See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/257870148

Theoretical Moment-Curvature Relationships for Reinforced Concrete

Members and Comparison with Experimental Data

Conference Paper · September 2004

CITATION READS

1 517

2 authors:

Idris Bedirhanoglu Alper Ilki

Dicle University Istanbul Technical University
51 PUBLICATIONS   211 CITATIONS    206 PUBLICATIONS   1,278 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Bolted Moment Connection System for Precast Reinforced Concrete Members View project

Seismic Retrofit of Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls Designed and Constructed Prior to Enforcement of the Recent Seismic Design Codes View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Idris Bedirhanoglu on 07 June 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Sixth International Congress on Advances in Civil Engineering, 6-8 October 2004
Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey

Theoretical Moment-Curvature Relationships for Reinforced

Concrete Members and Comparison with Experimental Data

I. Bedirhanoglu, A. Ilki
Istanbul Technical University, Department of Civil Engineering, Istanbul, Turkey

Abstract

In the first part of this study, analytical moment-curvature relationships were obtained
for reinforced concrete cross-sections by using three different models for confined
concrete. The theoretical moment-curvature relationships were then compared with
experimental data reported in literature. The results showed that the theoretical moment-
curvature relationships obtained by all of these three models were in quite good
agreement with experimental data. In the second part, a parametric investigation was
carried out for examining the effects of various variables on the moment-curvature
relationships, such as quality of concrete, level of axial load, amount and arrangement
of transverse reinforcement.

Introduction

The moment-curvature relationships of critical cross-sections of reinforced concrete

members are essential for non-linear analysis of reinforced concrete structures. Realistic
moment-curvature relationships can only be obtained if realistic material constitutive
models are utilized for confined and unconfined concrete, and reinforcing steel during
the cross-sectional moment-curvature analysis. In last decades various stress-strain
relationships for unconfined and confined concrete, and steel were proposed by
different researchers. In the first part of this study, theoretical moment-curvature
relationships were predicted for various reinforced concrete members tested by different
researchers. The obtained theoretical moment-curvature relationships were then
compared with experimental data. During theoretical moment-curvature analysis, three
different models for confined concrete (Mander et al., 1988, Ilki et al., 2003, Saatcioglu
and Razvi, 1992), one model for unconfined concrete (Hognestad, 1951) and one model
for reinforcing steel (trilinear with strain hardening) were taken into account. The
results showed that the theoretical moment-curvature relationships obtained by all of
these three models were in quite good agreement with considered experimental data. In
contrast, in the case of relatively higher axial load it was seen that the predicted

231
moment-curvature relationships were not realistic, when the effect of confinement was
not taken into account.

In the second part, a parametric investigation was carried out for examining the effects
of various variables on the moment-curvature relationships, such as quality of concrete,
level of axial load, amount and arrangement of transverse reinforcement by using the
material constitutive models listed above. Consequently, significant amount of
analytical data is collected representing the effects of different parameters on the
strength and ductility characteristics of reinforced concrete members.

Moment-Curvature Analysis

Moment-curvature analysis was carried out by fiber element approach. During the
analysis, sections were divided into a number of fibers of either concrete or
reinforcement. By estimating the axial deformation for given curvatures, the axial
deformations, which satisfy the balance requirements, were predicted by an iterative
procedure. Then making use of the deformations, the resisted moments were calculated,
(Figure 1). During this procedure, the stress-strain relationships of confined concrete,
unconfined concrete and steel were needed. For confined concrete, the stress-strain
models proposed by Mander et al. (1988), Ilki et al. (2003) and Saatcioglu and Razvi
(1992) were used. For unconfined concrete Hognestad (1951) model and for steel, a
trilinear model with strain hardening branch were used. While using the model
proposed by Ilki et al. (2003), Eq. (1) was used when εcc,85 is smaller than 0.0048. Note
that εcc,85 is the strain corresponding to 85 % of the peak stress on the descending
branch of the stress-strain relationship.

