Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/structures

Effect of stirrups densification on ultimate capacity of rectangular reinforced

concrete columns
M.K. Abd-Elhameda, , M.E. Owidab
⁎

a
Al Azhar University, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo, Egypt
b
El Gazeera Higher Institute for Engineering and Technology, Cairo, Egypt

AR T IC L E IN FO AB STR AC T

Keywords: One of the most important functions of transverse reinforcement in reinforced concrete columns (RC) is to
(RC) columns prevent buckling of longitudinal bars and transfer of tensile stresses. The presented study deals with an ex-
Capacity perimental (EXP) and finite element (FEA) investigation for stirrups densification at top and bottom of columns
Finite element also, stirrups densification behavior along of height of columns on ultimate capacity of rectangular reinforced
Axially loaded
concrete columns (RC) with different slenderness ratio (λ). A total of eight columns specimens having a cross
Slenderness ratio
section of 125 × 250 mm with a slenderness ratio λ of 6, 8, 10 and 12 were tested under axial loads using
Stirrups
Densification different stirrups densification. The results show that the failure load increases by increasing the percentage of
Experimental stirrups densification height at top and bottom of column / total column height. Also, the failure load decreases
by increasing slenderness ratio as well as stirrups densification along length of column is more active than
stirrups densification at top and bottom of column. Slightly effect of slenderness ratio on column carrying ca-
pacity with densification of stirrups at top and bottom. However, the (FEA) models can identify the structure
behavior of tested columns and can be excellent alternative of destructive laboratory test.

1. Introduction the force-deformation characteristics of bound concrete, are dependent

not only upon the volumetric ratio of lateral reinforcement but also
The parameters that affect columns behaviors depend on stirrups upon the type of lateral reinforcement (discrete square or rectangular
form and spacing, steel bar diameter, cross-section of the column, ties, spirals, envelopes).
concrete quality, percentage of longitudinal bar reinforcement, slen- Sheikh et al. [2] presented an analytical study on the increase oc-
derness ratio and other parameters. From previous parameters slen- curred in strength of confined concrete calculated on the basis of ef-
derness ratio becomes an important factor to be considered in design of fectively confined concrete area, which is less than the core concrete
columns. The present study deals with the effect of stirrups densifica- area enclosed by the centerline of the perimeter of the tie. The variables
tion at top and bottom of columns on rectangular reinforced concrete (volumetric ratio of lateral steel to concrete core, distribution of long-
(RC) columns behavior with different slenderness ratio tested under itudinal steel around the core perimeter and the resulting tie config-
axial loads. uration, tie spacing along RC column, characteristics of lateral steel and
Sargin et al. [1] executed an experimental study on the main vari- plain concrete compressive strength) were studied. The results showed
ables that affect the behavior of (RC) columns such as concrete strength, that the volumetric ratio of lateral steel to concrete core is considered as
size, spacing and grade of lateral reinforcement as well as thickness of a significant variable affecting concrete behavior. The efficiency of
cover. By analyzing the experimental results, the specimens which were confinement in column with only four corner bars is low. The effect of
laterally reinforced, have been treated as composite members con- distribution of longitudinal and lateral steel on effectiveness of con-
sisting of core and cover. The amount of confinement is provided by finement for square column core showed that when spacing of ties is
lateral reinforcement, and hence the effects of lateral reinforcement on twice the core size, the confinement is not effective in enhancing the

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: Eng_mkamel@yahoo.com (M.K. Abd-Elhamed).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2019.06.016
Received 23 April 2019; Received in revised form 31 May 2019; Accepted 24 June 2019
M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Table 1
Specifications of tested rectangular columns.

Columns Dimension slendrness Volumetric % of stirrups

Scale (1/2) ratio [ ] Height of stirrups Number of Long.
Total Stirrups ratio in densification
Group Column densification zones at stirrups at steel
number of volumetric stirrups height / total
No. No. top and bottom of densification ratio,
stirrups ratio [ t.%] densification column height
b t h columns [ ,mm] zones [ %]
h/b zones [ c%] [ %]
(mm) (mm) (mm)

