Flexural behavior of PVC stay-in-place formed RC walls

Noran Wahab
,1
, Khaled A. Soudki
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada
h i g h l i g h t s
PVC stay-in-place forming system enhanced the exural behavior of RC walls.
Effect of the PVC on the yield load decreased as the reinforcement ratio increased.
PVC increase to ultimate loads depends on concrete thickness and/or reinforcement ratio.
PVC enhanced the ductility of the wall system with an increase in ultimate deection.
A model was proposed to predict the capacity of the PVC encased walls.
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 4 March 2013
Received in revised form 16 June 2013
Accepted 21 July 2013
Available online 24 August 2013
Keywords:
Concrete walls
Stay-in-place formwork
Flexure
Cracks
Bending
PVC
Rupture
Compression
Static load
Connectors
a b s t r a c t
The study experimentally investigates the exural behavior of concrete wall strips encased with PVC
stay-in-place (SIP) concrete forming system. The system consists of interconnected Polyvinyl chloride
(PVC) elements; panels, connectors and bracings. Thirty PVC encased wall specimens were cast with
dimensions: 457 mm wide by 200 mm or 250 mm deep by 3050 mm long. The variables studied were:
the concrete core thickness (200 mm or 250 mm), the reinforcement ratio, and the connector type (mid-
dle and braced connector). The connectors used were middle connectors with at panels or connectors
with inclined bracing on the compression side and insulation (foam) on the tension side. All the speci-
mens were tested under four point bending with a shear span of 1150 mm. The test results showed that
the PVC stay-in-place formwork system was effective in enhancing the exural behavior of the encased
walls. For a given reinforcement, the PVC encased specimens cracked and failed in the same mode,
regardless of the connector type or the concrete cores thickness. The PVC encased walls exhibited higher
yield and ultimate loads in comparison to control walls. The increase in load for the PVC encased walls
decreased with higher reinforcement ratios. The contribution of the PVC stay-in-place system to the ulti-
mate load increased as the concrete core thickness decreased and/or as the reinforcement ratio
decreased. A model based on strain compatibility was developed to predict the exural capacity of
PVC stay-in-place encased walls. Predictions were in close agreement with measured results.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Stay-in-place (SIP) formwork is being utilized in current con-
crete construction as an alternative to the conventional wood
formwork. In contrast to conventional formwork, stay-in-place
formwork is left in place permanently with the structure. Applica-
tions of the system include agricultural, industrial and residential
buildings as; foundation walls, retaining walls, water and waste
treatment tanks, noise abatement walls, and in swimming pools.
Advantages of such systems include increased structural strength,
improved durability and protection from corrosion [14,6,7,911].
Below is a review of some of the previous research work on SIP
systems.
Chahrour et al. [2] investigated experimentally a polymer-based
stay-in-place formwork (Royal Building System) for concrete walls.
The program consisted of testing a total of 15 wall specimens in
exure under four point bending. The test variables were: the wall
thickness (100, 150 and 200 mm) and the reinforcement ratio
(plain and reinforced concrete walls). The specimens were simply
supported with a clear span of 2000 mm and a shear span of
500 mm. The walls failed by rupture of the polymer ange in ten-
sion. Control walls were not tested in this program. They reported
that polymer stay-in-place encased concrete walls tested in exure
exhibited a ductile response that depends on the specimen thick-
ness and steel reinforcement ratio. As the wall thickness increased
from 100 mm to 150 mm, the toughness increased by 10%. For the
same wall thickness (150 mm), the toughness of the reinforced
0950-0618/$ - see front matter 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2013.07.073

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 5197290889.