ε cc ,85 = 0.0048 (ε cc ,85 ≤ 0.0048) (1)

Fibers εi
εs2
M h/2
N Confined
κ h
ε0
Transverse
εs1 h/2
reinforcement
Unconfined

Figure 1. Fibers, axial deformation (εο) and curvature (κ).

Comparison With Experimental Results

In order to evaluate the performances of utilized confined concrete stress-strain models,

analytical results were compared with experimental moment-curvature relationships
obtained by various researchers. The analytical and experimental moment-curvature
relationships for specimens tested by Ilki (2000), Park et al. (1972), Sheikh and Khoury

232
 50 (1993) and Ilki et al. (1998) are
h
presented in Figure 2-5, respectively. In
these figures, ρsh, ρl, ν, fyh, fy, f'c, f'co are
40
the transverse reinforcement volumetric
b
Mander ratio, geometric ratio of longitudinal
Ilki reinforcement, dimensionless axial load,
Moment (KNm)

30
Saatcioglu yield strength of transverse
Hognestad reinforcement, yield strength of
Experiment longitudinal reinforcement, cylinder
20
b=200mm, h=200mm
strength, member concrete strength,
respectively (f'co=0.85xf'c). During
φ10/100, ρsh=0.021, fyh=478
MPa
10 moment-curvature analysis f'c was used
10φ12, ρl=0.0283, fy=365
MPa

MPa except the specimen AS17 tested by

=21.9 , υ=0.30
f'co MPa
c=21.9
f'f'c
Sheikh and Khoury (1993), where f'co
0 was used. As seen all of the moment-
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 curvature relationships obtained by
Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m) utilizing confined concrete models are

Figure 2. Comparison of moment-curvature

relationships for Specimen 9 (Ilki, 2000).

15 20
Mander
Ilki
15
Stress (MPa)

Saatcioglu
Hognestad
10
Mander
Ilki 5
10
Saatcioglu
Moment (KNm)

0
Hognestad
0 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003 0.0004
Experiment
Maximum Concrete Strain
mm mm
hb=203 , bh=125.4 400
5 φ6.4/51, ρsh=0.023
300
Stress (MPa)

MPa
4φ12.3, fyh=333
Mander
ρl=0.0186, fy=330
MPa
200
Ilki
υ=0.0
MPa
f'c=47.9 Saatcioglu
100
Hognestad

0 0
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0 0.005 0.01 0.015

Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m) Tensile Steel Strain

Figure 3. Comparison of moment-curvature relationships for specimen 24 (Park et al.,

1972).

generally in good agreement with the experimental data. Note that, Figure 2-5 include
moment-curvature relationships obtained by using Hognestad model for all of the cross-

233
sections without considering confinement too. As seen in Figure 4, the specimen AS17
tested by Sheikh and Khoury (1993) was the only specimen, for which the behavior of
confined concrete governed the behavior, due to relatively higher level of axial load.

240 60
Mander
MPa mm
f'f'coc=33.2
=26.6 b=305 Ilki
ν=0.77 h=305mm

Stress (MPa)
Saatcioglu
40
200 Hognestad

20
160
φ10/108
Moment (KNm)

ρsh=0.0168
0
fyh=507MPa
120 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
8φ19
Maximum Concrete Strain
ρl=0.0244 600
MPaMPa
fy=507
Mander fy=507
80
450

Stress (MPa)
Ilki
Mander
Saatcioglu 300 Ilki
40 Hognestad Saatcioglu

Experiment 150 Hognestad

0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02
Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m) Tensile Steel Strain

Figure 4. Comparison of moment-curvature relationships for AS17 (Sheikh and Khoury

1993).

120 45
Stress (MPa)

30
Mander

90 mm mm 15 Ilki
b=300 . h=300
Saatcioglu
φ8/100, ρsh=0.0083, Hognestad
0
fyh=425MPa
Moment (KNm)

0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 0.002

8φ16, ρl=0.0179,
60 fy=504 MPa Maximum Concrete Strain

f'f'coc =41.7MPa υ=0.33 600

Mander
Stress (MPa)

Ilki 400 Mander

30 Ilki
Saatcioglu
Saatcioglu
Hognestad
200 Hognestad
Experiment

0 0
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0 0.005 0.01 0.015
Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m) Tensile Steel Strain

Figure 5. Comparison of moment-curvature relationships for Specimen Gok-4 (Ilki et

al., 1998).