A-01 750 6 11 0.93% 33%

B-01 1000 8 13 0.82% 25%

1 125 250 250 8 2.03%
C-01 1250 10 15 0.76% 20%

D-01 1500 12 17 0.72% 17%

1%
C750-33% H 750 6 250 8 11 2.03%

C1000-33% H 1000 8 333 10 15 1.89%

2 125 250 0.93% 33%
C1250-33% H 1250 10 417 12 18 1.83%

C1500-33% H 1500 12 500 14 21 1.77%

strength of concrete.
Chung et al. [3] presented a study on the value of the strength en-
hancement of (RC) concrete under confining by lateral ties. The tests
were done on sixty-five reinforced concrete columns with a 200 mm
square cross section were tested. Experimental parameters include the
compressive strength of concrete, the volumetric ratio, strength, and
confinement type of rectilinear ties, as well as the densification of
longitudinal reinforcement bars. The confinement effects are studied by
using an effectively confined distance ratio. The tie stress which is due
to the lateral concrete pressure is given as a function of both the vo-
lumetric ratio and the configuration of ties as well as the strength of
concrete. Based on the empirical data and the nonlinear multiple re-
gression method, an empirical equations were presented to determine
the strength enhancement as a function of the tie stress, the effectively
confined distance ratio, the volumetric ratio of ties, and the strength of
concrete.
Němeček et al. [4] studied experimentally the effect of transverse
reinforcement in normal and high strength concrete columns with nu-
merical simulation. All tested columns with cross section
150 × 150 mm and length 1150 mm. The length of the longitudinal
distance between stirrups in the intermediate part of columns was given
to be 50, 100 and 150 mm. It was shown that the effect of stirrups
density was noticed in the post-peak region. It was obtained that the
ductility of columns increases as the distance between stirrups is
smaller.
Tavio [5] studied the rectangular normal-strength reinforced con-
crete columns that is confining by transverse steel under axial com-
pressive loading and a nonlinear finite element molding is concluded.
Four column specimens confined by various spacing of stirrups (40, 60
and 75 mm) with a 500 mm square cross section and length 1500 mm
were tested. It was obtained from the finite element (FEA) analysis that
the axial stress contours are concentrations in the center regions of the
column cross- sections, especially in the confined areas.
Gramblička et al. [6] presented the influence of transverse re-
inforcement on the resistance of a cross-section of the reinforced con-
Fig. 1. Shows details of stirrups densification columns. crete columns, verified the accuracy of design guides for detailing of
M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Fig. 2. Concrete dimension and reinforcement for group (1).

transverse reinforcement, the diameter of stirrups as well as its impact the same quantity of transversal reinforcement per column length unit
over transverse deformation of column. It was observed that the is used. Smaller stirrup bar diameter at smaller spacing is more favor-
bending stiffness of transverse reinforcement influences the transverse able than greater stirrup bar diameter at greater spacing.
column strains and also buckling of the stirrup as well as the long- Kottb et al. [8] studied the aspects that influence the behavior of
itudinal reinforcement too. (RC) columns which can be the eccentricity of the applied load, the
Radnic et al. [7] studied the impact of adding stirrups on both the slenderness ratio of the studied column and reinforcement ratios of both
compressive strength and ductility of axially loaded confined reinforced longitudinal and transverse steel. This analytical study was carried out
concrete columns having rectangular cross-section. The influence of by using nonlinear finite element program. The finite element work was
varying concrete strengths and the difference of both stirrup bar dia- divided to nineteen columns, ten of them were tested as square columns
meters and spacing were studied on the column's ultimate capacity and and the other nine columns were tested as rectangular section. The
ductility. It was investigated that stirrups spacing greatly have more effect of the parameters on the column ultimate load, mid-height dis-
effect than the stirrup bar diameter. Columns with smaller stirrup placement, and column cracking pattern were considered.
spacing will gain greater strength capacity and greater ductility when Li et al. [9] investigated the damage evolution of stirrup-confined
M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Fig. 3. Concrete dimension and reinforcement for group (2).

Table 2
Concrete mix design.
Constituents Mix proportions by weight for m3

Crushed stone 1108 kg

Gradate sand 640 kg
Water 135 L
Cement 270 kg
Water/cement ratio (w/c) 50%

concrete by studying the influence of the stirrup volume ratio, stirrup

yield strength and concrete strength. The experimental results showed
that the strength and ductility of concrete are enhanced by applying the
appropriate arrangement of the stirrup confinement. By increasing the
stirrup volume ratio, the concrete damage can be reasonably controlled.
Du et al. [10] investigated the behavior of concrete stocky re-
inforced concrete (RC) columns having a slenderness ratio (λ) of 3 and
confined by stirrups. The confining action and the size effect for the
columns with square and circular cross sections, and the effects of
stirrup ratio and concrete cover were also explored. The test results
showed that, increasing the stirrup ratio could make the enhancement
of the nominal strength and improvement of ductility capacity. Gen- Fig. 4. Wooden forms for casting.
erally, it was deduced that the failure of the RC columns without cover
and having a square cross section and a lower stirrup ratio, shows more
M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

ii. Determination of failure modes for columns with different stirrups

densification.
iii. Presenting finite element model to simulate the effect of stirrups
densification on the behavior of rectangular reinforced concrete
(RC) columns with different slenderness ratio (λ).

