PT WIJAYA KARYA (Persero) Tbk Construction ServiceDevelopment Agency

1

CONTENT

Welcome Message by Rector of Sebelas Maret University...............................2

Welcome Message Founding Chairman of 3rd ICRMCE ...................................3

Committees .......................................................................................................4

Invited Speakers ................................................................................................7

Program Schedule ...........................................................................................10

Parallel Sessions ...............................................................................................12

Abstracts ..........................................................................................................21

Material and Structure ..........................................................................21

Geotechnic .............................................................................................30

Management ..........................................................................................34

Earthquake .............................................................................................38

Water Resources.....................................................................................42

Traffic and Road Construction ...............................................................45

2

WELCOME MESSAGEBy Rector of Sebelas Maret University

Assalamu’alaikum wr.wb.Distinguished guest, Mr. Atiyanto Bustono, from theMinistry of Public Work and Housing Republic Indonesia,the invited speakers, speakers, guests, participants, sponsorand partners. Welcome to Solo and to this 3rd InternationalConference on Rehabilitation and Maintenance in CivilEngineering.

As National Reputable University, we have a strong vision to be the WorldClass University by 2019. Universitas Sebelas Maret is happy to conductinternational academic events, involving experts from many countries in all overthe world. One of them is this international conference. Smart Rehabilitation andMaintenance in Civil Engineering for Sustainable Construction has been chosen asthe topic for the 3rd International Conference on Rehabilitation and Maintenanceof Civil Engineering.

It is our great pleasure to see that this conference is an effective means tolink the civil engineers from all over the world, especially those with a commitmentto advance sustainable development and environmentally friendly buildings andinfrastructures. It has been the meeting place to establish long-lastingcollaboration among the researchers and the engineers. It has provided anopportunity for the professionals and researchers to learn and share the latestdevelopment and research in civil engineering.

Therefore, I fully support this important event and would like to expressmy deepest gratitude to all the speakers for their contribution and participation. Iwould like also to thank all of the participants, who have shown their interests andconcerns to this conference and the committee for their hard work andperseverance.

On behalf of Universitas Sebelas Maret and the Organizing Committee, Iofficially open this International Conference on Smart Rehabilitation andMaintenance in Civil Engineering for Sustainable Construction.Thank you,Wassalamu’alaikum Wr.Wb.

Solo – Indonesia, November 19, 2015

Prof. Dr. Ravik Karsidi, MSRector of Universitas Sebelas MaretSolo, Indonesia

3

By Chairman of the Committee

Assalamu’alaikum wr.wb.The honorable Rector of Sebelas Maret University Prof. Dr.Ravik Karsidi, the Vice Rectors, the Chairman of Agencies,the Dean of Faculties at Sebelas Maret University.Dear keynote speakers Mr. Atiyanto Bustono, invitedspeakers and all speakers, guests and participants of the 3rd

International Conference on Rehabilitation andMaintenance in Civil Engineering (ICRMCE). This year’sconference is held in Solo City, Indonesia on 19-21November 2015. Welcome to Solo, the spirit of Java

Having long preparation after our 2nd ICRMCE at the year of 2012,eventually the day has come. The theme of this 3rd ICRMCE is Smart Rehabilitationand Maintenance in Civil Engineering for Sustainable Construction. Civil engineers,researchers, educators, students and related industries from all over the world areexpected to work hand-in-hand to build a sustainable future for our nextgeneration. We do hope that this conference will be a meaningful event forsharing ideas and expertise and strengthening our network. As we announcedworld wide through many conference gates, more than 80 already submitted bythe experts around the word. However, trough tight reviewed there will be around60 papers will be presented at this conference followed by publication in theproceeding by Transtech Publication, Switzerland.

We are honored to have Mr. Atiyanto Bustono on behalf of the DirectorateGeneral of Highway Agency of the Ministry of Public Works and Housing Republicof Indonesia, Mr Setiabudi, Prof. Buntara Sthenly Gan, Dr. Damian Palin, Prof.Masyhur Irsyam, and Dr.Hendra Jitno as invited speakers as well as Dr Han Ay Lieand Dr. Sholihin As’ad who will be the chairlady and chairman of our plenarysession. We also want to extend our great appreciation to more than 40 scholarsaround the world who have helped us to review the papers, special appreciationwill be delivered to you at our Conference Dinner tonight, where all the guest areexpected to join.

