7. chapter 4

CHAPTER 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1 GENERAL
This chapter encloses the results obtained from the testing programme. The critical
observations and its discussions of greased and non-greased CFST tests are included. The
performance of axially loaded CFST columns designated as C1T4, C1T5, C2T4, C2T5, C3T4
and C3T5 were investigated for post – fire exposure at temperatures of 600 °C and 800 °C. The
results obtained from experiment were compared to the design codes such as Eurocode-4, ACI,
AS, AISC-LRFD and CECS 28:90. Comparison between results from model testing with
different diameter of CFST columns and thickness of steel tube and its validation by numerical
analysis is given in this chapter. A brief discussion on the results obtained and comparison with
published results from literature has been done.
4.2 ANALYSIS OF BEHAVIOR OF GREASED AND NON-GREASED

CFST SPECIMENS
4.2.1 Axial load-deformation characteristics
The comparison between load-deformation curves of the axial loaded greased and non-
greased specimens C1T4, C1T5, C2T4, C2T5, C3T4, and C3T5 are presented in Figures 4.2(a,
b), Figures 4.3(a, b) and Figures 4.4(a, b).
Table 4.1 Evaluation on loading capability of greased and non-greased columns
Load Carried by Column (kN)
Specimens Greased Column, Non-Greased % Increase in

PNGC/PGC
PGC Column, PNGC load
C1T4 823 834 1.3 1.01

C1T5 827 836 1.1 1.01
C2T4 1240 1252 1.0 1.00
C2T5 1248 1263 1.2 1.01
C3T4 1714 1749 2.0 1.02
C3T5 1721 1768 2.7 1.03
113
The observed experimental results for greased and non-greased specimens depicts that
the load-deformation behavior is almost identical to one another. The slope of load-deformation
curves of greased and non-greased specimens is almost equal. However, with the increase of
axial loading, there is a slightly difference between the load-deformation behavior of both the
columns. The elastic axial load bearing capacity of non-greased columns are slightly greater
than the greased columns as listed in Table 4.1.
The ratio of PNGC and PGC is found to vary from 1.00 to 1.03 for axial loaded columns.
This shows that impact of contraction on the loading capability of CFST columns is relatively
irrelevant as shown in Figure 4.1.
2000
1800 Load Carried by Column (kN)
Greased Column, PGC
1600
Load Carried by Column (kN)
1400 Non-Greased Column, PNGC
1200
Axial load (kN)
1000
800
600
400
200
0
C1T4 C1T5 C2T4 C2T5 C3T4 C3T5
CFST Specimens
Figure 4.1 Load capacity of greased and non-greased columns

1000 1000
800 800
Axial load (kN)
Axial load (kN)
600 600
400
400
200 C1T5-NG
200 C1T4-NG C1T5-G
C1T4-G 0
0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0 10 20 30 Deformation (mm)
Deformation (mm)
(b) C1T5 concrete filled steel tube colu
(a) C1T4 concrete filled steel tube column
mn
Figure 4.2 Load-deformation curves for (a) C1T4 greased and non-greased specimens (b) C1T5greased and
non-greased specimens
114
The elastic axial load capacity of non-greased columns (C1T4-NG and C1T5-NG) was
higher as compared to greased columns (C1T4-G and C1T5-G). The load carrying capacity of
CFST (dia. 100 mm) greased columns is found to be 823 kN and 827 kN for thickness of 4 mm
and 5 mm, respectively whereas, for non-greased CFST columns of equivalent thickness, the
load carrying capacity is recorded as 834 kN and 836 kN.
The maximum difference in axial load capacity of greased and non-greased CFST
columns were 11 kN for 4 mm steel tube thickness, and 9 kN for 5 mm steel tube thickness.
The increase in axial load capacity of CFST columns were 4 kN in case of greased columns
with the increased steel tube thickness from 4 mm to 5 mm, whereas, it was only 2 kN in case
of non-greased columns, which indicated that CFST columns had little influence on axial load
capacity of greased and non-greased columns. The ratio of load carried by non-greased column
(PNGC) to the greased column (PGC) was found to be 1.01 under axial loading, which indicates
that the effect of shrinkage on the load carrying capacity of CFST columns is almost
insignificant. The load-deformation behavior of concrete filled steel tube columns (C1T4 and
C1T5) for greased and non-greased columns is presented in Figures 4.2 (a, b).
1400 1400
1200 1200
Axial load (kN)
1000
Axial load (kN)
1000
800 800
600 600
400 400
C2T4-NG C2T5-NG
200 200
C2T4-G C2T5-G
0
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0 5 10 15 20 25
Deformation (mm) Deformation (mm)
(a) C2T4 concrete filled steel tube column (b) C2T5 concrete filled steel tube column
Figure 4.3 Load-deformation curves for greased and non-greased specimens (a) C2T4 (b) C2T5
The initial slope of load-deformation curve of C2T4-NG and C2T5-NG columns were
slightly greater than C2T4-G and C2T5-G columns. The elastic axial load capacity of non-
greased columns (C2T4-NG and C2T5-NG) was higher as compared to greased columns
(C2T4-G and C2T5-G). The load carrying capacity of CFST greased columns were 1240 kN
and 1252 kN, whereas, for non-greased CFST columns it was 1248 kN and 1263 kN with
diameter 125 mm and thickness 4 mm and 5 mm respectively. The maximum difference in
115
axial load capacity of greased and non-greased CFST columns were 12 kN for 4 mm steel tube
thickness, and 15 kN for 5 mm steel tube thickness. The increase in axial load capacity of CFST
columns were 8 kN n case of greased columns with the increased steel tube thickness from 4
mm to 5 mm, whereas, it was only 11 kN in case of non-greased columns, which indicated that
CFST columns had little influence on axial load capacity of greased and non-greased columns.
The ratio of load carried by non-greased column (PNGC) to the greased column (PGC) was
found to be 1.00 and 1.01 under axial loading for 4 mm and 5 mm outer steel tube thickness
respectively, which indicates that the effect of shrinkage on the load carrying capacity of CFST
columns is almost insignificant. The load-deformation behavior of concrete filled steel tube
columns (C2T4 and C2T5) for greased and non-greased columns is presented in Figures 4.3 (a,
b).
The load-deformation curves of C1T4 and C1T5 specimens were almost coincident
with each other in case of greased and non-greased columns. The initial slope of curves for
greased and non-greased columns was almost same. The elastic axial load capacity of non-
greased columns (C3T4-NG and C3T5-NG) was higher as compared to greased columns
(C3T4-G and C3T5-G). The load carrying capacity of CFST greased columns were 1714 kN
and 1721 kN, whereas, for non-greased CFST columns it was 1749 kN and 1768 kN with
diameter 150 mm and thickness 4 mm and 5 mm respectively.
The maximum difference in axial load capacity of greased and non-greased CFST
columns were observed to be 35 kN for 4 mm steel tube thickness, and 47 kN for 5 mm steel
tube thickness. The increase in axial load capacity of CFST columns were 7 kN in case of
greased columns with the increased steel tube thickness from 4 mm to 5 mm, whereas, it was
19 kN in case of non-greased columns, which indicated that CFST columns had little influence
on axial load capacity of greased and non-greased columns. The ratio of load carried by non-
greased column (PNGC) to the greased column (PGC) was found to be 1.02 and 1.03 under axial
loading for 4 mm and 5 mm outer steel tube thickness respectively, which indicates that the
effect of shrinkage on the load carrying capacity of CFST columns is almost insignificant. The
load-deformation behavior of concrete filled steel tube columns (C3T4 and C3T5) for greased
and non-greased columns is presented in Figure 4.4 (a, b).
116
2000
1800
1600
1400
Axial load (kN)
1200
1000
800
600
400
C3T4-NG
200
C3T4-G
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Deformation (mm)
(a) C3T4 concrete filled steel tube column
2000
1800
1600
1400
Axial load (kN)
1200
1000
800
600
400 C3T5-NG
200 C3T5-G
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Deformation (mm)
(b) C3T5 concrete filled steel tube column

