal
displacements, , of
δi ,each block
oftoeach
the comprised
block comprised
crack’s distance.between In thethe
between twotwo
the
uncracked sections.
sections.
portion it was assumed to be the
maximum block length observed in the cracked zone.
N N  i ! 
  
The relative displacement between N
two N
sections, i Δtot, was computed by summing the(11)
Δ =
∆tottot= ∑ δi = δ i ∑ Hi ∑i Θj Θ j 
=  H (11)
displacements, δi, of each block comprised between i =the 
i1=1 twoj=1 jsections.
i =i =11 =1 
N N  i  in which the portion of elementis
  
where
where HHii,, is the length of the
the ii block;
block; N
N isthe the number ofofblocks
blocks
Δ tot is
= δnumber
i =  Hi Θ j  in which the portion of element
(11)
is dividedinto;
divided andΘΘ
into;and i isthe
i is therelative
relativerotation
rotation between
i =1between
 the 1two faces
i =1  thej =two
faces of
of the i block
block evaluated
evaluated using
using

Equation
Equation(10),
(10),as
asshown
shownin inFigure
Figure9.9.
where Hi, is the length of the i block; N is the number of blocks in which the portion of element is
divided into; and Θi is the relative rotation between the two faces of the i block evaluated using
Equation (10), as shown in Figure 9.

Figure
Figure9.9.Evaluation
Evaluationofofthe
therelative
relativedisplacement
displacementbetween
betweentwo
twosections
sectionsofofan
anelement
elementininbending.
bending.

Figure 9. Evaluation of the relative displacement between two sections of an element in bending.
 Experimental Validation
The procedure described in the previous paragraphs was validated by applying it to evalua
he load-deflection curves
Materials 2017, 10, 669 of several r.c. circular cross section elements, and then9 of
comparing
16 the
with the experimental results.
4. Experimental Validation
1. Description of the
The Experimental Results
procedure described in the previous paragraphs was validated by applying it to evaluate
the load-deflection curves of several r.c. circular cross section elements, and then comparing them with
For this the
purpose, theresults.
experimental experimental tests conducted by Lehman and Moehle [26] and b
alderone and4.1.Lehman [27] were used. Both publications provide a lot of details regarding th
Description of the Experimental Results
eometrical and For mechanical characteristics of the section, on the loading mode, and the crack
this purpose, the experimental tests conducted by Lehman and Moehle [26] and by Calderone
attern duringand
the test and
Lehman onused.
[27] were its completion.
Both publicationsIn botha cases
provide the regarding
lot of details test setup was equal:
the geometrical and the column
mechanical
xed to the base characteristics
and loaded of the section,
transversely byonathe loading
cyclic mode,and
force and the cracks by
axially pattern during the test
a constant one, as shown
and on its completion. In both cases the test setup was equal: the column is fixed to the base and
igure 10. loaded transversely by a cyclic force and axially by a constant one, as shown in Figure 10.