Our gratitude goes to Balai Pendidikan dan Pelatihan VII, Ministry of PublicWorks and Housing Republic of Indonesia, who has financially helped thecommittee to run this conference successfully. We would also thank our sponsorsand partners who have contributed to this conference. Among others are PTWijaya Karya Jakarta, The Construction Service Development Agency (LPJK),Techno Construction Magazines, the industry associations and the universitiespartner.

On behalf of the Organizing Committee and the Steering Committee I wishyou all a blessed and productive time in our 3rd ICRMCE.Wassalamu’alaikum Wr.Wb.

Solo – Indonesia, November 19, 2015Ary Setyawan, Ph.D.Chairman of the Committee

4

COMMITTEESOrganizing Committee

Chairman Ir. Ary Setyawan, MSc (Eng), PhD

Member Yusep Muslih Purwana, ST., MT., PhD

Prof. S.A Kristiawan, ST., MSc (Eng)., PhD

Dr. Techn. Ir. Sholihin As’ad, MT

Budi Yuliyanto, ST., MSc., PhD

Amirotul MHM, ST., MSc

Edy Purwanto, ST.,MT

Dr. Dewi Handayani, ST., MT

Dr. Niken Silmi Surjandari, ST., MT

Ir. Noegroho Djarwanti, MT

Setiono, ST., MSc

Dr. Ir. Rr Rintis Hadiani, MT

Ir. Djoko Sarwono, MT

Fajar Sri Handayani, ST., MT

Widi Hartono, ST., MT

Ir. Sunarmasto, MT

Scientific Committee

1. Prof. T. F. Fwa, Director Centre of Transportation Research, NUS,

Singapore.

2. Prof. Dr. Ing. Dr. h.c. mult. Franz Nestmann, Ordinarius, Institute for Water

and River Basin Management, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany

3. Dr. Ing. Edgar Bohner, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Onkalo,

Finland

4. Hendra Jitno, PhD, Barrick Asia Pacific, Australia

5. Prof. Buntara S Gan, Nihon University, Japan

5

6. Prof. Ir. Indra Surya B. M, MSc., PhD, Sepuluh Nopember Institute of

Technology (ITS), Indonesia

7. Prof. Ir. Tavio, MT., PhD Sepuluh Nopember Institute of Technology (ITS),

Indonesia

8. Prof. Dr. Ing. Ir. Ahmad Munawar, M.Sc., Gadjah Mada University (UGM),

Indonesia

9. Prof. Ir. Iswandi Imran,MASc., PhD, Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB),

Indonesia

10. Prof. Ir. I Nyoman Arya Thanaya,ME., PhD, Udayana University (UNUD),

Indonesia

11. Prof. Ir. Masyhur Irsyam, MSE., PhD, Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB),

Indonesia

12. Dr. Ir. Bambang Riyanto, DEA, Diponegoro University (UNDIP), Indonesia

13. Dr. Ir. Han Ay Lie, MEng, Diponegoro University (UNDIP), Indonesia

14. Ir. M. Agung Wibowo, MM., M.Sc., PhD, Diponegoro University (UNDIP),

Indonesia

15. Dr. Ir. Sri Tudjono, MS, Diponegoro University (UNDIP), Indonesia

16. Dr. Ir. Lily Montarcih Limantara, M.Sc, University of Brawijaya(UB),

Indonesia

17. Prof. Dr. Ir. Wimpie Agung N. Aspar, Agency for the Assessment and

Application of Technology, BPPT, Indonesia

18. Dr. Ir. Ade Lisantono, M.Eng, Atmajaya Catholic University, Yogyakarta ,

Indonesia

19. Anastasia Yunika, M.Eng, Atmajaya Catholic University, Yogyakarta ,

Indonesia

20. Dr. Ing Andreas Triwiyono, Gadjah Mada University (UGM), Indonesia

21. Dr. Gito Sugianto, Soedirman University, Indonesia

22. Agus Setyo Muntohar, ST, M.Eng.Sc., PhD. Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta

University, Indonesia

23. Dr. Jati Hatmoko, Diponegoro University (UNDIP), Indonesia

6

24. Dr. Ing. Jack Wijayakusuma, Pelita Harapan University (UPH), Indonesia

25. Prof. Suripin, Diponegoro University (UNDIP), Indonesia

26. Prof. Yoyong Arfiandi, Atmajaya Catholic University, Yogyakarta ,

Indonesia

27. Prof. Dr. Ir, Sobriyah, MS, Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

28. Prof. S. A Kristiawan, ST, M.Sc (Eng), PhD., Sebelas Maret University,

Indonesia

29. Kusno A. S., ST, PhD., Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

30. Dr. (techn). Ir. Sholihin As’ad, MT., Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

31. Yusep Muslih P, ST, MT, PhD., Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

32. Dr. Eng.Ir. Syafi’i, MT, Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

33. Ir. Ary Setyawan, MSc (Eng), PhD., Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

34. Dr. Dewi Handayani, ST, MT, Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

35. Dr. Ir. AP Rahmadi, MSCE, Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

36. Budi Yulianto, ST, MSc, PhD, Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

37. Dr. Ir. Mamok Suprapto, M.Eng, Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

38. Dr. Niken Silmi Surjandari, ST, MT, Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

39. Dr. Ir. Rr Rintis Hadiani, MT, Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

40. Dr. Cahyono Ikhsan, Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

41. Dr. Ir. Arif Budiarto, MT, Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

42. Dr. Senot Sangadji, ST, MT, Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

43. Dr. F Pungky Pramesti, ST, MT, Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

44. Tuti Agustin, MEng, Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

45. Dr. Winny Astuti, Sebelas Maret University, Indonesia

Advisors :

Dean Faculty of Engineering, Sebelas Maret University

Head of Civil Engineering Department, Sebelas Maret University

Head of Post Graduate Program in Civil Eng. UNS

Central Java Construction Service Development Board

10

Media Partner

The Programme of the 3rd International Conference on Rehabilitationand Maintenance in Civil Engineering (3rd ICRMCE)

Solo, 19-21 November 2015The Sahid Jaya Hotel

Jl. Gajah Mada No.82, Banjarsari, Kota Surakarta, Jawa Tengah 57132, Indonesia

Date/Day Time Activities Venues

19th Nov 2015Thursday

07.30-9.00 Registration

Pedan Room

09.00-10.15

Opening CeremonyIndonesia Raya, Hymne UNSWelcoming speech(Chair of the Organizing Committee of the 3rd

ICRMCE Ary Setiawan)Opening Speech(Rector the University of Sebelas MaretProf. Ravik Karsidi)Keynote Speech : Atiyanto Bustono(Directore General of Highway Ministry ofPublic Works and Public Housing the Republic ofIndonesia)Voca Erudita Singing Performance:“Gundul-gundul pacul”“Kopi Dangdut”Photo sessionAnnouncement

10.15-10.30 Refreshment / morning break10.30-11.45 Plenary session

Voca Erudita Singing Performance (1 song)Chairman : Han Ay Lie

10.30 -10.50 Invited Speaker 1.Title: Friction Type seismic Isolation Device ofSteel Pile Foundation in Shaking Table Tests andits Numerical SimulationsBy Prof. Buntara Sthenly Gan

10.50 -11.10

Invited Speaker 2Title : Bacteria based self-healing concrete forapplication in the marine environmentBy Damian Palin

9

16

22

23

Parallel session 1 (the 1st day)Thursday, 19th November 2015

Time Presentation Paper NumberGroup A : Material and Structure

13.00-14.40 Venue: Sukoharjo Room 1Chairman : Prof. S.A Kristiawan, ST., MSc (Eng)., PhD

13.00-13.20 Design of Structural Health Monitoring UsingWireless Sensor Network Case Study Pasupati BridgeAnnisa Dian Kumalasari; Suhartono Tjondronegoro

Strengthening and Retrofitting Strategy for Masonry13.20-13.40 (New Build Construction in Indonesia) 13

Gede Adi Susila; Parthasarati Mandal; Thomas Swailes

13.40-14.00 Durability of Class C High Volume Fly Ash Concreteincorporated with Lime Water as Mixing WaterMochamad Solikin

14.00-14.20 Sisal Fiber as Steel Bar Replacement of LightweightConcrete under Flexural LoadingMurtiadi Suryawan and Akmaluddin

14.20-14.40Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete to Improve theCharacteristics of Fire-Resistant ConcreteYenny Nurchasanah, Mohamed Alfitouri Masoud andMochammad Solikin

Time Presentation Paper NumberGroup B : Material and Structure

13.00-14.40

13.00-13.20

Venue: Sukoharjo Room 2Chairman : Dr. Senot Sangadji, ST, MTStrength Models of Axial Capacity of FRP-ConfinedCircular Concrete Columns 24

IdaBagusRaiWidiarsa and INyomanSutarjaExperimental Investigation on the Flexural

13.20-13.40 Performance of Brick Masonry Wall Retrofitted 40using PP-Band Meshes under Cyclic LoadingAndreas Triwiyono, Frederica Neo, Johan Ardianto,GumbertMayldaPratamaandAndreasSugijopranoto