Figure 4.4 Load-deformation curves for greased and non-greased specimens (a) C3T4 (b) C3T5
4.3 SECANT STIFFNESS
Secant stiffness is obtained by ratio of ultimate compressive load to the displacement at

an ultimate compressive load. The obtained outcomes point out that the secant stiffness
decreases for the greased specimens as compare to the non-greased specimens as listed in Table
4.2. The greased and non-greased specimen C1T4 and C1T5 loses secant stiffness ranging from
41% to 59%. The greased and non-greased specimen C2T4 and C2T5 loses secant stiffness
ranging from 21% to 28%. The greased and non-greased specimen C3T4 and C3T5 loses secant
stiffness ranging from 18% to 27% as shown in Figure 4.5.
117
Table 4.2 Secant stiffness of greased and non-greased CFST columns
Specimens Secant Stiffness, (kN/mm)
Greased Non-Greased
C1T4 50.6 123.5
C1T5 90.0 151.8
C2T4 124.0 156.5
C2T5 166.4 229.6
C3T4 71.4 87.5
C3T5 86.1 117.9
250
Secant Stiffness, (kN/mm)
Greased
200
Secant stiffness (kN/mm)
150
100
50
0
CFST Specimens
Figure 4.5 Secant stiffness of greased and non-greased CFST columns
4.4 DUCTILITY INDEX FOR GREASED AND NON-GREASED

COLUMNS
The Ductility Index was obtained by an equation. DI for greased specimens decreases as compare
to non-greased specimens with t = 4 mm and 5 mm as shown in Figure 4.6. This indicates that the non-
greased specimens became more ductile under axial composite loading. Chacon et. al., [29] also
determines the CFST column’s ductility after the rise in fire exposure. The ductility index of greased
and non-greased CFST columns is shown by Table 4.3.
118
Table 4.3 Ductility index of greased and non-greased CFST columns
Specimens Ductility Index (DI)
Greased Non-greased
C1T4 1.0 1.1
C1T5 1.2 1.2
C2T4 1.6 2.1
C2T5 1.5 1.9
C3T4 1.2 1.5
C3T5 1.4 1.6
2.5
Ductility Index (DI)
Greased
2 Ductility Index (DI) Non-
greased
1.5
0.5
0
CFST Specimens
Figure 4.6 Ductility index of greased and non-greased CFST columns
4.5 BEHAVIOR OF CFST COLUMNS AT 600 °C and 800 °C

The load – deformation behavior of CFST columns (C1T4 and C1T5) at three different
temperature conditions namely ambient (AB), 600 °C and 800 °C have been shown in Figures
4.7 (a) and 4.7 (b). It can be seen from figure 4.7 (a) that for CFST column with diameter of
100 mm and thickness 4 mm depicts maximum load carrying capacity at ambient temperature.
119
However, the load capacity for the C1T4 columns is found to reduce as the columns are
exposed to increasing temperatures of 600 °C and then 800 °C. The reduction in load capacity
ranges from 14.2% to 5.2% to for temperature variation from ambient to 600 °C and then to
800 °. For all the tested specimens that test are ceased at deformation of 20 mm. The decrease
in load carrying capacity of the C1T4 CFST column can be attributed to the behavioral
variation in thermal properties of steel with the rise in temperature. Similarly, for CFST
columns with equivalent diameter of 100 mm and thickness of 5 mm, CFST columns (C1T5)
depicts similar nature of load carrying as that of C1T4. However, it can be seen from figure
4.7 (b) that C1T5 columns initially depict a 4.9% higher load carrying capacity at ambient
temperature than at 600 °C. However, beyond deformation of 8 mm, it is found that C1T5
columns depict similar load capacity. For C1T5 columns exposed to 800 °C, the load capacity
is found to decrease by 13.6 % in comparison with CFST columns at ambient temperature.
For CFST columns with same diameter of 100 mm but different steel thickness of 4 and 5mm,
the higher load carrying capacity of 5 mm CFST columns can be accounted to the 836 kN.
Figure 4.7 Load-deformation curves at ambient and elevated temperature (a) C1T4 (b) C1T5
The load – deformation behavior of concrete filled steel tube columns (C2T4 and C2T5)
at three different temperature conditions namely ambient (AB), 600 °C and 800 °C have been
shown in Figures 4.8 (a) and 4.8 (b). It can be seen from figure 4.8 (a) that for CFST column
with diameter of 125 mm and thickness 4 mm depicts maximum load carrying capacity at
ambient temperature. However, the load capacity for the C2T4 columns is found to reduce as
the columns are exposed to increasing temperatures of 600 °C and then 800 °C. The reduction
in load capacity ranges from 6.2% to 3.5% for temperature variation from ambient to 600 °C
and then to 800 °. For all the tested specimens that test are ceased at deformation of 20 mm.
120
The decrease in load carrying capacity of the C2T4 CFST column can be attributed to the
difference in the behavior of thermal properties of steel with the rise in temperature. Consistent
with Eurocode, after 400 °C, change in the steel properties was seen, whereas in case of
concrete, properties started differing after 200 °C. Similarly, for CFST columns with equivalent
diameter of 125 mm and thickness of 5 mm, CFST columns (C2T5) depicts similar nature of
load carrying as that of C2T4. However, it can be seen from figure 4.8 (b) that C2T5 columns
initially depict a 4.0% higher load carrying capacity at ambient temperature than at 600 °C.
However, beyond deformation of 8 mm, it is found that C2T5 columns depict similar load
capacity. For C2T5 columns exposed to 800 °C, the load capacity is found to decrease by 6.6
% in contrast to CFST columns at ambient temperature. For CFST columns with same diameter
of 125 mm but different steel thickness of 4 and 5mm, the higher load carrying capacity of 5
mm CFST columns can be accounted to the 1263 kN.
1400 1400
1200 1200
Axial load (kN)
1000 1000
Axial load (kN)
800 800
600 600
C2T5-AB
C2T4-AB 400
400 C2T5-600°C AN
C2T4-600°C AN
200 200 C2T5-800°C AN
C2T4-800°C AN
0
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
0 5 10 15 20 25
Deformation (mm)
Deformation (mm)
(a) C2T4 column at ambient and elevated (b) C2T5 column at ambient and elevated
temperature temperature
The load – deformation behavior of concrete filled steel tube columns (C3T4 and C3T5)
at three different temperature conditions namely ambient (AB), 600 °C and 800 °C have been
shown in Figures 4.9 (a) and 4.9 (b). It can be seen from figure 4.9 (a) that for CFST column
with diameter of 150 mm and thickness 4 mm depicts maximum load carrying capacity at
ambient temperature. However, the load capacity for the C3T4 columns is found to reduce as
the columns are exposed to increasing temperatures of 600 °C and then 800 °C. The reduction
in load capacity ranges from 6.9% to 2.9% for temperature variation from ambient to 600 °C
and then to 800 °. The decrease in load carrying capacity of the C3T4 CFST column can be
attributed to the variation in the performance of thermal properties of steel with the rise in
temperature. Similarly, for CFST columns with equivalent diameter of 150 mm and thickness
121
of 5 mm, CFST columns (C3T5) depicts similar nature of load carrying as that of C3T4.
However, it can be seen from figure 4.9 (b) that C3T5 columns initially depict a 3.6% higher
load carrying capacity at ambient temperature than at 600 °C. However, beyond deformation
of 13 mm, it is found that C3T5 columns depict similar load capacity. For C3T5 columns
exposed to 800 °C, the load capacity is found to decrease by 7.5 % in comparison to the CFST
columns at ambient temperature. For CFST columns with same diameter of 150 mm but
different steel thickness of 4 and 5mm, the higher load carrying capacity of 5 mm CFST
columns can be accounted to the 1768 kN.
2000 2000
Axial load (kN)

1500 1500
Axial load (kN)
1000 1000
C3T5-AB
500 C3T4-AB 500 C3T5-600°C AN
C3T4-600°C AN
C3T5-800°C AN
C3T4-800°C AN
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 10 20 30 40 50
(a) C3T4 column at ambient and elevated temperature (b) C3T5 column at ambient and elevated
temperature
4.6 EFFECT ON STRENGTH CAPACITY OF CFST COLUMNS AT A