234
 Parametric Study

In the parametric investigation the effects of quality of concrete, axial load, amount and
arrangement of transverse reinforcement on the moment-curvature relationships by
using different material constitutive models were examined. All cross-sections were
300mm × 300mm with 8Φ16 longitudinal bars of yield strength 420MPa. The yield strength
of transverse bars was assumed to be 220MPa. Other details of the considered cross-
sections are given in Table 1.

Table 1. Details of the sections

Concrete Lateral reinforcement
Section strength Size (mm) Spacing ρsh υ
group (f'c) (mm)
(MPa)
A1 20 8 80 0.01 0.30
B1 20 8 136 0.01 0.30
C1 20 6 45 0.01 0.30
D1 20 10 125 0.01 0.30
A21 10 8 Variable Variable 0.30
A23 30 8 Variable Variable 0.30
A31 Variable 8 150 0.00516 0.30
A32 Variable 8 80 0.00967 0.30
A41 10 8 150 0.00516 Variable
A43 30 8 150 0.00516 Variable

For A21 and A23, the transverse bar spacings s1, s2, s3, s4 were 80, 120, 140, 200 mm
and ρsh were 0.00967, 0.00644, 0.00483 and 0.00387, respectively. In order to
investigate the effect of transverse reinforcement arrangement three different tie
arrangements with the same volumetric transverse reinforcement ratio were taken into
account. As seen in Figure 6, all configurations gave similar results by all models.
However, as expected the specimens with smaller spacing of smaller size transverse
bars performed slightly better. This was previously observed by Ilki et al. (1997) too. In
Figure 7-8, the effects of tie spacing were investigated for different concrete qualities.
As expected, better performance was obtained for higher ρsh values. As seen in these
figures, since buckling of the longitudinal bars is taken into account in the model
proposed by Ilki et al. (2003), the predicted behaviour is significantly different then the
behaviour predicted by other models, for the specimens with relatively larger transverse
bar spacings. In Figure 9-10, the moment-curvature relationships for different concrete
qualities in case of two different ratios of volumetric transverse reinforcement are
given. As seen in these figures, the ductility is negatively effected by the increase in
concrete strength. From Figure 7-10, it can clearly be seen that when concrete strength
is higher, the needed amount of transverse reinforcement is also higher to provide
equivalent ductility. In Figure 11-12, the effect of level of axial load in case of two
different concrete strengths were investigated. From these figures, it can be seen that
when concrete strength is higher, the effect of variation of axial load on the behaviour is
more pronounced. As expected higher axial loads cause reduction in ductility.

235
 150 150
s=80−136−45−125 s=80−136−45−125
φ=8−8−6−10 φ=8−8−6−10
Moment (KNm)

Moment (KNm)
100 A1 100
A1
B1
A1 B1 B1 A1 B1
50 C1 50 C1
D1 C1 D1 C1 D1
D1
0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m) Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m)
(a) (b)

150 150
s=80−136−45−125
For Sections
φ=8−8−6−10
Moment (KNm)

Moment (KNm)
100 100
A1, B1, C1, D1
A1
B1
A1 B1
50 C1 50
D1 C1 D1

0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m) Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m)
(c) (d)

Figure 6. Parametric study on lateral reinforcement arrangement (a) Mander, (b) Ilki, (c)
Saatcioglu, (d) Hognestad.