13.40-14.00 Experimental Investigation Of Trapezoidal ProfileSheeting Under Varying Shear SpansA.Siva, S.Swaminathan, K.Prasanth and R.Senthil

30

Experimental Study On Shear Capacity Of Rc Beams14.00-14.20 Strengthened With Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer

Mandated By ACI 44031

Sri Tudjono, Himawan Indarto and Monica Devi

Determination of Damage Location in Reinforced14.20-14.40 Concrete Beams Using Mode Shape Curvature

Square (MSCS) Method43

Fadillawaty Saleh

12

25

(24) Strength Models of Axial Capacity of FRP-Confined Circular Concrete Columns

Ida Bagus Rai Widiarsa; I Nyoman Sutarja

Several numbers of strength models of FRP-confined circular concrete columns have beenpublished by several researchers. In this study,strength models were proposed based onexperimental data. Nine existing FRP-confinedstrength models of column confinement werereviewed in this study and two forms of strengthmodels of FRP-confined circular concrete columnswere proposed. The models were proposed basedon different number of experimental data collectedfrom literature. Based on the number ofexperimental data, i.e. 64-, 106-, 156- and 192-, thestrength models were developed. Theperformance of the existing and the proposedstrength models were evaluated and compared.The evaluation results showed that the strengthmodels proposed based on 192-data had the bestperformance among other models proposed withsmaller number of data. It was also shown that theproposed strength models had better performancethan the existing strength models.

(26) Structural Condition Assessment of Steel-Framed Maintenance Plant in Muara Badak,Balikpapan, East Kalimantan

Adinda Chaerany, Ali Awaludin, HenricusPriyosulistyo and Andreas Triwiyono

Structural condition assessment was conducted toa single-story, steel-framed maintenance plant.The assessment procedure aimed to ensure safeand sound operation of the existing structure, todetermine its remaining service life as well as topropose the appropriate remedial actions for theexisting structure. The assessment was performedthrough visual observation, Non-DestructiveTesting (NDT), field load testing, also by carrying

out structural analysis upon verified structuralmodel. Corrosion and buckling are the main typesof deterioration found within the structure owingto high salinity and slender steel sections.Structural analysis gave maximum stress ratio of0.374. Static load testing resulted in deflectionvalue of 17 mm, while dynamic load testingresulted in dynamic amplification factor of 1.06. Inconclusion, the existing structure is considered tobe structurally safe and sound with remainingservice life of approximately 36 years andsubjected to structural maintenance andstrengthening.

(30) EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION OFTRAPEZOIDAL PROFILE SHEETING UNDERVARYING SHEAR SPANS

A.Siva; S.Swaminathan; K.Prasanth; R.Senthil

Composite construction method has been mainlypopular due to its faster, lighter and economicalmethods in high rise buildings. Composite deck slabconsisting of two different components, concretebeing good in compression placed at the upperportion and the cold form profiled sheeting beinggood in resistance to tension is placed at thebottom of the deck slab. Composite slab being acombination of two different components, wideresearches have been carried out to enhance thestructural behavior and material properties. In thispaper, trapezoidal profiled sheeting is utilized andconstant geometrical dimensions are preferredthroughout the study. Specimen consists of totallysix numbers of trapezoidal profiled composite slabscast using M20 grade concrete according to therecommendations of Euro code 4. Load-deflectionbehavior is keenly observed and recorded using thedial.

Strength Models of Axial Capacity of FRP-Confined Circular Concrete Columns

Ida Bagus Rai Widiarsa1,a* and I Nyoman Sutarja2,b

1,2Department of Civil Engineering, University of Udayana, Bali, Indonesia a*email: r_widiarsa@yahoo.com bemail: nsutarja_10@yahoo.com

Keywords: strength model, axial capacity, FRP-confined, circular, concrete column.

Abstract. Several numbers of strength models of FRP-confined circular concrete columns have been published by several researchers. In this study, strength models were proposed based on experimental data. Nine existing FRP-confined strength models of column confinement were reviewed in this study and two forms of strength models of FRP-confined circular concrete columns were proposed. The models were proposed based on different number of experimental data collected from literature. Based on the number of experimental data, i.e. 64-, 106-, 156- and 192-, the strength models were developed. The performance of the existing and the proposed strength models were evaluated and compared. The evaluation results showed that the strength models proposed based on 192-data had the best performance among other models proposed with smaller number of data. It was also shown that the proposed strength models had better performance than the existing strength models.