MBIENT AND ELEVATED TEMPERATURE
The load carrying capacity of CFST columns at three different temperature conditions
namely ambient (AB), 600 °C and 800 °C for two cooling techniques have been shown in
Figures 4.10 (a) and 4.10 (b). It can be seen from figure 4.10 (a) that for CFST column depicts
maximum load carrying capacity at ambient temperature. However, the load capacity for the
CFST columns is found to reduce as the columns are exposed to increasing temperatures of
600 °C and then 800 °C for two cooling processes. The reduction in load capacity ranges from
2.9% to 14.2% for temperature variation from ambient to 600 °C to 800 °. Whereas, it can be
seen from figure 4.10 (b) the reduction in load capacity ranges from 17.5% to 5.0% for
temperature variation from ambient to 600 °C to 800 °.
122
2000
Load carried by column (kN) at Ambient
1800
Load carried by column (kN) at 600 °C
1600
Load carried by column (kN) at 800 °C
1400
Axial Load (kN)
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
CFST Specimen
(a) Load carried by specimens for annealing at ambient and elevated temperature
2000
Load carried by column (kN) Ambient
Load carried by column (kN) 600°C
1500
Load carried by column (kN) 800°C
Axial Load (kN)
1000
500
0
CFST Specimens
(b) Load carried by specimens for water quenching at ambient and elevated temperature
Figure 4.10 Load carried by CFST specimens at ambient and elevated temperature for (a) annealing (b) water
quenching
4.7 LOAD-DEFORMATION RESPONSE OF CFST COLUMNS AFTER H

EATING AND COOLING REGIMES
After being exposed to elevated temperatures, CFST columns were cooled using two methods:
METHOD 1: Annealing
METHOD 2: Water quenching.
The results obtained from the experiment are listed in Table 4.4. The observed results indicate
that the load carrying capacity of CFST columns was reduced by 9.5% to 2.7% during the post
123
cooling process at an elevated temperature of 600 °C to 800 °C in the case of annealing, while
the reduction in strength was from 10.6% to 3.4% in the case of water quenching, which is
marginally more than the case of annealing.
Table 4.4 Comparison of loading capacity of CFST columns after exposure temperature
Size Axial load carried by CFST columns (kN)

Specimens (D × Ts × H) Annealing Quenching
Ambient
(mm) 600 °C 800 °C 600 °C 800 °C
C1T4 100 × 4 × 600 834 791 716 749 688
C1T5 100 × 5 × 600 836 795 722 764 691
C2T4 125 × 4 × 600 1252 1208 1175 1170 1148
C2T5 125 × 5 × 600 1263 1213 1179 1182 1156
C3T4 150 × 4 × 600 1749 1698 1629 1662 1605
C3T5 150 × 5 × 600 1768 1705 1637 1667 1613
temperature conditions namely ambient (AB), 600 °C and 800 °C for two cooling regimes
have been shown in Figures 4.11 (a-d). It can be seen from figure 4.11 (a) and (b) that for
CFST column (C1T4) with diameter of 100 mm and thickness 4 mm depicts maximum load
carrying capacity at ambient temperature. However, the load capacity for the C1T4 columns
is found to reduce as the columns are exposed to increasing temperatures of 600 °C. The
reduction in load capacity ranges from 10.2% to 5.15% for temperature variation from
ambient to 600 °C in case of annealing and quenching. For all the tested specimens that test
are ceased at deformation of 25 mm. Similarly, for CFST columns with equivalent diameter
of 100 mm and thickness of 5 mm, CFST columns (C1T5) depicts similar nature of load
carrying as that of C1T4 in case of annealing and quenching. However, it can be seen from
figure 4.11 (c) and (d) that C1T5 columns initially depict a 4.9% higher load carrying
capacity at ambient temperature than at 600 °C. However, beyond deformation of 10 mm, it
is found that C1T5 columns depict similar load capacity in case of annealing and quenching.
For C1T5 columns exposed to 800 °C, the load capacity is found to decrease by 17.3% to
13.6% in case of annealing and quenching as compared to CFST columns at ambient
temperature. The decrease in load carrying capacity of the C1T4 CFST column can be
attributed to the sudden escape of gases and extreme hardening in case of water quenching.
124
900 900
800 800
700 700
Axial load (kN)

Axial load (kN)
600 600
500 500
400 400
300 300
C1T4-AB C1T4-AB
200 200
C1T4-600°C AN C1T4-800°C AN
100 C1T4-600°C QN 100 C1T4-800°C QN
0 0
0 10 20 30 0 10 20 30 40
(a) C1T4 at ambient and 600 °C (annealing (b) C1T4 at ambient and 800°C (annealing and
and quenching) quenching)
1000 1000
800 800
Axial load (kN)

Axial load (kN)
600 600
400 400
C1T5-AB
C1T5-AB
200 C1T5-800°C AN
200 C1T5-600°C AN
C1T5-800°C QN
C1T5-600°C QN
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 10 20 30
(c) C1T5 at ambient and 600°C (annealing (d) C1T5 at ambient and 800°C (annealing
and quenching) and quenching)
Figure 4.11 Load carried by CFST specimens for annealing and quenching (a) C1T4 at 600 °C (b) C1T4 at
800°C (c) C1T5 at 600 °C (d) C1T5 at 800°C
temperature conditions namely ambient (AB), 600 °C and 800 °C for two cooling regimes
have been shown in Figures 4.12 (a-d). It can be seen from figure 4.12 (a) and (b) that for
CFST column (C2T4) with diameter of 125 mm and thickness 4 mm depicts maximum load
carrying capacity at ambient temperature. However, the load capacity for the C2T4 columns
is found to reduce as the columns are exposed to increasing temperatures of 600 °C. The
reduction in load capacity ranges from 6.5% to 3.5% for temperature variation from ambient
to 600 °C in case of annealing and quenching. For all the tested specimens that test are ceased
at deformation of 20 mm. Similarly, for CFST columns with equivalent diameter of 125 mm
and thickness of 5 mm, CFST columns (C2T5) depicts similar nature of load carrying as that
of C2T4 in case of annealing and quenching. However, it can be seen from figure 4.12 (c)
125
and (d) that C2T5 columns initially depict a 3.9% higher load carrying capacity at ambient
temperature than at 600 °C. However, beyond deformation of 10 mm, it is found that C2T5
columns depict similar load capacity in case of annealing and quenching. For C2T5 columns
exposed to 800 °C, the load capacity is found to decrease by 8.5% to 6.6% in case of
annealing and quenching as compared to CFST columns at ambient temperature. The
decrease in load carrying capacity of the C2T4 CFST column can be attributed to the sudden
escape of gases due to cooling process and extreme hardening which can have exploded a
couple of twist or surface flaws that may be introduced due to unbalance heating & cooling
phases in case of water quenching.
1400 1400
1200 1200
1000
Axial load (kN) 1000
Axial load (kN)
800
800
600
600
400 C2T4-AB
C2T4-600°C AN 400 C2T4-AB
200 C2T4-600°C QN C2T4-800°C AN
200
0 C2T4-800°C QN
0 5 10 15 20 25 0
Deformation (mm) 0 5 10 15 20 25
Deformation (mm)
(a) C2T4 at ambient and 600°C (annealing and (b) C2T4 at ambient and 800°C (annealing and
quenching) quenching)
1400 1400
1200 1200
Axial load (kN)
1000 1000
Axial load (kN)
800 800
600 600
400 400 C2T5-AB