100 100
Moment (KNm)

Moment (KNm)

75 s1<s2<s3<s4 75
ρsh1>ρsh2>ρsh3>ρsh3 s1<s2<s3<s4
s1 s1
50 f'c=10MPa 50 ρsh1>ρsh2>ρsh3>ρsh3
s2 s2
A21 s3 f'c=10MPa s3
25 25 A21
s4 s4
0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m) Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m)
(a) (b)

100
100
f'c=10MPa
Moment (KNm)

75
Moment (KNm)

75
s1<s2<s3<s4 s1 50
50 ρsh1>ρsh2>ρsh3>ρsh3
For Sections with
s2 A21
MPa s1, s2, s3, s4
f'c=10 25
25 A21 s3
s4
0
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m)
Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m)
(c) (d)
Figure 7. Moment-curvature relationships for different amount of transverse
reinforcement in case of f'c=10MPa (a) Mander, (b) Ilki, (c) Saatcioglu, (d) Hognestad.

236
 160 160
A23 A23

Moment (KNm)
120
Moment (KNm)
120
s1
s1 80 s1<s2<s3<s4
80 s2
s2 s1<s2<s3<s4 ρsh1>ρsh2>ρsh3>ρsh3
s3
s3 ρsh1>ρsh2>ρsh3>ρsh3 40 f'c=30MPa
40 s4
s4 f'c=30MPa
0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25

Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m) Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m)
(a) (b)

160 160
A23
f'c=30MPa

Moment (KNm)
Moment (KNm)

120 120
s1
80 s2 80
s1<s2<s3<s4 A23
s3 ρsh1>ρsh2>ρsh3>ρsh3
40 40
s4 For Sections with
f'c=30MPa s1, s2, s3, s4
0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m) Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m)
(c) (d)
Figure 8. Moment-curvature relationships for different amount of transverse
reinforcement in case of f'c=30MPa (a) Mander, (b) Ilki, (c) Saatcioglu (d) Hognestad.

200 200 MPa

MPa
MPa
MPa
f'f'c=30
c=40
f'f'c=40
c=40
MPa MPa
MPa MPa
MPa A31
f'c=30MPa f'f'c=20
f'c=30 c=20 f'f'c=30
c=30
Moment (KNm)

150
Moment (KNm)

150
MPa
MPa
f'f'c=20
c=20
100 100

50
=10MPaMPa
f'cf'c=10 50 f'f'c=10
c=10
MPa
MPa
A31
ρsh=0.00516
ρsh=0.00516
0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25

Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m) Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m)
(a) (b)

200 200 MPa

MPa
f'f'c=40
c=40
MPa
MPa
A31
f'f'c=40
c=40 A31
MPa
MPa
MPa
f'c=30MPa f'f'c=30
c=30
Moment (KNm)

f'c=30
Moment (KNm)

150 150
MPa
f'c=20MPa
f'c=20
f'c=20MPa
MPa
100 100 f'c=20
MPa
MPa
f'f'c=10
c=10
50 50
ρsh=0.00516 MPa
f'f'c=10 MPa ρsh=0.00516
c=10

0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m) Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m)
(c) (d)

Figure 9. Moment-curvature relationships for different member concrete compressive

strengths in case of ρsh=0.00516 (a) Mander, (b) Ilki, (c) Saatcioglu (d) Hognestad.

237
 200 200 MPa
MPa f'f'c=40 MPa
MPa
f'f'c=40 c=40
c=40 f'c=30MPa f'c=30 MPa
f'c=30MPa A32 f'c=30MPa

Moment (KNm)
150
Moment (KNm)

150 MPa
MPa
f'f'c=20
c=20

100 100
MPa
MPa
f'c=10MPa
MPa f'f'c=10
c=10
50 ρsh=0.00967 f'c=10 50 A32
f'f'c=20MPa
MPa ρsh=0.00967
c=20

0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25

Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m) Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m)
(a) (b)

200 200
f'f'c=40
c=40
MPa
MPa
A32 f'c=40MPa A32
f'c=30MPa
Moment (KNm)

Moment (KNm)
150 MPa 150
f'f'c=30
c=30
MPa

100 100 f'c=20MPa

=10MPa
f'c MPa
f'c=10
50 f'c=20MPa
f'c=20MPa
50 f'c=10MPa
ρsh=0.00967 ρsh=0.00967
0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m) Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m)
(c) (d)
Figure 10. Moment-curvature relationships for different member concrete compressive
strengths in case of ρsh=0.00967 (a) Mander, (b) Ilki, (c) Saatcioglu (d) Hognestad.
100 100
ν=0.10 A41
Moment (KNm)
Moment (KNm)