E-mail addresses: nwahab@uwaterloo.ca (N. Wahab), soudki@uwaterloo.ca
(K.A. Soudki).
1
On leave from Department of Civil Engineering, Cairo University, Egypt.
Construction and Building Materials 48 (2013) 830839
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Construction and Building Materials
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ conbui l dmat
specimens was 57% more than the toughness of the un-reinforced
specimens.
Rteil et al. [11] tested eight PVC stay-in-place encased walls
monotonically under four point bending. All specimens were
305 mm wide and 2500 mm long. The specimens were reinforced
with two 10M rebars. The variables were the depth of the speci-
men (150 mm or 200 mm) and the connector conguration (at
in the middle or inclined at the corner). Test results showed that
the PVC stay-in-place formwork system increased the cracking
load, yield load and ultimate load by 36%, 78% and 36% on average,
respectively, compared to the control specimens. In addition, the
ductility index for the PVC stay-in-place encased specimens in-
creased by 25%. The type of the connectors had no effect on the
behavior of the PVC SIP formwork specimens.
Kuder et al. [8] investigated the exural performance of the
PVC-encased systems by testing reinforced concrete beams with
and without the PVC components. The beams were 152.4 mm deep
by 152.4 mm wide by 609.6 mm long. The beams were longitudi-
nally reinforced with a #3 rebar (9.5 mm diameter). The main test
variable was the wall conguration. Four different congurations
were used where the main conguration was the panels with the
standard connectors. The other three congurations were formed
by adding middle connector or inclined bracing on tension and
compression faces or inclined bracing on tension face only. They
were tested in three-point bending with a span of 508 mm. The
PVC encased beams showed an increase in the peak load by 39
66% depending on the PVC conguration where the PVC congura-
tion inuence the extent of the increase in peak load and
toughness.
Based on the above, few studies are reported in the literature on
the effectiveness of PVC stay-in-place formwork on the structural
behavior of concrete walls. The main objectives of this study were
to investigate the exural behavior of concrete walls encased with
PVC stay-in-place formwork system and to develop a simple model
to predict the exural capacity of such walls.
2. Test program
The test program consisted of testing thirty specimens as given
in Table 1. Six specimens were cast without a stay-in-place form-
ing system to act as control walls. The remaining 24 specimens
were cast in a stay-in-place (SIP) forming system.
The SIP system used in this study is manufactured by Octaform
and consists of interconnected polyvinyl chloride (PVC) elements;
panels, connectors and bracings. The PVC elements have a series
of openings in the interconnecting elements for steel placement
and lateral ow of concrete. The elements are shipped separately
to the site where they are assembled together forming the shell
(formwork) for a concrete wall. The panels are used to erect the
two faces of the wall which are connected by the hollow
connectors.
The test variables studied were: (a) the concrete core thickness
(200 mm or 250 mm (8 in. or 10 in.)), (b) the amount of steel rein-
forcement (three 10M rebars, three 15M rebars and three 20M re-
bars), and (c) the connector type. Two congurations for the
connectors were used; middle connectors with at panel or con-
nectors with inclined bracing (45) on the compression side and
insulation (foam) on the tension side (Fig. 1). Some of these vari-
ables were previously studied in the literature [11] and Kuder
et al. [8]). However, the work presented here provides a wider
range of values for these variables than the work presented before.
The specimen notation is as follows: the rst letter stands for
the specimen type; control (C) and Octaform PVC encased walls
(O). The second number stands for the concrete core thickness in
inches (8 in. or 10 in.). The third letter represents the type of the
connector, middle (M) and braced (B). The last number represents
the diameter of the reinforcement. For example: O-10M-20
stands for a 10 in. thick encased wall with middle connector rein-
forced with 320M.
2.1. Test specimen
The specimen had a rectangular cross section. All specimens
were 457 mm wide with variable concrete core thickness
(200 mm or 250 mm) and were 3050 mm long. Specimens with
middle connectors were 200 mm (8 in.) or 250 mm (10 in.) thick.
Specimens with inclined bracing and insulation were 250 mm
(10 in.) or 305 mm (12 in. thick). The insulation was 50 mm thick
(2 in.). Therefore, the concrete core thickness for all specimens
was 200 mm (8 in.) or 250 mm (10 in.).
Each specimen consisted of 3 bottom and 3 top panels. Speci-
mens with middle connectors had 7 connectors at 76 mm. Speci-
mens with braced connectors had 4 connectors at 152 mm,
inclined bracing on the compression side and insulation (2 in. thick
foam) on the tension side. All specimens were reinforced in the lon-
gitudinal direction (3050 mm) with 3 (10M or 15M or 20M) rebars.
They were also reinforced in the transverse direction (457 mm)
with 510M rebars to simulate the transverse reinforcement used
Table 1
Test matrix.
Group Thickness Concrete core Connector type RFT
a
RFT
a
ratio (%) Panel type No. of specimens