C2T5-AB
C2T5-800°C AN
200 C2T5-600°C AN 200
C2T5-800°C QN
C2T5-600°C QN 0
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
Deformation (mm)
Deformation (mm)
(c) C2T5 at ambient and 600°C (annealing and (d) C2T5 at ambient and 800°C (annealing and
Figure 4.12 Load carried by CFST specimens for annealing and quenching (a) C2T4 at 600 °C (b) C2T4 at 800°C (c)
C2T5 at 600 °C (d) C2T5 at 800°C
126
temperature conditions namely ambient (AB), 600 °C and 800 °C for two cooling regimes have
been shown in Figures 4.13 (a-d). It can be seen from figure 4.13 (a) and (b) that for CFST column
(C2T4) with diameter of 150 mm and thickness 4 mm depicts maximum load carrying capacity at
ambient temperature. However, the load capacity for the C3T4 columns is found to reduce as the
columns are exposed to increasing temperatures of 600 °C. The reduction in load capacity ranges
from 5.7% to 2.9% for temperature variation from ambient to 600 °C in case of annealing and
quenching. For all the tested specimens that test is ceased at deformation of 18 mm. Similarly, for
CFST columns with equivalent diameter of 150 mm and thickness of 5 mm, CFST columns (C3T5)
depicts similar nature of load carrying as that of C2T4 in case of annealing and quenching.
2000 2000
1500 1500
Axial load (kN)
Axial load (kN)
1000 1000
C3T4-AB
500 C3T4-AB 500 C3T4-800°C AN
C3T4-600°C AN
C3T4-800°C QN
C3T4-600°C QN
0
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
0 5 10 15 20 25
(a) C3T4 at ambient and 600°C (annealing and (b) C3T4 at ambient and 800°C (annealing and
2000 2000
Axial load (kN)
1500 1500
Axial load (kN)
1000 1000
C3T5-AB C3T5-AB
500 500
C3T5-600°C AN C3T5-800°C AN
C3T5-600°C QN C3T5-800°C QN
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
(c) C3T5 at ambient and 600°C (annealing and (d) C3T5 at ambient and 800°C (annealing and
Figure 4.13 Load carried by CFST specimens for annealing and quenching (a) C3T4 at 600 °C (b) C3T4 at
800°C (c) C3T5 at 600 °C (d) C3T5 at 800°C
127
However, it can be seen from figure 4.13 (c) and (d) that C3T5 columns initially depict
a 3.6% higher load carrying capacity at ambient temperature than at 600 °C. However,
beyond deformation of 10 mm, it is found that C3T5 columns depict similar load capacity
in case of annealing and quenching. For C3T5 columns exposed to 800 °C, the load capacity
is found to decrease by 8.8% to 7.5% in case of annealing and quenching as compared to
CFST columns at ambient temperature. The decrease in load carrying capacity of the C3T4
CFST column can be attributed to the sudden escape of gases due to cooling process and
extreme hardening which can have exploded a couple of twist or surface flaws that may be
introduced due to unbalance heating & cooling phases in case of water quenching.
4.8 SECANT STIFFNESS OF CFST COLUMNS AFTER ELEVATED
TEMPERATURE
Secant stiffness is the ratio of ultimate compressive load to displacement at ultimate
compressive load. Table 4.5 shows that the secant stiffness of CFST columns decreases as
temperature increases.
Table 4.5 Secant stiffness of CFST columns after exposure of fire
Secant Stiffness, (kN/mm)
Specimens Annealing Quenching

Ambient
600 °C 800 °C 600 °C 800 °C
C1T4 123.5 108.8 93.1 97.3 88.3
C1T5 151.8 123.5 94.1 101.9 93.2
C2T4 156.5 143.8 78.3 117.0 76.5
C2T5 229.6 121.3 88.5 118.2 77.1
C3T4 187.5 145.5 116.4 110.8 89.7
C3T5 217.9 142.1 109.1 111.1 107.5
Figures 4.14 and 4.15 display the secant stiffness of CFST columns at three different
temperature conditions: ambient (AB), 600 °C, and 800 °C for two cooling regimes. Figure
4.14 (a) shows that the highest secant stiffness at ambient temperature is for the CFST column.
However, when CFST columns are subjected to elevated temperatures of 600 °C and then 800
°C for two cooling regimes, the secant stiffness of the columns is found to decrease. For
128
temperature increases from ambient to 600 °C and then 800 °C in the case of annealing, the
decrease in secant stiffness varies from 45.5% to 14.4%.
300
Secant Stiffness, (kN/mm) Ambient
Secant Stiffness, (kN/mm) Annealing 600°C
250 Secant Stiffness, (kN/mm) Annealing 800°C
Secant Stiffness (kN/mm)
200
150
100
50
0
CFST Specimen
(a) Secant stiffness for annealing at 600 °C and 800 °C

300
Secant Stiffness, (kN/mm) Ambient
Secant Stiffness, (kN/mm) Quenching 600°C
250 Secant Stiffness, (kN/mm) Quenching 800°C
Secant stiffness (kN/mm)
200
150
100
50
0
CFST Specimen
(b) Secant stiffness for water quenching at 600°C and 800 °C
Figure 4.14 Secant stiffness of CFST columns at 600°C and 800 °C for (a) Annealing (b)
Water quenching
129
Whereas, in the case of quenching, the reduction in secant stiffness varies between
34.6% to 13.2% depending on the temperature variation from ambient to 600 °C and then 800
°C, as shown in Figure 4.14 (b). Since there is more heat absorption before the cooling step in
the annealing process than in the water quenching process, the loss in secant stiffness of the
CFST column is slightly higher.
4.9 DUCTILITY INDEX OF CFST COLUMNS AFTER ELEVATED TE

MPERATURE
Figures 4.15 and 4.16 display the ductility index of CFST columns for two cooling
regimes at three different temperatures: ambient (AB), 600°C, and 800°C. Figures 4.15 (a) and
(b) display the minimum ductility index at elevated temperatures for the CFST column.
However, when CFST columns are subjected to elevated temperatures of 600 °C and then 800
°C for two cooling regimes, the ductility index of the columns is found to decrease. This means
that after annealing, the CFST columns become more ductile than after water quenching under
axial loading. It's often related to changes in concrete and steel properties after being exposed
to high temperature as listed in Table 4.6.
Table 4.6 Ductility index of CFST columns after exposure of fire

Ambient
600 °C 800 °C 600 °C 800 °C
C1T4 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0
C1T5 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.1
C2T4 2.0 1.9 1.7 1.8 1.6
C2T5 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.2
C3T4 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2
C3T5 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.3
130
2.5
Ductility Index (DI) Ambient
Ductility Index (DI) Annealing 600°C
Ductility Index (DI) Annealing 800°C
2
Ductility Index
1.5
0.5
0
CFST Specimen
(a) Ductility index for annealing at 600°C and 800 °C
3
Ductility Index (DI) Ambient
2.5 Ductility Index (DI) Quenching 600°C
Ductility Index (DI) Quenching 800°C
2
Ductility Index
1.5
0.5
0
CFST Specimen
(b) Ductility index for water quenching at 600°C and 800 °C

Figure 4.15 Ductility index of CFST column at 600°C and 800 °C(a) Annealing (b) Water Quenching
131
4.10 RESIDUAL STRENGTH INDEX OF CFST COLUMNS AFTER EL
EVATED TEMPERATURE
The equation [50] was used to measure the residual strength index of CFST columns.
The residual strength index (RSI) indicates that if the RSI value is higher than the RSI
minimum value, the loss within the strength of CFST columns is greater [34]. Therefore,
the value of RSI in the case of the control specimen was zero, suggesting that no failure was
observed during the specimen's height. In Table 4.7, the measured RSI values for CFST
specimens are listed.
Table 4.7 Residual strength index of CFST columns after exposure of fire
Residual Strength Index (%)
600 °C 800 °C 600 °C 800 °C
C1T4 83.7 91.4 86.4 95.1
C1T5 81.5 89.8 85.9 94.8
C2T4 93.5 96.5 94.3 97.0
C2T5 91.7 93.6 93.8 96.5
C3T4 92.8 95.0 95.6 98.4
C3T5 91.2 92.3 93.1 97.1
Figures 4.16 display the residual strength index of CFST columns for two cooling
regimes at three different temperature conditions: ambient (AB), 600 °C, and 800 °C. Figure
4.16 indicates the overall residual strength index for the CFST column at 800 °C elevated
temperature in the case of water quenching. However, as the temperature increases, the residual
strength index of CFST columns rises. At 800 °C, the residual strength index was higher than
at 600 °C. This may be because a thicker section of steel obstructs heat transfer from steel to
concrete. The best temperature obtained by concrete was reduced as a result, reducing the
residual strength index value.
132
160
Residual Strength Index (%) Annealing 600°C
Residual Strength Index (%) 140 Residual Strength Index (%) Annealing 800°C
Residual Strength Index (%) Quenching 600°C
120
Residual Strength Index (%) Quenching 800°C
100
80
60
40
20
0
CFST Specimen
Figure 4.16 Residual strength index of CFST column at 600°C and 800 °C elevated temperature after
annealing and water quenching
4.11 COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS WITH DESIGN C