FigureFigure 10. BendingMoment

10. Bending Moment Profile M(zi ). M(z ).
Profile

Lehman and Moehle [26] tested a total of five specimens, while focusing the study on the influence
Lehman and Moehle ratio
of the slenderness [26]ontested a totalTable
column behavior. of 1five specimens,
summarizes while focusing
the main geometrical the study on th
and mechanical
nfluence of the slenderness
characteristics ratio
of the on column
specimens. behavior.
All of the the columns Table 1 summarizes
were subjected, the
during the main geometrical an
experiments,
to an external compressive force equal to 654 kN. Calderone and Lehman [27] tested four specimens,
mechanical characteristics of the specimens. All of the the columns were subjected, during th
while varying the column slenderness and the transversal reinforcement as shown in Table 2. All of
xperiments, to
thean external
columns compressive
were subjected force
to an external equal to
compressive 654
force kN.
equal Calderone
to 720 kN. and Lehman [27] teste
our specimens, while varying the column slenderness and the transversal reinforcement as show
Table 1. Main geometrical and mechanical properties of specimens tested by Lehman and Moehle [26].
n Table 2. All of the columns were subjected to an external compressive force equal to 720 kN.
Long. Transverse
Section Concrete Reinforcement Reinforcement Concrete Long. Trans.
Column Height
Diameter Cover f’c
[Number and [Diameter
Reinforcement Reinforcement
Table 1. Main geometrical and mechanical properties of specimens
ID (mm)
(mm) (mm) tested
Diameter (mm)
(MPa) fyby Lehman
(mm)/Spacing
(MPa) and Moehle [26].
fy (MPa)
of Bars] (mm)]
407 2438 609.6 33.4 11 Φ16
Long. Φ6/32 Transverse
43.4 471.6 668.1 Trans
415 2438 609.6 33.4 22 Φ16 Φ6/32 43.4 471.6 668.1 Long.
430 Section
2438 609.6
Concrete33.4 Reinforcement
44 Φ16 Reinforcement
Φ6/32 43.4 471.6Concrete 668.1 Reinfo
olumn Height 815 4877 609.6 33.4 22 Φ16 Φ6/32 43.4 471.6 668.1 Reinfor
1015Diameter
6096 Cover 33.4
609.6 [number
22 Φ16 and Φ6/32 [diameter
43.4 471.6 f’c 668.1 emen
ID (mm) cement
(mm) (mm) diameter (mm)/spacing (MPa) fy
fy (MPa)
(mm) of bars] (mm)] (MPa
407 2438 609.6 33.4 11 Φ16 Φ6/ 32 43.4 471.6 668.1
415 2438 609.6 33.4 22 Φ16 Φ6/ 32 43.4 471.6 668.1
430 2438 609.6 33.4 44 Φ16 Φ6/ 32 43.4 471.6 668.1
815 4877 609.6 33.4 22 Φ16 Φ6/ 32 43.4 471.6 668.1
1015 6096 609.6 33.4 22 Φ16 Φ6/ 32 43.4 471.6 668.1
Materials 2017, 10, 669 10 of 16

Table 2. Main geometrical and mechanical properties of specimens tested by Calderone and Lehman [27].

Long. Transverse
Section Concrete Reinforcement Reinforcement Concrete Long. Trans.
Column Height
Diameter Cover [Number and [Diameter f’c Reinforcement Reinforcement
ID (mm)
(mm) (mm) Diameter (mm) (mm)/Spacing (MPa) fy (MPa) fy (MPa)
of Bars] (mm)]
328 1829 609.6 41.3 28 Φ19 Φ6/25 27.6 483.0 483.0
328T 1829 609.6 41.3 28 Φ19 Φ6/76 27.6 483.0 483.0
828 4877 609.6 41.3 28 Φ19 Φ6/76 27.6 483.0 483.0
1028 6096 609.6 41.3 28 Φ19 Φ6/51 27.6 483.0 483.0

In both cases, the transverse load was applied cyclically, and with an increasing amplitude.
The envelope curve of each test was taken into consideration in order to compare the monotonic
experimental behavior with the numerical behaviour. It was also assumed that phenomena such as
low cycle fatigue do not influence the response of the column, given the low values of the imposed
displacements (the maximum value of interest is around 5 cm).

4.2. Comparison of Numerical and Experimental Results

The cracks pattern recorded by Lehman and Moehle [26] and Calderone and Lehman [27] allowed
a preliminary validation of the mean crack distance value given by Equation (11). Table 3 shows
the comparison between the numerical and experimental results. Considering that the identification
of “cracks” is characterized by high uncertainty, and that their actual interaxis is strongly influenced
by the actual mechanical characteristics of the component materials, Table 3 shows a good mean
agreement between the numerical and experimental results.

Table 3. Comparison between the experimental and numerical values of the mean crack distance.

Experimental Mean Cracks Distance Experimental Mean Cracks Distance

Column Column
Mean Crack Evaluated by Mean Crack Evaluated by
ID ID
Distance * (mm) Equation (12) (mm) Distance * (mm) Equation (12) (mm)
407 167 204 328 78 74
415 93 112 328T 77 74
430 114 79 828 114 74
815 147 112 1028 84 74
1015 102 112 - - -
* Evaluated in correspondence of the first meter starting from the column base.