C-8-NA-10 200 mm (8 in.) 200 mm (8 in.) NA 310M 0.43 1
C-8-NA-15 315M 0.86 1
C-8-NA-20 320M 1.29 1
O-8-M-10 200 mm (8 in.) 200 mm (8 in.) Middle 310M 0.43 Flat 2
O-8-M-15 315M 0.86 2
O-8-M-20 320M 1.29 2
O-8-B-10 250 mm (10 in.) 200 mm (8 in.) Braced 310M 0.43 Insulated 2
O-8-B-15 315M 0.86 2
O-8-B-20 320M 1.29 2
C-10-NA-10 250 mm (10 in.) 250 mm (10 in.) NA 310M 0.32 1
C-10-NA-15 315M 0.63 1
C-10-NA-20 320M 0.95 1
O-10-M-10 250 mm (10 in.) 250 mm (10 in.) Middle 310M 0.32 Flat 2
O-10-M-15 315M 0.63 2
O-10-M-20 320M 0.95 2
O-10-B-10 305 mm (12 in.) 250 mm (10 in.) Braced 310M 0.32 Insulated 2
O-10-B-15 315M 0.63 2
O-10-B-20 320M 0.95 2
a
RFT stand for reinforcement.
N. Wahab, K.A. Soudki / Construction and Building Materials 48 (2013) 830839 831
in practice. The longitudinal and transverse steel were tied together
using spiral ties.
2.2. Specimen fabrication
Wooden boxes were fabricated for pouring the control walls.
For the stay-in-place- formwork encased walls, all the specimens
were assembled horizontally. The walls were then ipped verti-
cally to the casting position using the crane. The walls were cast
in gang form. They were stacked against one another forming a
row in a box. After the row was completed a sheet of ply wood
was placed vertically to separate the rows from one another. Once
the box was completed, it was girdled with studs (2 in. 4 in.)
spaced at 600 mm (centerline to centerline).
The concrete was supplied by a local ready mix plant. The con-
crete was poured in 3 lifts using a bucket until the walls were com-
pletely lled. After each lift, the specimens were vibrated using a
hand vibrator that was 3 m long. Cylinders (100 mm 200 mm)
were taken from the concrete mix at the beginning and the middle
of the casting.
The walls were cured for 5 days by spraying them with water
twice daily and keeping them covered with wet burlap and plastic.
After 5 days, concrete cylinders were tested to ensure that the
compressive strength is more than 20 MPa and therefore the walls
can be stripped, handled and rotated horizontally without cracking
the concrete.
2.3. Material properties
The same concrete mix was used for the two batches. Batch 1
was used for the control walls and the PVC encased walls with
middle connectors. Batch 2 was used for the SIP encased walls with
braced connectors. The concrete had 10 mm aggregate size. Super
plasticizers and retarders were used to provide a workable con-
crete. The slump for all the mixes ranged from 180 mm to
200 mm. Compressive tests were conducted on the concrete cylin-
ders taken from the batches at 21 days and 28 days. The walls were
tested at 21 days and hence the strength of the concrete was deter-
mined at this age. At the desired age, eight concrete cylinders were
tested. The highest and lowest compressive strengths were elimi-
nated. Thus, the compressive strength value represents the average
of six tested cylinders. The target concrete strength was 35 MPa.
However, the actual concrete strength at 21 days was 48 MPa
and 40 MPa for batch 1 and 2, respectively. The concrete strength
at 28 days was 53 MPa and 43 MPa for batch 1 and 2, respectively.
Steel rebars 10M, 15M and 20Mwere used. The reinforcing steel
bars had a yield strength of 490 MPa and an ultimate strength of
630 MPa according to the manufacturers data sheet. The polyvinyl
chloride (PVC) had a tensile strength of 45.9 MPa and a tensile
modulus of 2,896 MPa, as provided by the manufacturer (Fig. 2).
2.4. Instrumentation and test procedure
For the walls without foam, two strain gauges were mounted on
two steel rebars at mid span. For the walls with foam, one strain
gauge was mounted on one steel rebar at mid span. For all the
walls, two gauges were mounted on the middle connector at mid
concrete core height and three quarters the concrete core height
(measured from the compression side). Five (5) mm long gauges
were used for the steel reinforcement and the PVC connectors.
The strain gauges were waxed and coated with VM tape (3 mm
thick) to protect the gauge during casting. After casting the speci-
mens and before load testing, two strain gauges were mounted on
the PVC panels. One gauge was mounted on the top panel and the
other gauge was placed at the bottom panel. Also, a gauge was
mounted on the concrete on the compression face inside a cut
made in the PVC panel. Sixty (60) mm long gauges were used for
measuring the strain in the concrete.
The beams were tested at age of 21 days in four-point bending
using a servo-hydraulic actuator controlled by a MTS 407 control-
ler. The shear span was 1150 mm and the constant moment region
was 600 mm. The loading rate was 2.5 mm/min. The duration of
the test varied between 60 and 120 min. The test set up is shown
in Fig. 3. The beam had a hinge support at one end and a roller sup-
port at the other. The hinge support was a half cylinder resting on a
curved plate. The roller support was a steel cylinder between two
curved plates. The load was measured using a 333 kN load cell. The
deection of the top panel (compression side of the wall) was mea-
sured using the internal LVDT. An external LVDT was mounted at
mid span to measure the deection of the soft of the wall (tension
(a) Assembling a wall with
middle connector
(b) Cross section of the wall with
inclined bracing after assembly
Connector
Panel
Inclined
bracing
Fig. 1. The Octaform walls.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035
S
t
r
e
s
s