2. Experimental program

The work carried out has been planned to investigate the effect of
stirrups densification at top and bottom zone of (RC) columns and
slenderness ratio (λ) on the behavior of columns. A total of eight spe-
cimens having a column cross section of 125 × 250 mm and a different
length of 750, 1000, 1250 and 1500 mm were tested. All specimens
contained six longitudinal reinforcement normal mild steel bars 8 mm
diameter and stirrups 6 mm diameter bars. The columns were divided
into two groups as shown in Table 1. Fig. 1 shows details of stirrups
densification in columns as follows:-

i. h = Total column height (mm).

ii. b = Cross section width (mm).
iii. t = Length of cross section column (mm).
iv. Δa = Stirrups densification height at top of column (mm).
v. Δb = Stirrups densification height at bottom of column (mm).
vi. Δ = Stirrups densification height at top and bottom of column
(mm) = [Δa + Δb].
vii. η = % of stirrups densification height at top and bottom of
column / total column height = [Δ / h].
viii. λ = Total column height / width of cross section column = [h / b].

2.1. Classification of columns groups

Groups (1): Contains four specimens with different slenderness ratio

6, 8, 10 and 12 tested under axial load which have a different
percentage of stirrups densification height to total column height
[ɳ] are 33, 25, 20, and 17% and the stirrups volumetric ratio [ρt %]
are 0.93, 0.82, 0.76 and 0.72% respectively. A constant volumetric
ratio in stirrups densification zones [ρc %] is 2.03% as shown in
Fig. 2.
Group (2): Contains four specimens with different slenderness ratio
6, 8, 10 and 12 tested under axial load which have a different vo-
lumetric ratio in stirrups densification zones [ρc %] 2.03, 1.89, 1.83
Fig. 5. Internal strain gauges: (A) for group (1) and (B) for group (2) respec-
and 1.77% respectively as shown in Fig. 3.The percentage of stirrups
tively.
densification height to total column height [ɳ] is constant and equal
33% and stirrups volumetric ratio [ρt %] equal to 0.93%. Table 1
shows the tested columns of group (1) and (2).
brittleness and exhibiting a stronger size effect.
The presented study deals with determination of the effect of the 3. Columns characteristics
following on the behavior of (RC) columns:
3.1. Used material
i. Effect of transverse reinforcement densification at top and bottom
zone of columns as well as along length of column of columns with i. Crushed stone with a maximum nominal size of (0.07–20.0 mm)
different slenderness ratio (λ). was used as the coarse aggregate in the mix.
M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Fig. 6. Location of strain gauges and (LVDTs).

Fig. 7. Casting of columns.

Fig. 8. Loading frame and test set up.

M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Table 3
Failure loads for all specimens.

failure
% of stirrups Columns Dimension slendrness
Long. load Pu
densification Scale (1/2) ratio [ ]
Group Column steel (kN)
height / total
No. No. ratio,
column height
[ %]
[ % = /H] b t h
h/b EXP.
(mm) (mm) (mm)

A-01 33% 750 6 660

B-01 25% 1000 8 626

1 125 250 1%

C-01 20% 1250 10 614

D-01 17% 1500 12 600

C750-33% H 750 6 660

C1000-33% H 1000 8 645

2 33% 125 250 1%

C1250-33% H 1250 10 620

C1500-33% H 1500 12 610

ii. Graded sand having sizes in the range of (0.075–0.3 mm) was used 3.2. Concrete dimensions and reinforcement details
as the fine aggregate in the mix.
iii. Ordinary Portland cement was used. Figs. 2, 3 and Table 1 show details of concrete dimensions and re-
iv. Clean fresh water is used for mixing and curing the specimens. inforcement for group [1] and group [2] respectively.
Percentage of water cement ratio 50%.
v. Normal mild steel bars St24/37 of diameter 8.0 mm were used. 3.3. Strain gauges and (LVDTs)