Using the bending moment profile M(z) along the column calculated at each loading step,
the corresponding deflections were obtained by adopting the procedure described in the previous
paragraphs. The numerical curves were evaluated up to the point corresponding to the peak stress
in the concrete in compression. The focus of this research is, indeed, to evaluate the influence of tension
stiffening on flexural stiffness. So, the behavior of the r.c. elements with circular sections beyond
this point was not investigated within this research. The comparison between the experimental and
numerical results, as shown in Figures 11 and 12, testifies to the optimal capacity of the proposed
model in evaluating the flexural stiffness of the circular cross section columns. The figures show also
the equivalent force-displacement curve obtained, not considering the contribution of the concrete
in tension. For the comparison among the proposed method’s curves (considering also tension
stiffening effects), the numerical curve obtained—ignoring tension stiffening and the experimental
results—showed that:

− for column 407, not considering tension stiffening can lead to a sensible error in evaluating
the element’s stiffness;
− for more slender columns (828 and 1028), tension stiffening effects are more evident than for
shorter ones (328 and 328T).
Materials 2017, 10, 669 11 of 16
Materials 2017, 10, 669 11 of 16

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e)
Figure 11. Comparison between the experimental results of Lehman and Moehle [26] and the
Figure 11. Comparison between the experimental results of Lehman and Moehle [26] and the numerical
numerical ones in terms of initial stiffness: Column IDs (a) 407, (b) 415, (c) 430, (d) 815 and (e) 1015
ones in terms of initial stiffness: Column IDs (a) 407, (b) 415, (c) 430, (d) 815 and (e) 1015.
Materials 2017, 10, 669 12 of 16
Materials 2017, 10, 669 12 of 16

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 12. Comparison between the experimental results of Calderone and Lehman [27] and the
Figure 12. Comparison between the experimental results of Calderone and Lehman [27] and
numerical ones in terms of initial stiffness: Column IDs (a) 328, (b) 328T, (c) 828 and (d) 1028
the numerical ones in terms of initial stiffness: Column IDs (a) 328, (b) 328T, (c) 828 and (d) 1028.
5. Parametric Analysis
5. Parametric Analysis
To study the influence of tension stiffening on global behavior, in this section a parametric
To study
analysis was the influencefor
performed of different
tension stiffening on global
cross sections, behavior,
varying: the indiameter,
this section
the a longitudinal
parametric
analysis was ratio,
reinforcing performed for compressive
and the different crossforce.
sections,
Thevarying: the diameter,
cases considered the longitudinal
in the reinforcing
parametric analysis are
ratio, and the compressive force. The cases considered in the parametric analysis
summarized in Table 4. Three different diameters, with values typical of pile foundations (60 cm, 100 are summarized
in
cm,Table
and 4.
150Three different
cm), and three diameters,
longitudinalwith values typical
reinforcing bar ratiosof pile
(1%, foundations
2%, and 3%) (60 werecm, 100 cm, and
considered. For
150 cm), and three longitudinal reinforcing bar ratios (1%, 2%, and 3%) were considered.
each of these sections, the influence of four levels of external compressive force was studied. These For each of
these sections, the influence of four levels of external compressive force was studied.
force levels correspond to 5%, 10%, 25%, and 35% of the ultimate axial resistance of the section (Nu), These force levels
correspond
evaluated withto 5%,
the10%, 25%, and
expression: N 35%= f of
A the
. ultimate axial resistance of the section (Nu), evaluated
with the expression: Nu = fc Ac .
The results presented hereinreinforced
Table 4. Circular were obtained in sections
concrete two ways: used one
forby
thetaking into study.
parametric account the influence
of the tension stiffening, and adopting the model proposed in the previous paragraphs; the other
Diameter (m) Longitudinal Bars As/Ac N/Nu (1) N/Nu (2) N/Nu (3) N/Nu (4)
by neglecting it. It was so possible to point out how tension stiffening can affect the performance of
0.60 14 ϕ16 1% 0.05 0.10 0.25 0.35
a reinforced concrete element with a circular section.
0.60 18 ϕ20 2% 0.05 0.10 0.25 0.35
Assuming0.60 that the concrete elastic modulus
22 ϕ22 3% remains 0.05constant, 0.10the influence
0.25 of tension
0.35 stiffening
was evaluated1.00 in terms of an equivalent
30 ϕ18 moment 1% of inertia.
0.05 For every
0.10 diameter0.25 considered
0.35 and listed
in Table 4, two1.00 42 ϕ22
plots were presented, the first referring
2% to
0.05 a normalized
0.10 moment
0.25 of inertia
0.35 defined as
the ratio between 44 ϕ26 rigidity (EI)
1.00 the secant flexural 3%sec at the
0.05first steel0.10
bar yielding0.25and the0.35
intact flexural
rigidity of the 1.50
section (Ec I = Ec40πDϕ24
4 /64), and the 1% second 0.05
referring0.10 0.25
to a normalized 0.35 of inertia
moment
1.50 44 ϕ32 2% 0.05 0.10 0.25 0.35
1.50 66 ϕ32 3% 0.05 0.10 0.25 0.35
Materials 2017, 10, 669 13 of 16