(
M
P
a
)
Strain ()
Fig. 2. Stress strain behavior for the PVC.
832 N. Wahab, K.A. Soudki / Construction and Building Materials 48 (2013) 830839
side). The test was stopped when the load dropped by more than
20% of the peak load or if the deection exceeded 200 mm.
2.5. Sectional analysis
A sectional analysis was carried out to compute the capacity of
the PVC encased walls at concrete crushing or PVC rupture. Fig. 4
shows a schematic of the PVC encased wall used in the analysis.
The tension forces are resisted by the steel, the solid part of the
connector and the PVC panel where the contribution of the web
of the connector are neglected. The compression forces are resisted
by the concrete and the PVC panel where the contribution of the
connector above the neutral axis is neglected.
The assumptions of the analysis were as follows:
Linear strain distribution along the cross section of the wall.
Tension forces are resisted by the steel rebar, the solid parts of
the connector and the PVC panel. The contribution of the con-
nector web was neglected.
Compression forces are resisted by the concrete and the PVC
panel.
The contribution of the connector in compression was
neglected.
The steel stress strain curve is modeled as bilinear with stress in
steel rebar taken as:
F
s
e
s
E
s
if e
s
6 e
y
F
s
F
y
0:01 E
s
e
s
e
y
A
s
if e
s
> e
y
1
where E
s
is the Young modulus of the steel reinforcement, equal to
200 GPa, e
s
is the strain in the steel from the sectional analysis, e
y
is
the yield strain, A
S
is the cross sectional area of the steel and F
y
is
the yield stress.
PVC stress strain behavior is nonlinear as shown in Fig. 2. The
relation between the stress (r
pvc
) and the stain (e
pvc
) in the
PVC is represented by
r
pvc
71518 e
2
pvc
3412:1 e
pvc
2
Concrete crushing strain is taken equal to 0.0025. This strain
value is in agreement with the measured experimental crushing
strain and with the value recommended by CSA A23.3-04 for
high concrete strength. The actual concrete compressive stress
can be represented by an equivalent rectangular stress block
using coefcients a and b [5]:
a b
e
c
e
co