ODES
4.11.1 Eurocode-4
For concrete-filled steel tube columns, the design load was determined using Eq (3.2).
The design loads are determined based on the total of the individual ultimate axial capacities
of the steel tube and concrete, as specified by Eurocode-4. Tables 4.8 and 4.9 demonstrate the
load capacity of CFST columns with Eurocode-4 greased and non-greased surfaces.
Table 4.8 Comparisons of experimental result of greased columns and Eurocodes-4
Experimental load
Specimens Eurocode-4, Nc(kN) Ne/ Nc % error
capacity, Ne (kN)
C1T4 823 612.1 1.3 25.6
C1T5 827 688.8 1.2 16.7
C2T4 1240 999.6 1.2 19.4
C2T5 1248 1131.2 1.1 9.4
C3T4 1714 1421.4 1.2 17.1
C3T5 1721 1607.9 1.1 6.6
133
Tables 4.8 and 4.9 display a difference of axial load capacity of experimental results for
greased and non-greased columns with Eurocode-4 for CFST columns. The difference in axial
load capacity between the exploratory result and Eurocode-4 of greased CFST columns with a
steel tube thickness of 4 mm was 25.6%, 17.3%, and 16.3% of the diameter of the outer steel
tube 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm, respectively. Whereas, for steel tube diameters of 100
mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm, it was 13.4%, 6.7%, and 5.7% for 5 mm steel tube thickness,
respectively.
It was also seen that for steel tube diameters of 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm, the
disparity in axial load capacity between experimental results and Eurocode-4 of non-greased
CFST columns with steel tube thickness of 4 mm was 26.6%, 20.2%, and 18.7%, respectively.
For steel tube diameters of 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm, the percentages were 17.6%, 10.4%,
and 9.1%, respectively, for a 5 mm steel tube thickness. As shown in Figures 4.17 and 4.18,
the most substantial variations between experimental results and Eurocode-4 for greased and
non-greased specimens with a 4 mm steel tube thickness were found to be reduced within the
range of 26.6% to 25.6%, respectively, for C1T4 specimens. The average Ne/Nc for greased
columns was 1.2, while it was 1.3 for non-greased columns. For greased and non-greased
specimens with a 5 mm steel tube diameter, the difference between experimental results and
Eurocode-4 was found to be between 6.6% and 9.1% for C3T5 specimens, respectively.
1721
1714
Experimental load
1607.9
capacity, Ne (kN)
1421.4
1248
1240
Axial load (kN)
1131.2
999.6
827
823
688.8
612.1

CFST Specimen
Figure 4.17 Load capacity of greased columns and Eurocodes-4
134
It was also seen that increasing the external steel tube thickness from 4 to 5 mm,
increased the load carrying capacity of CFST columns while decreasing the percentage error.
Table 4.9 Comparisons of experimental result of non-greased columns and Eurocodes-4
Experimental
Eurocode- Ne/
Specimens load capacity, Ne % error
4, Nc(kN) Nc
(kN)
C1T4 834 612.1 1.3 26.6
C1T5 836 688.8 1.2 17.6
C2T4 1252 999.6 1.2 20.2
C2T5 1263 1131.2 1.1 10.5
C3T4 1749 1421.4 1.2 18.7
C3T5 1768 1607.9 1.1

1749 9.1
1768
1607.9
Experimental load capacity, Ne
1421.4
(kN)
1263
1252
1131.2
999.6
Axial load (kN)
836
834
688.8
612.1

CFST Specimen
Figure 4.18 Load capacity of non-greased columns and Eurocodes-4
Tables 4.10 and 4.11 demonstrate the axial load potential of experimental results for
non-greased CFST columns at 600 °C and 800 °C for annealing with Eurocode-4. The
deviations in axial load capability of experimental results and Eurocode-4 of CFST specimens
135
at 600 °C with steel tube thickness of 4 mm were 22.6%, 17.3%, and 16.3%, respectively, for
steel tube diameters 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm. Whereas, for steel tube diameters of 100
mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm, it was 13.4%, 6.7%, and 5.7% for 5 mm steel tube thickness,
respectively.
Table 4.10 Comparisons of Eurocodes-4 and experimental result of non-greased CFST columns at 600 °C for
annealing
Experimental Eurocode-
Specimens load capacity, 4, Nc Ne/ Nc % error
Ne (kN) (kN)
C1T4 791 612.1 1.3 22.6
C1T5 795 688.8 1.2 13.4
C2T4 1208 999.6 1.2 17.3
C2T5 1213 1131.2 1.0 6.7
C3T4 1698 1421.4 1.2 16.3
C3T5 1705 1607.9 1.1 5.7
The difference in axial load capacity between the experimental result and Eurocode-4
of non-greased CFST columns at 800 °C with a steel tube thickness of 4 mm was 14.5%, 14.9%,
and 12.7%, respectively. For steel tube diameters of 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm,
respectively, the percentages were 4.6%, 4.0%, and 1.8% for 5 mm steel tube thickness. The
largest differences between experimental results and Eurocode-4 for the non-greased
specimens at 600 °C and 800 °C with 4 mm steel tube thickness was found to be reduce in the
range of 14.9% and 22.6% for C2T4 and C1T4 specimens respectively as showed in Figure
4.19 and Figure 4.20. The average Ne/Nc for the non-greased columns was 1.2 at 600 °C and it
was 1.1 at 800 °C for annealing. The least difference between experimental results and
Eurocode-4 for the non-greased CFST columns at 600 °C and 800 °C with 5 mm steel tube
thickness was found to reduce in the range of 5.7% to 1.8% for C3T5 specimen. The percentage
error was also reduced as the temperature was increased from 600 °C to 800 °C and the external
steel tube thickness was increased from 4 mm to 5 mm.
136
Experimental load capacity at 600 °C , Ne
1705
1698
(kN)
1607.9
Eurocode-4, Nc (kN)
1421.4
Axial load (kN)
1213
1208
1131.2
999.6
795
791
688.8
612.1

CFST Specimen
Figure 4.19 Load capacity of non-greased columns at 600 °C for annealing
and Eurocodes-4
Table 4.11 Comparisons of Eurocodes-4 and experimental result of CFST columns at 800 °C for annealing
Experimental Eurocode-
Specimens load capacity, 4, Nc Ne/ Nc % error
Ne (kN) (kN)
C1T4 716 612.1 1.2 14.5
C1T5 722 688.8 1.0 4.6
C2T4 1175 999.6 1.2 14.9
C2T5 1179 1131.2 1.0 4.0
C3T4 1629 1421.4 1.1 12.7
C3T5 1637 1607.9 1.0 1.8
137
Experimental load capacity at 800 °C , Ne (kN)
1637
1629
1607.9
Eurocode-4, Nc (kN)
1421.4
Axial load (kN)
1179
1175
1131.2
999.6
722
716
688.8
612.1

CFST Specimen
and Eurocodes-4
The experimental behavior of non-greased CFST specimens at 600 °C and 800 °C for
extinguishing with Eurocode-4 are mentioned in Table 4.12 and 4.13. The difference in axial
load capacity between the test result and Eurocode-4 of CFST specimens at 600 °C with a steel
tube thickness of 4 mm was 18.3%, 14.6%, and 14.5%, respectively. For steel tube diameters
of 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm, respectively, it was 9.8%, 4.3%, and 3.5% for 5 mm steel
tube thickness. It can also be shown that the disparity in axial load capacity test results and
Eurocode-4 of CFST specimens at 800 °C for steel tube thickness of 4 mm was 11.0%, 12.9%,
and 11.4%, respectively, and for steel tube thickness of 5 mm, it was 0.3%, 2.1%, and 0.3%
for steel tube diameters 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm. As shown in Figures 4.21 and 4.22,
the largest discrepancies between experimental results and Eurocode-4 for non-greased
specimens at 600 °C and 800 °C with 4 mm steel tube thickness were found to be reduced by
12.9% and 18.3% for C2T4 and C1T4 specimens, respectively.
138
Table 4.12 Comparisons of Eurocodes-4 and experimental result of CFST columns at 600 °C for
quenching
Experimental load
Specimens Eurocode-4, Nc(kN) Ne/ Nc % error
capacity, Ne (kN)
C1T4 749 612.1 1.2 18.3
C1T5 764 688.8 1.1 9.8
C2T4 1170 999.6 1.2 14.6
C2T5 1182 1131.2 1.0 4.3
C3T4 1662 1421.4 1.2 14.5
C3T5 1667 1607.9 1.0 3.5
The average Ne/Nc for the non-greased columns was 1.1 at 600 °C and 800 °C for
annealing. The least difference between experimental results and Eurocode-4 for the non-
greased CFST columns at 600 °C and 800 °C with 5 mm steel tube thickness was found to
reduce in the range of 0.3% and 3.5% individually for C3T5 specimen.
Experimental load capacity at 600 °C , Ne

(kN)
1667
1662
1607.9
Eurocode-4, Nc (kN)
1421.4
Axial load (kN)
1182
1170
1131.2
999.6
764
749
688.8
612.1