Introduction Strengthening of reinforced concrete structures has become very important and has been

accepted in the world of construction along with that many structures of civil buildings suffered damage (deterioration). The strengthening method is more advantageous to be done when compared to the method of replacing or rebuilding of the structures. There are several conditions that make reinforced concrete structures require strengthening or retrofitting for example cracks, corrosion, damages due to earthquake loads, the imperfection of the design, and increment of service load. For concrete column structures, strengthening by wrapping columns with certain materials (method of jacketing) has become a popular method, where it especially has been done using fiber reinforced polymer (FRP). FRP has several advantages in mechanical properties such as high strength, high stiffness and durability, low density, corrosion resistance, low thermal coefficient and high strength to weight ratio [1]. FRP types that commonly used as structural strengthening materials are Glass, Carbon, Aramid and Kevlar fiber.

Some experimental tests on concrete columns with circular cross section have been conducted by several researchers [2,3,4,5,6]. The results of such studies showed that strengthening concrete columns with FRP increased the strength and performance of the columns.

Other than the experimental research, some researchers have also formulated stress-strain models for concrete columns strengthened with FRP layers [7,8,9,10,11,12]. In formulating these models, each researcher used data from the testing results having various parameters and different number of specimens. Therefore, each model would provide different results, with regard to the strength and performance after strengthening. Under these circumstances, therefore, a study on modeling the axial strength capacity of circular concrete columns confined with FRP was herein conducted in order to propose the most suitable strength model with respect to different number of experimental data and the performance of the columns.

Methodology This study was conducted by reviewing and analyzing some existing strength models of confined

circular concrete columns. Several researchers have published strength models to determine the axial compressive capacity of circular concrete columns confined with FRP sheets, such as Newman and Newman [13], Fardis and Khalili [7], Mirmiran and Shahawy [14], Miyauchi et al. [8], Toutanji [9], Lam and Teng [10], Lam and Teng [11], and Matthys et al. [12]. The strength models were formulated based on the testing results having various parameters and different number of specimens.

The majority of the available existing models to determine the compressive strength of FRP-

confined circular concrete columns are based on the confinement model derived by Richart et al. [15] using Eq. (1).

'co

l1'

co

'cc 1

ffk

ff

+= (1)

where, 'ccf and '

cof are the compressive strength of confined and unconfined concrete, respectively;

1k is the coefficient of confinement effectiveness, and lf is the lateral confining pressure. The lateral confining pressure provided by the FRP jacket is expressed in Eq. 2 as:

dtf

f ffl

2= (2)

where, ff is the rupture tensile strength of FRP; ft is the thickness of FRP; and d is the diameter of the confined concrete.

Lateral confining pressure of FRP jacket on the circular concrete section can be illustrated as in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1. Confining pressure of FRP jacket

Some of the existing strength models for FRP-confined circular concrete where had been published in the literatures were reviewed and analyzed in this study, including:

- Model of Newman and Newman [13] 86.0

'co

l'

co

'cc 7.31

+=

ff

ff (3)

- Model of Fardis and Khalili [7]

'co

l'

co

'cc 1.41

ff

ff

+= (4)

- Model of Mirmiran and Shahawy [14]

'co

587.0l

'co

'cc 269.41

ff

ff

+= (5)

- Model of Miyauchi et al. [8]

'co

l'

co

'cc 98.21

ff

ff

+= (6)

- Model of Toutanji [9]

85.0

'co

l'

co

'cc 5.31

+=

ff

ff

(7)

- Model of Lam and Teng [10]

'co

l'

co

'cc 21

ff

ff

+= (8)

- Model of Lam and Teng [11]

'co

al,'

co

'cc 3.31

ff

ff

+= (9)

where, al,f is the actual confining pressure and can be calculated as:

dtE

f ruph,ffal,

2 ε= (10)

where fE is the modulus of elasticity of FRP and ruph,ε is the hoop rupture strain of FRP. The average value of strain efficiency factor ( fruph, εε ) of 0.63 was obtained for a different type of FRP, where fε is the ultimate tensile strain of FRP from coupon tests.

- Model of Matthys et al. [12]

85.0

'co

l'

co

'cc 3.21

+=

ff

ff (11)

From the existing strength models described above, it can be seen two forms of equation. Some

models were written as follows:

'co

l1'

co

'cc 1

ffk

ff

+= (12)

and some other models had the following form: α

+= '

co

l1'

co

'cc 1

ffk

ff

(13)

where α is the coefficient of the lateral confinement ratio.