1
3
e
c
e
co

2
3
a
4
ec
eco
h i
6
2ec
eco
h i 4
The depth of the compression block (c) is calculated by strain
compatibility and equilibrium of forces as follows (Fig. 4):
a b c b f
c
r
pvcpc
A
pvcp
r
pvcpt
A
pvcp
r
pvcc
A
pvcc
e
s
E
s
A
s
5
The moment capacity of the wall is calculated using the follow-
ing equation:
M
app
r
pvctp
A
pvcp
h a b
c
2

r
pvcc
A
pvcc
d
pvcc
a b
c
2

e
s
E
s
A
s
d
s
a b
c
2

r
pvcpc
A
pvcp
a b
c
2

6
The peak load is calculated from moment capacity using statics
(Fig. 3):
P
u

2 M
app
a
; a 1100 mm
where
a shear span
A
pvcp
area of the PVC panel
A
pvcc
area of the PVC connector
A
s
area of steel reinforcement
b width of the cross section
c depth of the compression block
d
pvcc
depth of the centroid of the PVC connector measured
from the compression face
d
s
depth of the steel reinforcement measured from the
concrete compression face
E
s
Youngs modulus of steel reinforcement
f
c
compressive strength of the concrete
h height of the cross section
M
app
externally applied bending moment
Pu ultimate load
a ratio of the average stress in the compression block to
the concrete strength
b ratio of the depth of the compression stress block to
the depth of the neutral axis
e
c
strain at extreme top bre of concrete for a given load
level
e
co
strain at maximum concrete compressive strength
e
pvc
strain in the PVC
e
s
strain of the steel reinforcement
r
pvc
stress in the PVC
r
pvcpt
stress of the PVC panel on the tension side
r
pvcpc
stress of the PVC panel on the compression side
r
pvcc
stress of the PVC connector
The input parameters for the analysis were the material properties,
the concrete crushing strain and rupture strain for the PVC. By com-
bining the linear strain distribution with the force and moment
equilibrium equations, the peak load for the PVC encased wall at
concrete crushing or PVC rupture was computed. The calculated
loads will be presented and compared to the experimental loads
in the following sub sections.
External
LVDT
Roller
support
1150
mm
Loading
points
Fig. 3. Test set up.
N. Wahab, K.A. Soudki / Construction and Building Materials 48 (2013) 830839 833
2.6. Test results
Table 2 gives a summary of the cracking, yield and ultimate load
and deection for all the control specimens. As the rebar diameter
and/or the concrete core thickness (depth of the steel) increases,
the yield and ultimate load increase. Tables 3 and 4 give a sum-
mary of the cracking, yield and ultimate load and deection for
all the PVC encased specimens with middle and braced connectors,
respectively.
2.7. Modes of failure
For a given reinforcement, the PVC encased specimens cracked
and failed in the same mode, regardless of the connector type or
the wall thickness. Cracks rst appeared on the tension side at
mid span in the constant moment region. As the load increased,
cracks occurred underneath and close to the loading point. As the
loading continued, cracks propagated through the depth of the
specimen until the steel reached yielding. After yielding, the
behavior of the specimen was slightly different depending on steel
reinforcement ratio. The PVC encased specimens reinforced with
310M failed by yielding of the steel rebar followed by rupture
of the PVC panel on the tension side as shown in Fig. 5a. The PVC
encased specimens reinforced with 315M or 320M failed by
crushing of the concrete followed by buckling of the PVC panel
on the compression side as shown in Fig. 5b. This mode of failure
is similar to the failure reported by Rteil et al. [11]. In contrast,
all the control specimens, except the control walls that are
250 mm (10 in.) thick and reinforced with 310M or 315M, failed
by steel yielding at mid span followed by concrete crushing at mid
span as shown in Fig. 6a. The two control walls that are 250 mm
(10 in.) thick and reinforced with 310M or 315M (C-10-NA-10
and C-10-NA-15) failed by steel yielding at mid span followed by
a exural-shear crack growing in the shear span causing a shear
failure as shown in Fig. 6-b.
2.8. Flexural behavior
2.8.1. Load deection behavior
The loaddeection behavior for all specimens was similar.
Fig. 7 shows the load versus deection for PVC encased specimen
with middle and braced connectors versus the control specimen.
The vertical axis represents the load (kN) and the horizontal axis
represents the deection (mm). At the beginning, the load in-
creased with minimum deection (less than 3 mm) until the con-
crete cracks at mid span. Past the cracking load, the deection
Table 2
Loads and deection for control specimens.
Specimen RFT f
c
(MPa)
(21 days)
Cr.
a
load (kN)
Yield
load (kN)
Peak
load (kN)
D
cr
a
(mm)
D
yield
(mm)
D
peakload
(mm)
D
ult
(mm)
Ductility index Mode of failure
Thickness = 200 mm (8 in.)
C-8-NA-10 3
10M
48 8 26.7 39.5 0.8 11.4 160 160 14 Steel yielding at mid span followed