CFST Specimen
Figure 4.21 Load capacity of non-greased columns at 600 °C for quenching
and Eurocodes-4
139
It was additionally seen that with the increase of temperature from 600 °C to 800 °C
and for external steel tube thickness from 4 mm to 5 mm, the percentage error was decreased.
Table 4.13 Comparisons of Eurocodes-4 and experimental result of CFST columns at 800 °C for quenching
Experimental load Eurocode-4,

Specimens Ne/ Nc % error
capacity, Ne (kN) Nc(kN)
C1T4 688 612.1 1.1 11.0
C1T5 691 688.8 1.0 0.3
C2T4 1148 999.6 1.1 12.9
C2T5 1156 1131.2 1.0 2.1
C3T4 1605 1421.4 1.1 11.4
C3T5 1613 1607.9 1.0 0.3
Experimental load capacity at 800 °C, Ne (kN) 1613

1607.9
1605
Eurocode-4, Nc (kN)
1421.4
Axial load (kN)
1156
1148
1131.2
999.6
691
688.8
688
612.1

CFST Specimen

and Eurocodes-4
140
4.11.2 American Concrete Institute and Australian Standard
The American Concrete Institute (ACI) and Australian Standards (AS) have fair
expectations for specimens made of thicker (lower D/t ratio) steel tubes. For determining the
design load capacity of CFST columns, the American Concrete Institute (ACI) and the
Australian Standard (AS) both use the same equation. The design load capacity of CFST
columns predictable with ACI and AS was determined by utilizing Eq. (3.12).
An examination of axial load capacity of experimental test result with ACI and AS, for
greased and non-greased CFST columns is mentioned in Table 4.14 and 4.15.
Table 4.14 Comparisons of experimental result of greased columns and ACI, AS
ACI and
Experimental AS, Ne/ Nc, ACI, AS
Specimens load capacity, % error
Nc, ACI, AS
Ne (kN)
(kN)
C1T4 823 692.5 1.2 15.9
C1T5 827 707.7 1.2 14.4
C2T4 1240 1126.3 1.1 9.2
C2T5 1248 1155.6 1.1 7.4
C3T4 1714 1605.7 1.1 6.3
C3T5 1721 1619.7 1.1 5.8
It can be shown that the experimental test result of axial load capacity was well predicted
using ACI and AS of greased CFST columns with a steel tube thickness of 4 mm. The measured
results for steel tube diameters of 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm were 15.9%, 9.2%, and 6.3%,
respectively. The measured results for 5 mm steel tube thickness were found to be in the range
of 14.4%, 7.4%, and 5.8%. The difference in axial load capacity of experimental results,
reliable with ACI and AS of non-greased CFST columns with steel tube thickness of 4 mm,
was found to be 16.9%, 10.0%, and 8.2%, respectively. For steel tube diameters of 100 mm,
141
125 mm, and 150 mm, it was 15.3%, 8.5%, and 7.4% for 5 mm steel tube thickness,
respectively. Between experimental results and ACI and AS shown in Figures 4.23 and 4.24,
the main difference in the axial load of concrete filled steel tube columns (C1T4) for greased
and non-greased specimens was found to be 15.9% and 16.9% for 4 mm steel tube thickness.
Experimental load capacity,

Ne (kN)
1721
1714
1689.7
1605.7
Axial load (kN)
1248
1240
1155.6
1126.3
827
823
767.7
692.5

CFST Specimen
Figure 4.23 Load capacity of greased columns and ACI and AS
Table 4.15 Comparisons of experimental result of non-greased columns and ACI, AS
ACI and
Experimental AS, Ne/ Nc, ACI, AS
Nc, ACI, AS
Ne (kN)
(kN)
C1T4 834 692.5 1.2 16.9
C1T5 836 707.7 1.2 15.3
C2T4 1252 1126.3 1.1 10.0
C2T5 1263 1155.6 1.1 8.5
C3T4 1749 1605.7 1.1 8.2
C3T5 1768 1619.7 1.1 7.4
142
The average Ne/Nc for the greased and non-greased columns was 1.1. The least
difference between experimental results and ACI and AS for the greased and non-greased
specimens with 5 mm steel tube thickness was found to 5.8% and 7.4% respectively for C3T5
specimens. The axial load carrying capacity of CFST columns was also improved and the
percentage error was reduced as the outer steel tube thickness was increased from 4 mm to 5
mm.
Experimental load capacity, Ne (kN)
1768
1749
ACI and AS, Nc, ACI, AS (kN)
1689.7
1605.7
Axial load (kN)
1263
1252
1155.6
1126.3
836
834
767.7
692.5

CFST Specimen
Figure 4.24 Load capacity of non-greased columns and ACI and AS
The axial load capacities of experimental result with ACI and AS, for non-
greased CFST columns at 600 °C and 800 °C for annealing, are listed in Table 4.16 and 4.17
respectively.
The difference in axial load capacity of experimental results, reliable with ACI and AS
of non-greased CFST columns at 600 °C with steel tube thickness of 4 mm, was 12.5%, 6.8%,
and 5.4%, respectively. It was found to be 11.0%, 4.7%, and 0.9% for steel tubes with a
thickness of 5 mm. The axial load capacity of experimental results, predicted with ACI and AS
of non-greased CFST columns at 800 °C with steel tube thickness of 4 mm, was 3.3 %, 4.1%,
and 1.4%, respectively. For steel tube diameters of 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm,
respectively, it was 2.0%, 2.0%, and 1.1% for 5 mm steel tube thickness. Between experimental
results and ACI and AS shown in Figures 4.25 and 4.26, the largest difference in the axial load
of concrete filled steel tube columns (C2T4 and C1T4) for non-greased specimens for
143
annealing at 600 °C and 800 °C was found to be 4.1% and 12.5% with 4 mm steel tube
thickness.
Table 4.16 Comparisons of ACI, AS and experimental result of CFST columns at 600 °C for annealing
ACI and
Experimental AS,
Specimens load capacity, Ne/ Nc, ACI, AS % error
Nc, ACI, AS
Ne (kN)
(kN)
C1T4 791 692.5 1.1 12.5
C1T5 795 707.7 1.1 11.0
C2T4 1208 1126.3 1.1 6.8
C2T5 1213 1155.6 1.0 4.7
C3T4 1698 1605.7 1.1 5.4
C3T5 1705 1619.7 1.0 0.9
Experimental load capacity at 600 °C, Ne (kN)

1705
1698
1619.7
1605.7
ACI and AS, Nc

(kN)
Axial load (kN)
1213
1208
1155.6
1126.3
795
791
707.7
692.5

CFST Specimen
and ACI and AS
144
The average Ne/Nc for the non-greased columns at 600 °C and 800 °C was 1.1 and 1.0
respectively. The least difference between experimental results and ACI and AS for the non-
greased specimens at 600 °C and 800 °C with 5 mm steel tube thickness was found to 0.9%
and 1.1% respectively for C3T5 specimens.
Table 4.17 Comparisons of ACI, AS and experimental result of CFST columns at 800 °C for annealing
ACI and
Experimental AS,
Nc, ACI, AS
Ne (kN)
(kN)
C1T4 716 692.5 1.0 3.3
C1T5 722 707.7 1.0 2.0
C2T4 1175 1126.3 1.0 4.1
C2T5 1179 1155.6 1.0 2.0
C3T4 1629 1605.7 1.0 1.4
C3T5 1637 1619.7 1.0 1.1
The axial load carrying capacity of CFST columns was also found to decrease as the
outer steel tube thickness was increased from 4 mm to 5 mm and the temperature was increased
from 600 °C to 800 °C.
The experimental results of non-greased CFST columns at 600 °C and 800 °C for
quenching are mentioned in Table 4.18 and 4.19. The observed results of non -greased
CFST columns are reliable with ACI and AS at 600 °C with a steel tube thickness of 4
mm, and the test results vary by 7.5%, 3.7%, and 3.4%. For steel tube diameters of 100
mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm, respectively, the percentages were 7.3%, 2.2%, and 2.8% for
5 mm steel tube thickness.
The largest difference in the axial capacity of concrete filled steel tube columns (C2T4
and C1T4) for non-greased specimens for annealing at 600 °C and 800 °C was found to 1.89%
145
and 7.5% with 4 mm steel tube thickness between experimental results and ACI and AS shown
in Figure 4.27 and 4.28.
1637
1629
1619.7
1605.7
ACI and AS, Nc
(kN)
Axial load (kN)
1179
1175
1155.6
1126.3
722
716
707.7
692.5