defined as the ratio between the secant flexural rigidity evaluated when the concrete reaches peak
stress in compression and the intact flexural stiffness.

Table 4. Circular reinforced concrete sections used for the parametric study.
Materials 2017, 10, 669 13 of 16
Materials 2017, 10, 669 13 of 16
Diameter (m) presented
The results Longitudinal Barswere As/Ac
herein obtained in N/Nutwo(1)ways:N/Nu one (2)
by takingN/Nu (3) account
into N/Nuthe (4)
The
influence
0.60 results
of the presented
tension herein
stiffening,
14 ϕ16 were
and obtained
adopting
1% the in two
model
0.05 ways:
proposed onein
0.10 by
the taking
previous into
0.25 account
paragraphs; the
0.35
influence
other by of
0.60 the tension
neglecting it.stiffening,
was soand
18It ϕ20 adopting
possible 2% to thepointmodeloutproposed
0.05 in the stiffening
0.10
how tension previous
0.25paragraphs;
can affect0.35the
other 0.60
by neglecting it. 22It was so possible 3%
performance of a reinforced concrete element with a circular section.
ϕ22 to point 0.05
out how 0.10
tension 0.25
stiffening can affect0.35
the
1.00
performance of a reinforced30 concrete
ϕ18 element 1% with a 0.05
circular section. 0.10
Assuming that the concrete elastic modulus remains constant, the influence of tension stiffening 0.25 0.35
1.00
Assuming that the of42 ϕ22 elastic modulus
concrete 2% 0.05constant, the 0.10influence of 0.25 0.35
was evaluated in terms an equivalent moment remains of inertia. For every diameter tensionand
considered stiffening
listed
1.00 44 ϕ26 3% 0.05 0.10 0.25 0.35
was
in evaluated
Table 4, two in terms
plots wereof an equivalent
presented, the moment
first of inertia.
referring to a For every diameter
normalized moment considered
of inertia and listed
defined
1.50 40 ϕ24 1% 0.05 0.10 0.25 0.35as
in Table
the ratio 4,
1.50 two
between plots were
the secantpresented,
44 ϕ32 flexural the first
rigidity
2% referring
(EI) sec to
at
0.05a normalized
the first steel
0.10 moment
bar of
yielding inertia
0.25 and defined
the 0.35as
intact
the ratio
flexural between the
rigidity of the section
1.50 secant flexural
66 ϕ32 (EcI = EcπD /64),rigidity
4 (EI)
3% and the0.05
sec at the first steel
second referring bar yielding
0.10 to a normalized
0.25 and the
moment intact
0.35of
flexural rigidity of the section (E cI = E cπD 4/64), and the second referring to a normalized moment of
inertia defined as the ratio between the secant flexural rigidity evaluated when the concrete reaches
inertia
peak defined
stress in as the ratio between
compression and the secant flexural rigidity evaluated when the concrete reaches
Figures 13–15 show that thethe intact
influence flexural stiffness.
of tension stiffening is:
peakFigures
stress in13–15
compression
show that and
thethe intact flexural
influence of tensionstiffness.
stiffening is:
− Figures 13–15 show
less evident on thethat secant
the influence
stiffness of tension
at thestiffening
first baris:yielding than on that evaluated at
− less evident on the secant stiffness at the first bar yielding than on that evaluated at the
the− maximum
less evident bending
on themoment;
secant stiffness at the first bar yielding than on that evaluated at the
maximum bending moment;
− increasing
− increasing as
maximum as the reinforcement
bending moment;
the reinforcement ratioratio
decreases;
decreases;
− not − sonotmuch
increasing influenced by the axial
so much influenced by the axial decreases;
as the reinforcement force,
ratio except for lowfor
force, except values of the reinforcement
low values ratio; and
of the reinforcement
− higher − ratio;
not
forso much
smaller
and influenced
diameters. by the axial force, except for low values of the reinforcement
− higher
ratio; and for smaller diameters.
− higher for smaller diameters.