75 75
ν=0.10 ν=0.70
50
ν=0.30
50
ν=0.30 A41 ν=0.50
MPa
MPa
ν=0.70
25
25 ν=0.50 f'f'c=10
c=10 MPa
MPa
f'f'c=10
c=10
0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m) Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m)
(a) (b)
100 100
A41 A41
ν=0.10
Moment (KNm)

Moment (KNm)

75 75
ν=0.50 ν=0.10
ν=0.70 ν=0.30
50 ν=0.30 50
ν=0.70
ν=0.50
25 MPa
MPa
25 f'f'c=10
c=10
=10MPa
f'f'c=10
c
MPa

0 0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m) Curvature in plastic hinging zone (1/m)
(c) (d)
Figure 11. Moment-curvature relationships for different levels of axial loads in case of
f'c=10MPa (a) Mander, (b) Ilki, (c) Saatcioglu (d) Hognestad.

200 200
MPa
=30MPa
f'cf'c=30 A43
238 ν=0.50 f'f'c=30
c=30
MPa
MPa A43
ent (KNm)

ent (KNm)

150 150
ν=0.10
100 100
ν=0.10
Figure 12. Moment-curvature relationships for different levels of axial loads in case of
f'c=30MPa (a) Mander, (b) Ilki, (c) Saatcioglu (d) Hognestad.

Conclusions

In this study, analytical moment-curvature relationships were obtained by fiber element

approach utilizing different confined concrete models. Then the analytical results were
compared with experimental moment-curvature relationships and it was observed that
analytical and experimental moment-curvature relationships were in reasonable
agreement for all confined concrete models considered. In the second part of the study,
a parametric investigation was carried out. At the end of the parametric study it was
seen that the effect of using different confined concrete stress-strain models varied from
marginal to significant according to the characteristics of the examined cross-sections.
Particularly, when level of axial load was relatively higher, the variation appeared to be
more significant.

References

Hognestad, E. (1951). A Study of Combined Bending and Axial Load in RC Members.

University of Illinois, Engineering Experimental Station Bulletin Series No. 399.

Ilki, A. (2000). The Nonlinear Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Members Subjected to

Reversed Cyclic Loads. Phd thesis submitted to Istanbul Technical University.

239
 Ilki, A., Darilmaz, K., Yuksel, E., Bakan, I., Zorbozan, M. & Karadogan, F. (1998).
Prefabricated columns subjected to displacement reversals. In Seismic Safety of Big
Cities, Earthquake Prognostics World Forum, Istanbul, 21-25 September 1998, (to be
published).

Ilki, A., Ozdemir, P. And Fukuta, T. (1997). Confinement Effect of Reinforced

Concrete Columns with Circular Cross-section. BRI Research Paper, No.143: Tsukuba.

Ilki, A., Ozdemir, P. And Fukuta, T. (2003). Behaviour of Confined Concrete and a
Trilinear Stres-Strain Model. Technical Journal of Turkish Chamber of Civil Engineers
14(1), 2853-2871.

Mander, J.B., Priestley, M.J.N. and Park, R. (1988). Theoretical Stres-Strain Model for
Confined Concrete. American Society of Civil Engineers Journal of Structural Division,
Volume 114. No.8, 1804-1826.

Park, R., Kent, D.C. and Sampson, R.A. (1972). Reinforced Concrete Members With
Cyclic Loading. American Society of Civil Engineers Journal of Structural Division,
Volume 98. No.ST7, 1341-1360.

Saatcioglu, M. And Razvi R.S. (1992). Strength and Ductility of Confined Concrete.
American Society of Civil Engineers Journal of Structural Engineering, Volume 118.
No.6, 1590-1607.

Sheikh, S.A. and Khoury S.S. (1993). Confined Concrete Columns With Stubs.
American Concrete Institute Journal of Structural Engineering, Volume 90. No.4, 414-
431.

240

View publication stats