CFST Specimen
and ACI and AS
Table 4.18 Comparisons of ACI, AS and experimental result of CFST columns at 600 °C for quenching
ACI and
Experimental AS,
Nc, ACI, AS
Ne (kN)
(kN)
C1T4 749 692.5 1.1 7.5
C1T5 764 707.7 1.1 7.3
C2T4 1170 1126.3 1.0 3.7
C2T5 1182 1155.6 1.0 2.2
C3T4 1662 1605.7 1.0 3.4
C3T5 1667 1619.7 1.0 2.8
146
The least difference between experimental results and ACI and AS for the non-greased
specimens at 600 °C and 800 °C with 5 mm steel tube thickness was found to 0 and 2.2%
respectively for C2T5 specimens. It was also observed that the average Ne/Nc for the non-
greased columns at 600 °C and 800 °C was 1.0 respectively.
1667
1662
1619.7
1605.7
ACI and AS, Nc, ACI, AS
(kN)
Axial load (kN)
1182
1170
1155.6
1126.3
764
749
707.7
692.5

CFST Specimen

and ACI and AS
Table 4.19 Comparisons of ACI, AS and experimental result of CFST columns at 800 °C for quenching
ACI and
Experimental AS,
Nc, ACI, AS
Ne (kN)
(kN)
C1T4 688 692.5 0.6 0.7
C1T5 691 707.7 0.9 2.4
C2T4 1148 1126.3 1.0 1.89
C2T5 1156 1155.6 1.0 0
C3T4 1605 1605.7 1.0 0
C3T5 1613 1619.7 1.0 0.2
147
1619.7
1613
1605.7
1605
ACI and AS, Nc, ACI, AS
Axial load (kN) (kN)
1156
1155.6
1148
1126.3
707.7
692.5
691
688

CFST Specimen
and ACI and AS
4.11.3 AISC– LRFD

The design load carrying capacity of the CFST columns consistent with AISC-LRFD was
calculated by using Eq. (3.22). The comparisons of concrete filled steel tubular (CFST)
columns on the basis of axial load carrying capacity according to AISC– LRFD for greased
and non-greased CFST specimens are listed in Table 4.20 and 4.21 respectively.
Table 4.20 Comparisons of experimental result of greased columns and AISC– LRDF
Experimental AISC–
Specimens load capacity, LRDF, Pn Ne/ Pn % error
Ne (kN) (kN)
C1T4 823 573.0 1.4 30.4
C1T5 827 650.7 1.3 21.3
C2T4 1240 936.5 1.3 24.4
C2T5 1248 1068.9 1.2 14.4
C3T4 1714 1329.4 1.2 22.4
C3T5 1721 1517.2 1.2 11.8
148
The axial load capacity obtained from experimental results and AISC-LFRD of greased
CFST column specimens with steel tube thickness 4 mm was found to vary by 30.4%, 24.4%,
and 22.4%, respectively. For steel tubes with diameters of 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm and
a thickness of 5 mm, the disparity was found to be 21.3%, 14.4%, and 11.8% for the same
diameters of steel tubes, i.e., 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm. For both greased and non-greased
columns, the average Ne/Pn was 1.3. For the greased and non-greased specimens with a 5 mm
steel tube diameter, the least difference between experimental findings and AISC–LRDF was
found to be 11.8% and 14.2%, respectively, for the C3T5 specimen. As shown in Figures 4.29
and 4.30, when the outer steel tube thickness was increased from 4 mm to 5 mm, the load
carrying capacity of CFST columns was improved, and the percentage error was also reduced.
1721
1714
1517.2
AISC– LRDF, Pn (kN)
1329.4
1248
1240
1068.9
Axial load (kN)
936.5
827
823
650.7
573

CFST Specimen
Figure 4.29 Load carrying capacity of greased columns according to experimental result and AISC-LFRD
The difference in axial load carrying capacity of non-greased CFST columns based on
experimental results, consistent with AISC-LFRD, having 4 mm thick steel tube was 31.3%,
25.2%, and 23.9% for steel tubes of diameter 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm, respectively, and
22.2%, 15.4%, and 14.2% for steel tubes of thickness 5 mm. For the greased and non-greased
specimens with a 4 mm steel tube diameter, the main difference between experimental results
and AISC–LRDF was found to be 30.4% and 31.3%, respectively, for the C1T4 specimen.
149
Table 4.21 Comparisons of experimental result of non-greased columns and AISC– LRDF
Ne (kN) (kN)
C1T4 834 573.0 1.5 31.3
C1T5 836 650.7 1.3 22.2
C2T4 1252 936.5 1.3 25.2
C2T5 1263 1068.9 1.2 15.4
C3T4 1749 1329.4 1.3 23.9
C3T5 1768 1517.2 1.2 14.2

1768
1749
AISC– LRDF, Pn (kN) 1517.2

Axial load (kN)
1329.4
1263
1252
1068.9
936.5
836
834
650.7
573

CFST Specimen
Figure 4.30 Load capacities of non-greased columns and AISC-LFRD
The axial load carrying capacities of CFST columns with AISC– LRFD for non-greased
CFST specimens at 600 °C and 800 °C for annealing are listed in Table 4.22 and 4.23
150
respectively. The variation in axial load carrying capacity greased CFST columns with 4 mm
thickness of steel tube having diameters 100 mm, 125 mm and 150 mm at 600 °C based on
experimental result and AISC-LFRD was found to be 27.6%, 22.5% and 21.7% respectively
and for 5 mm steel tube thickness with diameter of 100mm, 125mm and 150mm, the difference
was 18.2%, 11.9% and 11.0% respectively. Similarly, the observation were made on the
variation in axial load carrying capacities of non-greased CFST columns at 800 °C with steel
tube of thickness 4 mm and diameters of 100 mm, 125 mm and 150 mm for experimental result,
consistent with AISC-LFRD was 20.0%, 20.3% and 18.4% respectively and for steel tube
having diameter 100 mm, 125 mm and 150 mm with 5 mm thickness, it was observed to be
10.0%, 9.3% and 7.3% respectively.
Table 4.22 Comparisons of AISC– LRDF and experimental result of CFST columns at 600 °C for annealing
Ne (kN) (kN)
C1T4 791 573.0 1.4 27.6
C1T5 795 650.7 1.2 18.2
C2T4 1208 936.5 1.3 22.5
C2T5 1213 1068.9 1.1 11.9
C3T4 1698 1329.4 1.3 21.7
C3T5 1705 1517.2 1.1 11.0
The largest difference between experimental results and AISC– LRDF for non-greased
specimens at 600 °C and 800 °C with 4 mm steel tube thickness was found to 27.6% and 20.3%
for C1T4 and C2T4 specimen respectively. The average Ne/Pn for non-greased columns was
1.2.
151
Experimental load capacity at 600 °C, Ne
1705
1698
(kN)
1517.2
1329.4
Axial load (kN)
1213
1208
1068.9
936.5
795
791
650.7
573

CFST Specimen
Figure 4.31 Load capacity of non-greased columns at 600 °C for annealing and AISC-LFRD
The least difference between experimental results and AISC– LRDF for non-greased
specimens with 5 mm steel tube thickness was found to 7.3% and 11.0% for C3T5 specimen.
Also, it was noticed that as the temperature increased, the load carrying capacity of CFST
columns was decreased and percentage error was also reduced with increase in thickness as
shown in Figure 4.31 and 4.32.
Table 4.23 Comparisons of AISC– LRDF and experimental result of CFST columns at 800 °C for annealing
Ne (kN) (kN)
C1T4 716 573.0 1.2 20.0
C1T5 722 650.7 1.1 10.0
C2T4 1175 936.5 1.3 20.3
C2T5 1179 1068.9 1.1 9.3
C3T4 1629 1329.4 1.2 18.4
C3T5 1637 1517.2 1.1 7.3
152
(kN)
1637
1629
1517.2
1329.4
Axial load (kN)
1179
1175
1068.9
936.5
722
716
650.7
573