Figure 13. Diameter 60 cm: normalized secant stiffness at first steel bar yielding (left) and at peak
Figure 13. Diameter 60 cm: normalized secant stiffness at first steel bar yielding (left) and at peak
Figurein13.
stress Diameter 60
compression cm: normalized secant stiffness at first steel bar yielding (left) and at peak
(right).
stress
stressinincompression
compression (right).
(right).

Figure 14. Diameter 100 cm: normalized secant stiffness at first steel bar yielding (left) and at peak
Figurein14.
stress Diameter 100
compression cm: normalized secant stiffness at first steel bar yielding (left) and at peak
(right).
Figure 14. Diameter 100 cm: normalized secant stiffness at first steel bar yielding (left) and at peak
stress in compression (right).
stress in compression (right).
 Materials 2017, 10, 669 14 of 16
Materials 2017, 10, 669 14 of 16

Figure 15. Diameter 150 cm: normalized secant stiffness at first steel bar yielding (left) and at peak
Figure 15. Diameter 150 cm: normalized secant stiffness at first steel bar yielding (left) and at peak
stress in compression (right).
stress in compression (right).

6. Conclusions
6. Conclusions
Within this paper, the influence of tension stiffening on the global behavior of elements with a
Within this paper, the influence of tension stiffening on the global behavior of elements with
circular cross section and subjected to the combined axial–flexural action was studied. A preliminary
a circular cross section and subjected to the combined axial–flexural action was studied. A preliminary
analysis of the modeling approach adopted by Salvatore et al. [8] was carried out; it was then slightly
analysis of the modeling approach adopted by Salvatore et al. [8] was carried out; it was then slightly
modified in order to avoid problems in the formal definition of the elasticity modulus in tension Ect.
modified in order to avoid problems in the formal definition of the elasticity modulus in tension Ect .
The comparison of numerical results, obtained with the enhanced model, and the experimental
The comparison of numerical results, obtained with the enhanced model, and the experimental
ones, provided by the studies of Lehman and Moehle [26] and Calderone and Lehman [27],
ones, provided by the studies of Lehman and Moehle [26] and Calderone and Lehman [27], highlighted
highlighted the capacity of the model to foresee the flexural behavior of r.c. elements characterized
the capacity of the model to foresee the flexural behavior of r.c. elements characterized by a circular
by a circular section, especially from a stiffness point of view. A lack of precision was noted in the
section, especially from a stiffness point of view. A lack of precision was noted in the evaluation
evaluation of the flexural resistance, but this aspect is practically independent from the tension
of the flexural resistance, but this aspect is practically independent from the tension stiffening
stiffening phenomenon, and it can be mainly ascribed to the lack of information about the actual
phenomenon, and it can be mainly ascribed to the lack of information about the actual mechanical
mechanical behaviour of the constituent materials. The analysis of the results also highlighted the
behaviour of the constituent materials. The analysis of the results also highlighted the importance of
importance of tension stiffening in the evaluation of flexural stiffness, especially for slender