by concrete crushing
C-8-NA-15 3
15M
8.1 54.6 74.7 0.5 18.4 111 111 6
C-8-NA-20 3
20M
10.2 85 103.8 0.7 20 85 85 4.3
Thickness = 250 mm (10 in.)
C-10-NA-
10
3
10M
48 17.68 41.2 62.7 0.54 8.3 153 155 18.7 Steel yielding at mid span followed
by a exural-shear crack growing in
the shear span causing a shear failure C-10-NA-
15
3
15M
17.43 81.5 107.8 0.52 11.9 80 87 7.3
C-10-NA-
20
3
20M
11 128 150.7 0.72 16.3 52 54 3.3 Steel yielding at mid span followed
by concrete crushing
a
Cr = cracking.
Table 3
Test results for Octaform encased walls with middle connectors.
Specimen RFT f
c
(MPa)
(21 days)
Cracking
load (kN)
Yield
load (kN)
Peak
load (kN)
D
cr
.
(mm)
D
yield
(mm)
D
ult
(mm)
Ductility index Mode of failure
Thickness = 200 mm (8 in.)
O-8-M-10 310M 48 23.7 33.9 54.8 3.1 10.4 193 18.75 Yielding of the steel rebar followed
by rupture of the PVC panel on the
tension side
Average increase over
control (%)
27% 38.75% 20.9% 46.5%
O-8-M-15 315M 23.5 65.9 84.95 2.2 17.8 149 8.4 Crushing of the concrete followed by
buckling of the PVC panel on the
compression side
Average increase over
control (%)
20.6% 13.7% 33.7% 43.5%
O-8-M-20 320M 22.4 104.9 123.4 2.3 21.6 91.5 4.2
Average increase over
control (%)
23.4% 18.9% 7.6% 14.9%
Thickness = 250 mm (10 in.)
O-10-M-10 310M 48 37 50.4 75.6 1.4 9.4 157 16.7 Yielding of the steel rebar followed by
rupture of the PVC panel on the tension side Average increase over
control (%)
22.3% 20.6% 2.6% Zero
O-10-M-15 315M 38.5 92.5 130.2 1.4 11.9 187 15.7 Crushing of the concrete followed by
buckling of the PVC panel on the
compression side
Average increase over
control (%)
13.5% 20.7% 115% 114%
O-10-M-20 320M 40 151.8 183.2 2.4 16.3 86.5 5.3
Average increase over
control (%)
18.6% 21.8% 60.2% 66%
834 N. Wahab, K.A. Soudki / Construction and Building Materials 48 (2013) 830839
increased as the load increased until the steel yields. Past yielding,
the slope of the load versus deection was less steep than before
yielding until failure was attained. The load versus deection
behavior was not affected by the type of the connector. For a given
concrete core thickness and reinforcement, the load versus deec-
tion curves for all the specimens were almost identical (see Fig. 7).
2.8.1.1. Cracking stage. Tables 3 and 4 show that the PVC encased
specimens with concrete cores 200 mm (8 in.) and 250 mm
(10 in.) had an increase in the cracking load by at least 270% and
216%, respectively over the control specimens. The cracking deec-
tion for most of the PVC encased walls varied between 1.5 mm and
3 mm. Meanwhile, the cracking deection for the control
Fig. 4. Schematic showing the stress and strain distribution in the cross section.
Table 4
Test results for Octaform encased walls with braced connectors.
Specimen Reinforcement f
c
(MPa)
(21 days)
Cracking
load (kN)
Yield
load (kN)
Peak
load (kN)
D
cr
.
(mm)
D
yield
(mm)
D
ult
(mm)
Ductility index Mode of failure
10 in. thick specimens (8 in. concrete core)
O-8-B-10 310M 40 21.2 31.3 54 1.7 10.4 168.1 16.2 Yielding of the steel rebar followed by
rupture of the PVC panel on the tension side Average increase over
control (%)
17% 36.6% 5% 26.4%
O-8-B-15 315M 24.6 65.3 89.5 1.8 15.8 136.4 8.6 Crushing of the concrete followed by
buckling of the PVC panel on the
compression side
Average increase over
control (%)
19.6% 19.8% 22.9% 49.8%
O-8-B-20 320M 27.2 106.1 121.6 1.6 19.7 74.5 3.8
Average increase over
control (%)
24.8% 17.2% Zero Zero
12 in. thick specimens (10 in. concrete core)
O-10-B-
10
310M 40 31.5 42 77.8 1.7 8.3 181.5 21.9 Yielding of the steel rebar followed
by rupture of the PVC panel on
the tension side Average increase over
control (%)
2% 23.3% 18.6% 17%
O-10-B-
15
315M 32 94.4 126.1 1.5 13.2 164.6 12.5 Crushing of the concrete followed
by buckling of the PVC panel on the
compression side Average increase over
control (%)
15.8% 17% 89% 71.7%
O-10-B-
20
320M 36.7 141.3 164 1.7 16 126.5 7.9
Average increase over
control (%)
10.4% 8.7% 134% 145%
(a) Failure by steel yielding followed
by rupture of PVC panel (O-8-M-10)
(b) Failure by concrete crushing followed
by PVC buckling
O-10-M-20
Front view
Bottom view
O-8-M-10
Fig. 5. Modes of failure for Octaform encased walls.
N. Wahab, K.A. Soudki / Construction and Building Materials 48 (2013) 830839 835
(a) Failure by steel yielding followed by
concrete crushing (Specimen C-8-NA-15)
(b) Failure by flexural-shear crack in
the shear span (Specimen C-10-NA-15)
Concrete crushing
Shear span
Fig. 6. Failure modes for the control specimens.
(a) Octaform walls 8 incPh thick
reinforced with 3-10M
(b) Octaform walls 10 inch thick
reinforced with 3-10M
(e) Octaform walls 8 inch thick
reinforced with 3-20M
(f) Octaform walls 10 inch
thick reinforced with 3-20M
O-8-M-10 O-8-B-10
C-8-NA-10
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
L
o
a
d