In formulating Eqs. (12) and (13) which is determining the values of k1 and α, analysis using optimization methods was done. Optimization was done by using a statistical indicator i.e. the criteria of Sum of squares error (SSE), which was formulated as follows [16]:

( ) ( ){ } 2heo

'co

'ccexp

'co

'ccE ∑ −= tffffSS (14)

The analysis to formulate the strength models was done based on different number of

experimental data. The data were grouped according to the research development or based on the year of publication. The data were summarized as follows and in detailed were shown in Table 1.

- 1994 to 1999 : 64 data - 1994 to 2001 : 106 data - 1994 to 2007 : 156 data - 1994 to 2012 : 192 data

Table 1. Database of Experimental Results of FRP-Confined Circular Concrete Columns

Researcher (Year) Number of specimens

Dimension Concrete strength (MPa)

FRP

d (mm) L (mm) Type ft (mm) ff (MPa)

Howie & Karbhari [17] 21 152 305 38.6 CFRP 0.31-1.22 755-1352

Karbhari and Gao [18] 8 152 305 18, 38.6 CFRP 0.33+5.31 513-1352

Watanable et al. [19] 9 100 200 30.2 CFRP 0.14-0.67 1285-2873

Harries et al. [20] 6 152 610 26.2 CFRP 1.0, 2.0 330-580

Matthys et al. [21] 4 150 300 34.9 CFRP 0.12, 0.24 1100, 2600

Miyauchi et al. [8] 16 150 300 23.6-51.9 CFRP 0.11-0.33 3481

Kshirsagar et al. [22] 3 102 204 38-39.5 CFRP 1.42 363

Rochette and Labossiere [23] 7 100, 150 200, 300 42, 43 CFRP 0.60-5.21 230, 1265

Xiao and Wu [24] 27 152 305 33.7-55.2 CFRP 0.38-1.14 1577

Zhang et al. [25] 5 150 300 34.3 CFRP 1.0-2.83 167-753

Shehata et al. [26] 4 150 300 25.6, 29.8 CFRP 0.165, 0.33 3550

Lam and Teng [27] 18 152 305 34.3-38.5 C/GFRP 0.165-2.54 490, 4198

Lam et al. [28] 6 152 305 38.9, 41.1 CFRP 0.165, 0.33 3754, 3800

Jiang and Teng [29] 23 152 305 33.1-47.6 C/GFRP 0.11-1.36 2033-3905

Wang and Wu [30] 12 150 300 29.2-52.3 CFRP 0.165, 0.33 3788

Benzaid et al. [31] 12 160 320 29.5-63.01 CFRP 1.0, 3.0 450

Liang et al. [32] 12 100-300 200-600 22.7-25.9 CFRP 0.167-0.50 3591

Results and Discussion

Strength Models Proposed Using Different Number of Experimental Results Analysis to determine the value k1 of the Eq. 12 was performed by means of optimization

process to obtain the smallest value of SSE. Optimization was done for each number of testing data and the results were shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2. Performance of strength models in a form of Eq. 12 with different number of testing data

It can be seen from Fig. 2 that the larger the number of experimental data resulted in a greater value of SSE. The model based on 64 testing data had the smallest value of SSE which was about 4.90. Meanwhile, the greatest value of SSE was obtained from the strength model proposed based on 192 testing data which was about 12.63.

Furthermore, analysis to determine the value k1 and α of the Eq. 13 was performed by similar

method to obtain the smallest value of SSE. Optimization was also done for each number of experimental data and the results were shown in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. Performance of strength models in a form of Eq. 13 with different number of testing data

Similar condition as in Fig. 2 was observed from Fig. 3 as well. The larger the number of testing data resulted in a greater value of SSE. The model based on 64 testing data had the smallest value of SSE which was about 2.87. Meanwhile, the greatest value of SSE was obtained from the strength model proposed based on 192 testing data which was about 10.61. Until this stage, no optimum value of k1 and α were concluded. Therefore, no definitive strength model was proposed.

4.90

5.71

7.26

12.63

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

2.22 (64 data)

2.2 (106 data)

2.12 (156 data)

2.22 (192 data)

SSE

k 1

2.87

4.72

6.33

10.61

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

2.22 ; 0.81 (64 data)

2.16 ; 0.89 (106 data)

2.10 ; 0.89 (156 data)

2.17 ; 0.88 (192 data)

SSE

k 1

Verification of the Proposed Strength Models In order to define the proposed strength model which gives the best performance, i.e. the

smallest value of SSE, all strength models with corresponding coefficients k1 and α were evaluated using 192 data of experimental results. The result of the evaluation showed that the strength model proposed using 192 experimental data had the best performance with the values of SSE of 12.63 and 10.61, respectively for models having the form of Eqs. 12 and 13. The evaluation results are completely shown in Figs. 4 and 5.