The concrete mix used in all specimens was designed according to Tow strain gauges have been mounted on the two vertical re-
the Egyptian code of practice. The concrete mix was designed to obtain inforcement bars at the mid of columns. One was mounted on the
target strength of 20 N/mm2 at the age of 28 days as shown in Table 2. corner vertical steel bars (BAR I), while another one was mounted on
The test specimens were casted in wooden forms shown in Fig. 4. the bar located between two corner bars (BAR II) as shown in Fig. 5.
The strain gauges used were manufactured by Tokyo Sokki Kenkyujo
M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Fig. 9. Failure mode of column [A-01, B-01, C-01 and D-01] respectively (group 1).

Co. Ltd. The strain gauges type used was PFL-30-11-3L, having re- 3.4. Casting of columns
sistance of 120.4 ± 0.5nd % Ω at 11 °C. The gauge factor ranges
2.13 ± 1.0%. Three (LVDTs) were installed on columns to measure the All specimens were casted in wooden forms as shown in Fig. 7 and a
axial deformation. Fig. 6 shows the location of (LVDTs) and strain mechanical vibrator was used. Columns forms were removed and col-
gauges. umns specimens were cured.
M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Fig. 10. Failure mode of column [C750-33% H, C1000-33% H, C1250-33% H and C1500-33% H] respectively (group 2).

4. Testing setup and procedure 5. Experimental test results

All column specimens were tested under static axially loads at the The following results were obtained:
material laboratory of Al-Azhar University. Loading frame was manu-
factured to resist the expected maximum loads. Fig. 8 shows the loading i. Failure loads are shown in Table 3.
frame and test set up. The testing load was applied using a 1000 kN As increasing load inclined cracks started to appear near the upper
hydraulic jack as shown in Fig. 8. Data acquisition system connected to part of the column head. The cracks increased with the increase of
load cell consisted of a computer and the lab tech notebook software the load the column, the concrete cover spall off and a visible
package. buckling of longitudinal reinforcement with outside buckling in the
M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Load (kN)

Strain (%)
Fig. 11. Relation between load and strain in corner steel bar I and strain in bar located between two corner bars II for column [A-01].
Load (kN)

Strain (%)
Fig. 12. Relationship between load and strain in corner steel bar I and strain in bar located between two corner bars II for column [C1000-33% H].
M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Load (kN)

Fig. 13. Comparison between load and strain in corner steel bar I for group (1).
Load (kN)

Strain (%)
Fig. 14. Comparison between load and strain in steel bar II for group (1).
M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Load (kN)

Strain (%)
Fig. 15. Comparison between load and strain I for group (2).
Load (kN)

Strain (%)
Fig. 16. Comparison between load and strain II for group (2).
M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Failure load (KN)

= 250/ 750 mm

= 333 /1000 mm

= 417/1250 mm

=500 /1500

= 250 / 1000 mm

= 250 /1250 mm
= 250 /1500 mm

Slenderness ratio ( )
Fig. 17. Relationship between failure loads and slenderness ratio for group one and group two.

stirrups occurred from one side. When the load reached failure load, compression and did not reach yield limit.
crushing was observed and total collapse of specimens occurred as iii. Comparison between failure loads and strain in steel bar I and strain
shown in Fig. 9 for group one and Fig. 10 for group two. in steel bar II for group (1) is shown in Figs. 13 and 14. Comparison
First group contains four specimens with different slenderness ratio between failure loads and strain in steel bar I and strain in steel bar
6, 8, 10 and 12 with variation percentage of stirrups densification II for group (2) are shown in Figs. 15 and 16.
height at top and bottom of columns to total column height [ɳ] 33, Figs. 13 to 16 show the strain increases by increasing slenderness
25, 20, and 17%, while second group contains four specimens with ratio for group one and two.
different slenderness ratio 6, 8, 10 and 12 with constant percentage
of stirrups densification height at top and bottom of columns to total From group one with constant stirrups densification height at top
column height [ɳ] equal to 33%. and bottom of column and group two with variable in stirrups densi-
It can be shown from Table 3, that the failure load decreases with fication height at top and bottom of column, gives a decrease in the
increasing slenderness ratio for group (1) and group (2). ultimate carrying capacity is obtained with increase in slenderness ratio
ii. The relations between failure loads and strain in corner steel bar I as shown in Fig. 17.
and strain in steel bar II located between two corner bars are shown
in Fig. 11 for column [A-01] group one and Fig. 12 for column 6. Finite element analysis
[C1000–33% H] group two.
Figs. 11 and 12 show the maximum strain in corner steel bar I is The finite element package ANSYS 15.0 was used in order to si-
greater than the maximum strain in steel bar located between two mulate the obtained experimental testing by introducing a numerical
corner bars II. While longitudinal steel strains in all columns were in model. The tested columns in the experimental work were modeled to
M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Fig. 18. The finite element mesh, steel loading plate and dimensions.