tension stiffening in the evaluation of flexural stiffness, especially for slender columns.
columns.
The parametric analysis carried out using the enhanced model, and varying the values of the axial
The parametric analysis carried out using the enhanced model, and varying the values of the
force and reinforcement ratio, highlighted that the influence of tension stiffening:
axial force and reinforcement ratio, highlighted that the influence of tension stiffening:
−− is isless
less evident
evident on onthethe
yield stiffness
yield than that
stiffness thanof that
the one
of evaluated
the one at the moment
evaluated at corresponding
the moment
to the reaching of peak stress in compression in concrete;
corresponding to the reaching of peak stress in compression in concrete;
−− increases
increases as as
thethe reinforcement
reinforcement ratio
ratio decreases;
decreases;
−
− is not so much influenced by the axial force,force,
is not so much influenced by the axial except except forvalues
for low low values
of the of the reinforcement
reinforcement ratio;
andratio; and
−− is higher
is higher forfor smaller
smaller section
section diameters.
diameters.
These
Theseresults
resultssuggests
suggeststhatthatfor
forr.c.
r.c.elements
elementscharacterized
characterizedby byaacircular
circularsection
sectionwith
withaadiameter
diameter
larger
larger than 11 mmandandwith
with a reinforcement
a reinforcement ratioratio
higherhigher
than than 1%, as
1%, such such
usualasbridge
usual piers,
bridge
thepiers, the
influence
influence of tension stiffening can
of tension stiffening can be neglected. be neglected.
The
Theinfluence
influenceof oftension
tensionstiffening
stiffeningbecomes
becomessensible
sensiblefor
forlow
lowdiameters
diameters(around
(around60 60cm,
cm,such
suchas
as
some
some foundation piles)and
foundation piles) andlowlowvalues
values of the
of the reinforcement
reinforcement ratioratio
(lower(lower thanHowever,
than 1%). 1%). However, in
in general,
general, in the
in the case case of foundation
of foundation piles,
piles, it can it canassumed
be easily be easilythat
assumed that the
the influence of influence of tension
tension stiffening on
stiffening on global
global behavior behavior
is absorbed is absorbed
by the uncertaintiesby inthe
theuncertainties in the
definition of the soil’sdefinition
mechanical ofproperties.
the soil’s
mechanical properties.
Author Contributions: Francesco Morelli, Cosimo Amico and Walter Salvatore studied the application of
the tension stiffening model to the circular sections; Francesco Morelli, Cosimo Amico and Stefano Stacul analyzed
References
the data and performed the comparison with experimental tests; Cosimo Amico Stefano Stacul and Nunziante
Squeglia carried out the parametric analysis and evaluated the influence of tension stiffening on foundation piles;
1. EN 1992. Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures, Part 1–1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings; European
Francesco Morelli and Stefano Stacul wrote the paper.
Committee for Standardization (CEN): Brussels, Belgium, 2005.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
2. FIB-Special Activity Group 5. FIB Bulletin 65: Model Code 2010—Final Draft; International Federation for
Structural Concrete (FIB): Lausanne, Switzerland, 2012.
Materials 2017, 10, 669 15 of 16