Fig. 4. Performance of strength models having a form of Eq. 12

Fig. 5. Performance of strength models having a form of Eq. 13

Based on the aforementioned evaluation results, the following equations were proposed as the

strength models to determine the axial compressive capacity of FRP-confined circular concrete columns:

'co

l'

co

'cc 22.21

ff

ff

+= (15)

88.0

'co

l'

co

'cc 17.21

+=

ff

ff

(16)

12.63

12.66

13.15

12.63

12.2 12.4 12.6 12.8 13.0 13.2

2.22 (192 data)

2.2 (192 data)

2.12 (192 data)

2.22 (192 data)

SSE

k 1

11.77

10.66

10.94

10.61

10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0

2.22 ; 0.81 (192 data)

2.16 ; 0.89 (192 data)

2.10 ; 0.89 (192 data)

2.17 ; 0.88 (192 data)

SSE

k 1

When compared with the existing strength models and analysed using 192 experimental data, again the strength models proposed in this study showed the best performance, as shown in Fig. 6.

Fig. 6. Performance comparison between proposed and existing strength models

Conclusions Strength models of FRP-confined circular concrete columns under axial compressive loads were

proposed in this study based on different number of experimental data. The analysis results showed that the value of confinement effectiveness k1 varies between 2.10 to 2.22 and the value of coefficient of lateral confining ratio α varies between 0.81 to 0.89. The strength models that proposed in this study using 192 experimental data had the best performance. The analysis also shows the proposed strength models have better performance than those of the existing strength models.

References

[1] Pendhari. “Continuous bounded controller for active control of structures”. Computers and Structures, Vol. 84 (2008), 798-807.

[2] Li, J. and Hadi, M. N. S. “Behaviour of Externally Confined High Strength Concrete Columns Under Eccentric Loading.” Composite Structures, 62 (2003), 145-153.

[3] Hadi, M. N. S. “Behaviour of FRP Wrapped Normal Strength Concrete Columns Under Eccentric Loading.” Composite Structures, 72 (2006), 503–511.

[4] Hadi, M. N. S. “Behaviour of FRP Strengthened Concrete Columns Under Eccentric Compression Loading.” Composite Structures, 77 (2007a), 92–96.

[5] Hadi, M. N. S. “The Behaviour of FRP Wrapped HSC Columns Under Different Eccentric Loads.” Composite Structures, 78 (2007b), 560–566.

[6] Bisby, L. and Ranger, M. “Axial-Flexural Interaction In Circular FRP-Confined Reinforced Concrete Columns.” Construction and Building Materials, 24 (2010), 1672-1681.

41.76

15.08

108.3

41.13

65.20

187.57

12.63

10.61

0 50 100 150 200

Matthys et al. (2005)

Lam & Teng (2002)

Toutanji (1999)

Miyauchi et al. (1999)

Mirmiran & Shahawy (1997)

Fardis & Khalili (1982)

Proposed Model Eq. 15

Proposed Model Eq. 16

SSE

[7] Fardis, M. N. And Khalili, H. H. “FRP-encased concrete as a structural material.” Magazine of Concrete Research, 34(121), 1982, 191-202.

[8] Miyauchi, K., Inoue, S., Kuroda, T., and Kobayashi, A. “Strengthening Effects of Concrete Column with Carbon Fiber Sheet." Transactions of the Japan Concrete Institute, 21 (1999), 143-150.

[9] Toutanji, H. A. “Stress-Strain Characteristics of Concrete Columns Externally Confined with Advanced Fiber Composite Sheets.” ACI Materials Journal, 96(3), 1999, 397-404.

[10] Lam L. and Teng, J. G. “Strength Model for Fiber-Reinforced Plastic-Confined Concrete.” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 128(5), 2002, 612-623.

[11] Lam, L. and Teng, J. G. “Design-Oriented Stress-Strain Model for FRP-Confined Concrete.” Construction and Building Materials, 17 (2003), 471-489.

[12] Matthys, S., Toutanji, H., Audenaert, K., and Taerwe, L. “Axial Load Behavior of Large-Scale Columns Confined with Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Composites." ACI Structural Journal, 102(2), 2005, 258-267.

