The Effect of Confinement Shapes on Over-Reinforced HSC Beams

Authors: Ross Jeffry, Muhammad N. S. Hadi

Abstract:

High strength concrete (HSC) provides high strength but lower ductility than normal strength concrete. This low ductility limits the benefit of using HSC in building safe structures. On the other hand, when designing reinforced concrete beams, designers have to limit the amount of tensile reinforcement to prevent the brittle failure of concrete. Therefore the full potential of the use of steel reinforcement can not be achieved. This paper presents the idea of confining concrete in the compression zone so that the HSC will be in a state of triaxial compression, which leads to improvements in strength and ductility. Five beams made of HSC were cast and tested. The cross section of the beams was 200×300 mm, with a length of 4 m and a clear span of 3.6 m subjected to four-point loading, with emphasis placed on the midspan deflection. The first beam served as a reference beam. The remaining beams had different tensile reinforcement and the confinement shapes were changed to gauge their effectiveness in improving the strength and ductility of the beams. The compressive strength of the concrete was 85 MPa and the tensile strength of the steel was 500 MPa and for the stirrups and helixes was 250 MPa. Results of testing the five beams proved that placing helixes with different diameters as a variable parameter in the compression zone of reinforced concrete beams improve their strength and ductility.

Keywords: Confinement, ductility, high strength concrete, reinforced concrete beam.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1055952

References:

[1] Nawy, E. (2001). Fundamentals of High-Performance Concrete. Canada: John Wiley & Sons.
[2] Sargin.M (1971). Stress-strain relationships for concrete, and the analysis of structural concrete sections, Waterloo, Solid Mechanics Div., Univ. of Water loo.
[3] Richart, F., Brandtzaeg, A., and Brown, R. (1929). the Failure of Plain and Spirally Reinforced Concrete in Compression. Illinois University, Engineering Exp-erimental Stat ion, Bulletin, No. 190, Vol.26, No.31, pp 1- 74.
[4] Martinez, S., Nilson, A.H., and Slate, F.O. (1984) Spirally Reinforced High Strength Concrete Columns, Journal of the American Concrete Institute, No. 81, Vol. 5, pp 431-442.
[5] Kwan, A. (2004). Effects of Confinement on Flexural Strength and Ductility Design of HS Concrete Beams. Structural Engineer, 38-44.
[6] Hadi, M.N.S. and Schmidt, L.C. (2002). Use of Helixes in Reinforced Concrete Beams, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 99, No2, pp 191-198.
[7] Whitehead. P. A. and Ibell T. J. (2004). Deformability and Ductility in Over- reinforced Concrete Structures. Magazine of Concrete research, Vol. 56, No. 3, pp 167-177.
[8] Hadi, M.N.S. and Elbasha, N. (2005). Effect of Tensile Reinforcement Ratio and Compressive Strengths on the Behaviour of Over-Reinforced Helically Confined HSC Beams, Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 21, pp 269-276.
[9] Australian Standard for Concrete Structures. (2001). AS3600 .North Sydney, Australia: Standard Association of Australia.
[10] Warner, R., Rangan, B., Hall, A., and Faulkes, K. (1998). Concrete Structures, Longman.
[11] Warner, R., Rangan, B., Hall, A., and Faulkes, K (1998). Concrete Structures, Longman.
[12] Onesteel Reinforcing Design Guide (2004) 500+ Rebar, Onesteel Australia.
[13] Onesteel Reinforcing Product Catalogue (2004) 500+ Rebar, Onesteel Australia.