(
k
N
)
Deflection (mm)
C-10-NA-10
O-10-M-10
O-10-B-10
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Deflection (mm)
L
o
a
d

(
k
N
)
C-10-NA-10
O-10-M-10
O-10-B-10
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
L
o
a
d

(
k
N
)
O-10-M-15
O-10-B-15
C-10-NA-15
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
L
o
a
d

(
k
N
)
O-10-M-15
O-10-B-15
C-10-NA-15
C-8-NA-20
O-8-M-20
O-8-B-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
(c) Octaform walls 8 inch
thick reinforced with 3-15M
(d) Octaform walls 10 inch
thick reinforced with 3-15M
0 50 100 150 200
Deflection (mm)
0 50 100 150 200
Deflection (mm)
0 50 100 150 200
Deflection (mm)
0 50 100 150 200
0 50 100 150 200 250
Deflection (mm)
0 50 100 150 200 250
L
o
a
d

(
k
N
)
C-8-NA-20
O-8-M-20
O-8-B-20
O-10-M-20
C-10-NA-20
O-10-B-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
L
o
a
d

(
k
N
)
Fig. 7. Load versus deection for the Octaform encased walls.
836 N. Wahab, K.A. Soudki / Construction and Building Materials 48 (2013) 830839
specimens was less than 1 mm. That difference in the cracking
deection is expected because of the higher cracking load of the
PVC encased specimens compared to the control specimens.
2.8.1.2. Yield stage. For a given wall thickness and reinforcement,
the average yield load was almost the same for most of the PVC en-
cased specimens with different connector types as shown in Tables
3 and 4. The PVC encased walls showed a higher yield load com-
pared to the yield load of the control specimens. The average yield
load for the 200 mm(8 in. thick) PVC encased walls reinforced with
310M, 315M and 320M rebar increased by 27%, 20.6% and
23.4%, respectively, over the control specimens. The average yield
load for the 250 mm (10 in. thick) PVC encased walls reinforced
with 310M, 315M and 320M rebar increased by 22.3%, 13.5%
and 18.6%, respectively, over the control specimens. However,
the yield deection for the PVC encased walls was almost the same
as the control walls. The presence of the PVC did not affect the
yield deection.
2.8.1.3. Ultimate stage. The PVC encased walls showed an increase
in the ultimate load over the control specimens as shown in Tables
3 and 4. For a given reinforcement and concrete core thickness, the
increase in the ultimate load for the PVC encased walls with mid-
dle or braced connector was of same order of magnitude except for
the walls with 250 mm (10 in.) concrete core and reinforced with
320M rebar. The maximum increase in the ultimate capacity
was for the walls with 8 in. thick concrete cores reinforced with
310M, regardless of the connector type. For the same concrete
core thickness, as the reinforcement increased from 310M to 3
15M or 320M, the increase in the ultimate capacity (contribution
of PVC panels) decreased from an average of 37.7% to 17.4%. Also,
for the PVC encased walls with middle or braced connectors rein-
forced with 310M, as the concrete core thickness increased from
8 to 10 in., the contribution of the PVC panels to the ultimate load
decreased from 37.7% to 22%. For the PVC encased walls 250 mm
(10 in.) thick concrete core with middle or braced connectors, as
the reinforcement increased from 310M to 315M or 320M,
the contribution of PVC panels (to the increase in ultimate capacity
of the wall) decreased but not as much as the 8 in. concrete cores.
The contribution of the PVC panels to the increase in ultimate
capacity of the wall decreased from an average of 22% to 17%.
Therefore, the contribution of the PVC stay-in-place forming sys-
tem to the ultimate load increases as the concrete core thickness
decreases and/or as the reinforcement ratio decreases.
Most of the PVC encased walls showed an increased ultimate
deection and ductility index as shown in Tables 3 and 4. The in-
crease in ultimate deection for the PVC encased walls over the
control walls varied between 2.5% and 134%. The ductility index
for the PVC encased walls was higher than the ductility index for
the control walls. The increase in ductility index for the PVC en-
cased walls varied between 14.5% and 145% over the control spec-
imens. In addition, exural toughness can be determined as the
area under the load versus deection curve as shown in Table 5.
It is clear that the Octaform encased specimens showed higher
toughness values than the control specimens.
2.8.2. Load tensile strain behavior
The tension forces were resisted mainly by the steel reinforce-
ment and the PVC panel on the tension side in addition to part of
the connector below the neutral axis. Fig. 8 shows a typical load
versus strain in the steel and the PVC panel. The vertical axis rep-
resents the load (kN) and the horizontal axis represents the strain
(le From Fig. 8, it is evident that the strain in the steel and PVC was
small (less than 200 le) until a load of 26 kN where the concrete
on the tension side cracked. Once the concrete cracked, the tensile
forces were transmitted to the steel and the PVC panel. A sudden
increase in tension strain was recorded as seen in Fig. 8. Past crack-
ing, the loadstrain behavior was bi-linear similar to the load
deection curves. As the load increased, the strain in the steel
and the PVC panel increased almost linearly until the steel yielded
at about 108 kN. Past the yield load, the strains in the PVC in-
creased at a higher rate until complete failure. The PVC strain at
failure ranged from 10,000 to 42,000 le.
2.8.3. c- Load- compressive strain behavior
The compression forces were resisted mainly by the concrete
and the PVC panel on the compression side in addition to part of
the connector above the neutral axis. Fig. 9 shows a typical load
versus compressive strain behavior for the concrete and the PVC
panel. It is clear that the strain in the concrete and the PVC panel
increased as the load increased. Strain readings for both the con-
crete and the PVC were almost the same until reaching a load of
156 kN. Past 156 kN, the concrete strain was slightly higher than
the PVC strain. At 178 kN, the concrete started to crush. The con-
crete strain dropped and the forces were transmitted to the PVC
Table 5
Comparison of toughness of the specimens.
Specimen Toughness (kN mm) Increase over control Specimen Toughness (kN mm) Increase over control
C-8-NA-10 5400 NA C-10-NA-10 8426 NA
O-8-B-10 8160 51% O-10-B-10 9817 17%
O-8-M-10 9213 71% O-10-M-10 13,841 64%
C-8-NA-15 6813 NA C-10-NA-15 9484 NA
O-8-B-15 10,797 59% O-10-B-15 21,074 122%
O-8-M-15 12,004 76% O-10-M-15 26,273 177%
C-8-NA-20 7357 NA C-10-NA-20 6309 NA
O-8-B-20 7393 4.8% O-10-M-20 17,420 176%
O-8-M-20 9000 22% O-10-B-20 17,662 180%
steel
PVC panel
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 5000 10000 15000 20000
L
o
a
d

(
k
N
)
Strain ()
Fig. 8. Load versus tensile strain for the Octaform encased wall (O-8-M-20).
N. Wahab, K.A. Soudki / Construction and Building Materials 48 (2013) 830839 837
panel. The PVC strain reading continued to increase until reaching
a load of 185 kN. At a load of 185 kN, the PVC started to buckle and
the load dropped. It is worth noting that for the walls that failed by
buckling of PVC, the maximum PVC strain reading at failure initia-
tion varied from 3233 le to 9200 le with an average of 6500 le
depending on the buckling location with respect to the strain
gauge location.
2.8.4. d- Strain distribution along the connectors
Fig. 10 shows the strain gauges location along the connectors
height. Fig. 11 shows a typical strain distribution along the height
of the connector for the PVC encased walls with middle and braced
connectors. The horizontal axis represents the strain in the PVC
and the vertical axis represents the gauge location. The strain dis-
tribution was plotted at different percentages of the peak load level
as indicated by the legend. In addition, the steel strain reading at a
given load level was superimposed on the plot. At a given load level
the steel strain reading was given the same symbol as that for the
PVC strain. The PVC strain readings are connected with straight
lines, but the steel strain is represented by a single point. It is clear
from Fig. 11 that as the load increases the strain at all locations in-
creases. The strains in the steel and the connector were consistent
in the walls with middle connectors (Fig. 11a). The PVC strain dis-
tribution versus wall height was linear up to 60% of the peak load
level and bi-linear for 80% and 100% of the peak load level. In the
walls with braced connectors (Fig. 11b), the strain gauges on the
steel rebar and the PVC connector were not at the same location.
The strain in the steel rebar at a given percentage of the peak load
was almost equal to the strain on the PVC panel on the tension
side. Also, the strains in the web of the connector were low. This
means that the contribution of the web in resisting the applied mo-
ment can be ignored.
Table 6 shows a comparison between the experimental and cal-
culated peak loads for all the PVC encased walls. The predicted
peak load using the proposed analysis correlated well with the
measured loads with reasonable errors. The average error is 5%
and the maximum error is 10%. These results agree well with Rteil
et al. [11]. They used a linear strain distribution in their model.
They concluded that the difference between the predicted and
experimental moment capacity values ranged between 12% and
16%. Ref. [8] used limit-state analysis to calculate the capacity of
the PVC encased specimen. Their analysis provided a lower bound
to their experimental results.
3. Conclusions
Based on the experimental results, the use of the PVC stay-in-
place forming systemenhanced the exural behavior of a reinforced
concrete
PVC
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
-10000 -8000 -6000 -4000 -2000 0
L
o
a
d