determine the failure loads and strains in each specimen. Comparison of 6.1. Defining material properties
results between experimental and finite element model (FEA) was
carried out. 6.1.1. Model of concrete
The concrete is modeled using hexahedral elements (SOLID 65) type
with eight corner nodes having three translation degrees of freedom at
M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Fig. 19. Specimens model, boundary conditions and steel loading plate.

Table 4
Details of the parametric study.

slendrness ratio
Columns Dimension Scale (1/2) Height of stirrups % of stirrups
[ ] Stirrups
Group Column Number of distribution zones at top distribution height Long. steel
volumetric ratio
No. No. stirrups and bottom of columns / total column ratio, [ %]
[ t.%]
b (mm) t (mm) h (mm) h/b [ ,mm] height [ %]

C750 750 6 7

C1000 1000 8 9
3 125 250 ----------- 0.59% -----------
C1250 1250 10 11

C1500 1500 12 13

C750-20% H 750 6 10 150 0.84%

C1000-20% H 1000 8 14 200 0.89%

4 125 250 20%
C1250-20% H 1250 10 15 250 0.76%

C1500-20% H 1500 12 19 300 0.80%

1%
C750-50% H 750 6 14 250 1.18%

C1000-50% H 1000 8 17 333 1.08%

5 125 250 50%
C1250-50% H 1250 10 22 417 1.11%

C1500-50% H 1500 12 25 500 1.06%

C750-100% H 750 6 19 750 1.60%

C1000-100% H 1000 8 25 1000 1.58%

6 125 250 100%
C1250-100% H 1250 10 31 1250 1.57%

C1500-100% H 1500 12 37 1500 1.56%

M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Fig. 20. Concrete dimension and reinforcement for group (3) without densification at top and bottom of column with different slenderness ratio (λ).

each node. The Young's modulus for concrete was taken 19,677 (N/ rough crack (no loss of shear transfer).
mm2) and Poisson's ratio was taken to be (0.2). Additional concrete
material data needed for (SOLID 65) were the shear transfer coeffi- 6.1.2. Model of longitudinal and transverse reinforcement steel elements
cients, tensile stresses, and compressive stresses. Typical shear transfer The longitudinal and transverse steel is modeled using LINK180
coefficients ranges were taken from 0.0 to1.0, with 0.0 representing a element type. Both yielding and strain-hardening failure modes can be
smooth crack (complete loss of shear transfer) and 1.0 representing a accounted. The yield stress, Fy = 280 (N/mm2).
M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Fig. 21. Concrete dimension and reinforcement for group (4) with percentage of stirrups densification height at top and bottom of column to total column
height = [Δ / h] equal 20% with different slenderness ratio (λ).

6.1.3. Model of loading plate 6.2. Boundary conditions and loading

The loading plate is modeled using (SOLID45) element type. This
element is defined by eight nodes which three degrees of freedom. The The boundary conditions were chosen to resembling the experi-
finite element mesh, steel loading plate details and dimension are mental conditions. This was done by restraining the horizontal trans-
shown in Fig. 18. lations of all base joints in the three directions.
Fig. 19 shows the boundary conditions and method of loading of
M.K. Abd-Elhamed and M.E. Owida

Fig. 22. Concrete dimension and reinforcement for group (5) with percentage of stirrups densification height at top and bottom of column to total column
height = [Δ / h] equal 50% with different slenderness ratio (λ).

specimen. concrete columns.

This parametric study depends on variation of percentage stirrups
7. Parametric study and analytical results densification height at top and bottom of column to total column
height = [Δ / h] (20, 50% and 100) as well as columns without stirrups
The finite element models performed with numerical analysis using densification at top and bottom with different slenderness ratio (λ) as
ANSYS15.0 predict strictly the analysis and discussion effective of shown in Table 4.
stirrups densification in capacity and slenderness ratio for reinforced Fig. 20 shows concrete dimension and reinforcement for columns