[13] Newman, K. and Newman, J. B. “Failure Theories and Design Criteria for Plain Concrete.” Proceeding of International Civil Engineering Materials Conference On Structure, Solid Mechanics and Engineering Design (Southampton, 1969). Wiley Interscience, New York, (1972), Part 2, 963-995.

[14] Mirmiran, A. and Shahawy, M. “Behavior of Concrete Columns Confined by Fiber Composites." Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 123(5), 1997, 583-590.

[15] Richart, F. E., Brandtzaeg, A. and Brown, R. L. “A Study of the Failure of Concrete Under Combined Compressive Stresses.” Bulletin No. 185, Engineering Experiment Station, Univ. of Illinois, Urbana, 1928.

[16] Montgomery, D. C. and Runger, G. C. Applied Statistics and Probability for Engineers. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 2003.

[17] Howie, I. and Karbhari, V. M. “Effect of materials architecture on strengthening efficiency of composite wraps for deteriorating columns in the North_East.“ Proceeding of the 3rd Materials Engineering Conference, Material Engineering Division, ASCE, 1994, 199-206.

[18] Karbhari, V. M. and Gao, Y. “Composite Jacketed Concrete Under Uniaxial Compression – Verification of Simple Design Equations.“ Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, ASCE, 9(4), 1997, 185-193.

[19] Watanable, K., Nakamura, H., Honda, T., Toyoshima, M., Iso, M., Fujimaki, T., Kaneto, M. And Shirai, N. “Confinement effect of FRP sheet on strength and ductility of concrete cylinders under uniaxial compression.“ Proceeding of the 3rd International Symposium, Japan Concrete Institute, Sapporo, Japan, 1, 1997, 233-240.

[20] Harries, K. A., Kestner, J., Pessiki, S., Sause, R. and Ricles, J. “Axial behavior of reinforced concrete columns retrofit with FRPC jackets.“ Proceeding of the 2nd International Conference on Composites in Infrastructures (ICCI), Tucson, Arizona, 1998, 411-425.

[21] Matthys, S., Taerwe, L. And Audenaert, K. “Test on Axially Loaded Concrete Columns Confined by FRP Sheet Wrapping.“ Proceeding of the 4th International Symposium, SP-188, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan, 1999, 217-228.

[22] Kshirsagar, S., Lopez-Anido, R. A. and Gupta, R. K. “Environmental aging of fiber-reinforced polymer-wrapped concrete cylinders.“ ACI Material Journal, 97(6), 2000, 703-712.

[23] Rochette, P. and Labossiere, P. “Axial Testing of Rectangular Column Models Confined with Composites.“ Journal of Composites for Construction, ASCE, 4(3), 2000, 129-136.

[24] Xiao, Y. and Wu, H. “Compressive Behavior of Concrete Confined by Carbon Fiber Composite Jackets.“ Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, ASCE, 12(2), 2000, 139-146.

[25] Zhang, S., Ye, L. and Mai, Y. W. “A Study on Polymer Composite Strengthening Systems for Concrete Columns.“ Applied Composite Materials, 7, 2000, 125-138.

[26] Shehata, I. A. E. M., Carneiro, L. A. V. and Shehata, L. C. D. “Strength of short concrete columns confined with CFRP sheets.“ Materials and Structures, 35, 2002, 50-58.

[27] Lam, L. and Teng, J. G. “Ultimate Condition of Fiber Reinforced Polymer-Confined Concrete.“ Journal of Composites for Construction, ASCE, 8(6), 2004, 539-548.

[28] Lam, L., Teng, J. G., Cheung, C. H. and Xiao, Y. “FRP-confined concrete under axial cyclic compression.“ Cement & Concrete Composites, 28, 2006, 949-958.

[29] Jiang, T. and Teng, J. G. “Analysis-oriented stress-strain models for FRP-confined concrete.“ Engineering Structures, 29, 2007, 2968-2986.

[30] Wang, L. M. and Wu, Y.F. “Effect of corner radius on the performance of CFRP-confined square concrete columns: Test.“ Engineering Structures, 30, 2008, 493-505.

[31] Benzaid, R., Mesbah, H. And Chikh, N. E. “FRP-confined Concrete Cylinders: Axial Compression Experiments and Strength Model.“ Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, 29(16), 2010, 2469-2488.

[32] Liang, M., Wu, Z. M., Ueda, T., Zheng, J. J. and Akogbe, R. “Experiment and modeling on axial behavior of carbon fiber reinforced polymer confined concrete cylinders with different sizes.“ Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, 31(6), 2012, 389-403.