(
k
N
)
Strain ()
Fig. 9. Load versus compressive strain for the Octaform encased wall (O-10-M-20).
(a) walls with middle
connectors
(b) walls with braced
connectors
Strain
gauges
Fig. 10. Strain gauge location along the connectors height.
(a) 200mm (8inch) thick wall with middle
connectors reinforced with 3-15M
(b) 305mm (12inch) thick wall with braced
connectors reinforced with 3-20M
80%
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
H
e
i
g
h
t

(
m
m
)
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Steel @ 60%
Steel @ 80%
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
-5000 0 5000 10000 15000 -4000 -3000 -2000 -1000 0 1000 2000 3000
H
e
i
g
h
t

(
m
m
)
Strain () Strain ()
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Steel @40%
Steel @ 60%
Steel @ 80%
Fig. 11. Strain distribution along the connectors height at different percentages of peak load.
838 N. Wahab, K.A. Soudki / Construction and Building Materials 48 (2013) 830839
concrete wall. The mainconclusions of the study canbe summarized
as follows:
1. The PVC encased walls failed in a similar manner to the control
specimens: yielding of the steel reinforcement with rupture of
the PVC panel on the tension side and concrete crushing with
buckling of the PVC panel on the compression side in some
cases. The wall thickness and connector type did not affect
the mode of failure.
2. The PVC encased specimens showed an increase in the cracking
load that ranged from 216% to 270% over the control specimens.
3. The effect of the PVC on the yield load decreased as the rein-
forcement ratio increased and the type of the connector did
not affect the yield load. The increase in yield load ranged from
15% to 22% above the control walls.
4. The contribution of the PVC system to the ultimate load
increased as the concrete core thickness decreased and/or as
the reinforcement ratio decreased. The increase in ultimate load
due to the PVC stay-in-place system ranged from 17.4% to 37.7%
over the control.
5. The PVC stay-in-place system contributed to enhancing the
ductility of the wall system with an increase in ultimate deec-
tion between 2.5% and 134% over the control walls.
6. A model based on strain compatibility and force equilibrium
was proposed to predict the capacity of the PVC encased walls.
The predicted loads correlated well with the measured loads
with a 5% error on average.
References
[1] ACI committee 318. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI
31805). Farmington Hills, (MI): American Concrete Institute; 2005.
[2] Chahrour A, Soudki K, Straube J. RBS Polymer encased concrete wall. Part I:
experimental study and theoretical provisions for exure and shear. Constr
Build Mater 2005;19(7):55063.
[3] Canadian Standards Association. Design of Concrete Structures. CSA A23.3;
2004.
[4] Chahrour A, Soudki K. RBS Polymer encased concrete wall part II: experimental
study and theoretical provisions for combined axial compression and exure.
Constr Build Mater 2006;20(10):101627.
[5] Collins M, Mitchell D. Prestressed concrete basics. Ottawa, Ontario,
Canada: Canadian Prestressed Concrete Institute (CPCI); 1987.
[6] Fam AZ, Flisak B, Rizkalla S. Experimental and analytical modeling of concrete-
lled ber reinforced polymer tubes subjected to combined bending and axial
loads. ACI Struc J 2003;100(4):499509.
[7] Fam AZ, Rizkalla SH. Flexural behavior of concrete-lled ber-reinforced
polymer circular tubes. ASCE J Compos Construct 2002;6(2):12332.
[8] Kuder K, Rishi G, Harris-Jones C, Hawksworth R, Henderson S, Hitney J. Effect of
PVC stay-in-place formwork on mechanical performance of concrete ASCE. J
Mater Civil Eng 2009;21(7):30915.
[9] Li G, Torres S, Alaywan W, Abadie C. Experimental study of FRP tube-encased
concrete columns. J Compos Mater 2005;9(13):113145.
[10] Octaform. General Guide: version 2 revision 1. Vancouver, (BC): Octaform
Systems Inc.; 2004. 87 p.
[11] Rteil A, Soudki K, Richardson D. Flexural Behavior of Octaform Forming
System, vol. 257(9). ACI SP; 2008. p. 133-148.
Table 6
Comparison between the predicted and experimental peak loads.
Wall type Wall
thickness
RFT Experimental
load (kN)
Calculated
load (kN)
Error
(%)
Walls
without
insulation
8 in. 310M 54.8 50.5 7.9
315M 87.5 83.9 4.1
320M 114.3 114.3 0.0
10 in. 310M 75.6 69.05 8.7
315M 124.2 117.2 5.6
320M 178.6 161.8 9.4
Walls with
insulation
10 in. 310M 54 51.6 4.5
315M 82.2 84.7 3.1
320M 120 114.3 4.8
12 in. 310M 77.77 70 9.6
315M 115.8 117.5 1.5
320M 159.8 161.5 1.1
N. Wahab, K.A. Soudki / Construction and Building Materials 48 (2013) 830839 839