References
1. EN 1992. Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures, Part 1–1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings;
European Committee for Standardization (CEN): Brussels, Belgium, 2005.
2. FIB-Special Activity Group 5. FIB Bulletin 65: Model Code 2010—Final Draft; International Federation for
Structural Concrete (FIB): Lausanne, Switzerland, 2012.
3. Vecchio, F.J.; Collins, M.P. Response of Reinforced Concrete to In-Plane Shear and Normal Stresses;
University of Toronto: Toronto, ON, Canada, 1982.
4. Collins, M.P.; Mitchell, D. Prestressed Concrete Basics; Canadian Prestressed Concrete Institute:
Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1987.
5. Belarbi, A.; Hsu, T.T. Constitutive Laws of Concrete in Tension and Reinforcing Bars Stiffened by Concrete.
Struct. J. 1994, 91, 465–474.
6. Belarbi, A.; Hsu, T.T. Constitutive Laws of Softened Concrete in Biaxial Tension-Compression. Struct. J. 1995,
92, 562–573.
7. Bentz, E. Explaining the Riddle of Tension Stiffening Models for Shear Panel Experiments. J. Struct. Eng.
2005, 131, 1422–1425. [CrossRef]
8. Salvatore, W.; Buratti, G.; Maffei, B.; Valentini, R. Dual-phase steel re-bars for high-ductile r.c. structures,
Part 2: Rotational capacity of beams. Eng. Struct. 2007, 29, 3333–3341. [CrossRef]
9. Maffei, B.; Salvatore, W.; Valentini, R. Dual-phase steel rebars for high-ductile r.c. structures, Part 1:
Microstructural and mechanical characterization of steel rebars. Eng. Struct. 2007, 29, 3325–3332. [CrossRef]
10. Shukri, A.A.; Darain, K.M.; Jumaat, M.Z. The Tension-Stiffening Contribution of NSM CFRP to the Behavior
of Strengthened RC Beams. Materials 2015, 8, 4131–4146. [CrossRef]
11. Shukri, A.A.; Visintin, P.; Oehlers, D.J.; Jumaat, M.Z. Mechanics Model for Simulating RC Hinges under
Reversed Cyclic Loading. Materials 2016, 9, 305. [CrossRef]
12. Sato, Y.; Vecchio, F.J. Tension Stiffening and Crack Formation in Reinforced Concrete Members with
Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Sheets. J. Struct. Eng. 2003, 129, 717–724. [CrossRef]
13. Stramandinoli, R.S.; La Rovere, H.L. An efficient tension-stiffening model for nonlinear analysis of reinforced
concrete members. Eng. Struct. 2008, 30, 2069–2080. [CrossRef]
14. Lee, S.C.; Cho, J.Y.; Vecchio, F.J. Model for post-yield tension stiffening and rebar rupture in concrete
members. Eng. Struct. 2011, 33, 1723–1733. [CrossRef]
15. Kaklauskas, G.; Gribniak, V.; Bacinskas, D.; Vainiunas, P. Shrinkage influence on tension stiffening in concrete
members. Eng. Struct. 2009, 31, 1305–1312. [CrossRef]
16. Soltani, M.; An, X.; Maekawa, K. Computational model for post cracking analysis of RC membrane elements
based on local stress-strain characteristics. Eng. Struct. 2003, 25, 993–1007. [CrossRef]
17. Manfredi, G.; Pecce, M. A refined RC beam element including bond–slip relationship for the analysis of
continuous beams. Comput. Struct. 1998, 69, 53–62. [CrossRef]
18. Braga, F.; Caprili, S.; Gigliotti, R.; Salvatore, W. Hardening slip model for reinforcing steel bars. Earthq. Struct.
2005, 9, 503–539. [CrossRef]
19. Kwak, H.G.; Song, J.Y. Cracking analysis of RC members using polynomial strain distribution function.
Eng. Struct. 2002, 24, 455–468. [CrossRef]
20. Castel, A.; Vidal, T.; FranÇois, R. Effective Tension Active Cross-Section of Reinforced Concrete Beams After
Cracking. Mater. Struct. 2007, 39, 115–126. [CrossRef]
21. Carbonell-Màrquez, J.F.; Gil-Martìn, L.M.; Alejandro Fernàndez-Ruìz, M.; Hernàndez-Montes, E. Effective
area in tension stiffening of reinforced concrete piles subjected to flexure according to Eurocode 2. Eng. Struct.
2014, 76, 62–74. [CrossRef]
22. Mondal, T.G.; Prakash, S.S. Effect of tension stiffening on torsional behaviour of square RC columns.
Adv. Struct. Eng. Mater. Vol. Three 2015, 92, 2131–2144. [CrossRef]
23. CEB. Ductility of Reinforced Concrete Structures; Bulletin d’Information N◦ 242; International Federation of
Structural Concrete, FIB: Lausanne, Switzerland, 1998.
24. Mander, J.B.; Priestley, M.J.; Park, R. Theoretical Stress-Strain Model for Confined Concrete. J. Struct. Eng.
1988, 114, 1804–1825. [CrossRef]
25. Popovic, S. A numerical approach to the complete stress-strain curves for concrete. Cement Concrete Res.
1973, 3, 583–599. [CrossRef]
Materials 2017, 10, 669 16 of 16

26. Lehman, D.E.; Moehle, J.P. Seismic Performance of Well-Confined Concrete Bridge Columns. PEER Report 1998/01;
College of Engineering, University of California: Berkeley, CA, USA, December 2000.
27. Calderone, A.; Lehman, D.E.; Moehle, J.P. Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Bridge Piers Having Varying
Aspect Ratios and Varying Lengths of Confinement. PEER Report 2000/08; College of Engineering,
University of California: Berkeley, CA, USA, January 2001.

© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).