CFST Specimen
Figure 4.32 Load capacities of non-greased columns at 800 °C for annealing and AISC-LFRD
Table 4.24 Comparisons of AISC– LRDF and experimental result of CFST columns at 600 °C for quenching
Ne (kN) (kN)
C1T4 749 573.0 1.3 23.5
C1T5 764 650.7 1.1 14.8
C2T4 1170 936.5 1.2 20.0
C2T5 1182 1068.9 1.1 9.6
C3T4 1662 1329.4 1.3 20.0
C3T5 1667 1517.2 1.1 9.0
The comparisons of axial load capacity of concrete filled steel tube columns with AISC–
LRFD for non-greased CFST specimens at 600 °C and 800 °C for quenching are listed in Table
4.24 and 4.25 respectively. The difference in load carrying capacity of greased CFST columns
with 4mm thickness of steel tube having diameters of 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm from
153
experimental results and AISC-LFRD was found to be 23.5%, 20%, and 20%, respectively, at
600 °C. For steel tube with 5 mm thickness and diameters of 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm,
the difference was 14.8%, 9.6%, and 9%, respectively.
It had been also noticed that at 800 °C, the variation in loading capacity of non-greased
CFST columns with the steel tube of thickness 4 mm and diameter 100 mm, 125 mm and 150
mm on the basis of result from experiment, consistent with AISC-LFRD was 19.7%, 18.4%
and 17.2% respectively and for steel tube thickness of 5mm with diameter 100 mm, 125 mm
and 150 mm, it was 8.8%, 7.5% and 5.9% respectively. The largest difference between
experimental results and AISC– LRDF for non-greased specimens at 600 °C and 800 °C in
case of quenching with 4 mm steel tube thickness was found to 23.5% and 19.7% for
C1T4specimen. The average Ne/Pn for non-greased columns was 1.2. The least difference
between experimental results and AISC– LRDF for non-greased specimens with 5 mm steel
tube thickness was found to 5.9% and 9% for C3T5 specimen.
1667
1662
1517.2
1329.4
Axial load (kN)
1182
1170
1068.9
936.5
764
749
650.7
573

CFST Specimen
Figure 4.33 Load capacity of non-greased columns at 600 °C for quenching and AISC-LFRD
It was also found that with increase in temperature, the load carrying capacity of CFST
columns was decreased and percentage error was also decreased with increased thickness from
4 mm to 5 mm as shown in Figure 4.33 and 4.34.
154
Table 4.25 Comparisons of AISC– LRDF and experimental result of CFST columns at 800 °C for quenching
Ne (kN) (kN)
C1T4 688 573.0 1.2 19.7
C1T5 691 650.7 1.1 8.8
C2T4 1148 936.5 1.2 18.4
C2T5 1156 1068.9 1.1 7.5
C3T4 1605 1329.4 1.2 17.2
C3T5 1613 1517.2 1.1 5.9

1613
1605
1517.2
1329.4
Axial load (kN)
1156
1148
1068.9
936.5
691
688
650.7
573

CFST Specimen
Figure 4.34 Load capacity of non-greased columns at 800 °C for quenching and AISC-LFRD
4.11.4 Chinese code (CECS 28:90)

Eq. 1 was used to measure the CFST columns design load carrying capacity in
compliance with Chinese code (CECS 28:90). (3.28). Tables 4.26 and 4.27 compare the
axial load potential of greased and non-greased CFST specimens with CECS 28:90.
155
Table 4.26 Comparisons of experimental result of greased columns and Chinese code (CECS 28:90)
CECS
Experimental 28:90, Ne/ No
No
Ne (kN)
(kN)
C1T4 823 612.9 1.3 25.5
C1T5 827 689.7 1.2 16.6
C2T4 1240 999.7 1.2 19.4
C2T5 1248 1131.2 1.1 9.4
C3T4 1714 1421.5 1.2 17.1
C3T5 1721 1608.0 1.1 6.6

1721
1714
CECS 28:90, No (kN)

1608
Axial load (kN)
1421.5
1248
1240
1131.2
999.7
827
823
689.7
612.9

CFST Specimen
Figure 4.35 Load capacity of greased columns and CECS 28:90
Based on the results of the experimental work and CECS 28:90, the difference in
axial load carrying capacity of the greased CFST columns with steel tube of thickness 4
mm and diameters of 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm was 25.5%, 19.4%, and 17.1%,
respectively, and for 5mm thick steel tube with diameters of 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150
156
mm, it was 16.6%. Furthermore, it was found that the disparity in load carrying capacity
of non-greased CFST specimens with steel tube thickness 4 mm and diameters of 100 mm,
125 mm, and 150 mm on the basis of experimental findings, consistent with CECS 28:90,
was 26.5%, 20.2%, and 18.7%, respectively, and for steel tube thickness 5 mm with
diameters 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm, it was 17.5%.
Table 4.27 Comparisons of experimental result of non-greased columns and Chinese code (CECS 28:90)
CECS
No
Ne (kN)
(kN)
C1T4 834 612.9 1.3 26.5
C1T5 836 689.7 1.2 17.5
C2T4 1252 999.7 1.2 20.2
C2T5 1263 1131.2 1.1 10.4
C3T4 1749 1421.5 1.2 18.7
C3T5 1768 1608.0 1.1 9.1
The largest difference between experimental results and Chinese code (CECS 28:90)
for the greased and the non-greased specimens with 4 mm steel tube thickness was found to
25.5% and 26.5% respectively for C1T4 specimen. The average Ne/No for the greased and non-
greased columns was 1.2. The least difference between experimental results and Chinese code
(CECS 28:90) for the greased and non-greased specimens with 5 mm steel tube thickness was
found 6.6% and 9.1% respectively for C3T5 specimens. It was found that the load carrying
capacity was improved as the thickness of external steel tube of CFST columns increased to
5mm from 4mm and percentage error was decreased as showed in Figure 4.35 and 4.36. It was
also observed that the comparison of results by using Chinese code (CECS 28:90) was similar
to the Eurocode-4.
157
1768
CECS 28:90, No (kN)
1749
1608
Axial load (kN)
1421.5
1263
1252
1131.2
999.7
836
834
689.7
612.9

CFST Specimen
Figure 4.36 Load capacity of non-greased columns and CECS 28:90
Table 4.28 Comparisons of Chinese code (CECS 28:90) and experimental result of CFST columns at 600 °C
for annealing
CECS
No
Ne (kN)
(kN)
C1T4 791 612.9 1.3 22.5
C1T5 795 689.7 1.2 13.2
C2T4 1208 999.7 1.2 17.2
C2T5 1213 1131.2 1.1 6.7
C3T4 1698 1421.5 1.2 16.3
C3T5 1705 1608.0 1.1 5.7
The comparisons of axial load carrying capacity of CFST columns with CECS 28:90 for
non-greased specimens of CFST at 600 °C and 800 °C for annealing are listed in Table 4.28
and 4.29 respectively. Based on experimental findings and CECS 28:90, the difference in load
carrying capacity of non-greased CFST column specimens at 600 °C with steel tube of 4 mm
158
thickness and diameters of 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm was found to be 22.5%, 17.2%, and
16.3%, respectively, and for steel tube of thickness 5 mm with diameters of 100 mm, 125 mm,
and 150 mm, the variance in the result was 13.2%. Furthermore, at 800 °C, the difference in
loading power of non-greased CFST columns with 4 mm thick steel tube with diameters of 100
mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm was found to be 14.4%, 14.9%, and 12.7%, respectively, in
experimental findings consistent with CECS 28:90, and for 5 mm thick steel tube with
diameters of 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm diameters, the difference was 4.5%.
1705
1698
(kN)
1608
CECS 28:90, No
1421.5
(kN)
Axial load (kN)
1213
1208
1131.2
999.7
795
791
689.7
612.9

CFST Specimen
and CECS 28:90
The largest difference between experimental results and Chinese code (CECS 28:90)
for the non-greased specimens with 4 mm steel tube thickness was found to 14.9% and 22.5%
for C2T4 and C1T4 specimen respectively. The average Ne/No for the non-greased columns at
600 °C and 800 °C for annealing was 1.2 and 1.1. The least difference between experimental
results and Chinese code (CECS 28:90) for non-greased specimens with 5 mm steel tube
thickness was found 1.8% and 5.7% for C3T5 specimens. Another observation was made that
in CFST columns, the load carrying capacity increased as the thickness of external steel tube
of 4 mm was increased to 5mm. It was also observed that with the increase of temperature from
600 °C and 800 °C, the percentage error was decreased as showed in Figure 4.37 and 4.38.
159
Table 4.29 Comparisons of Chinese code (CECS 28:90) and experimental result of CFST columns at 800 °C for
annealing
CECS
No
Ne (kN)
(kN)
C1T4 716 612.9 1.2 14.4
C1T5 722 689.7 1.0 4.5
C2T4 1175 999.7 1.2 14.9
C2T5 1179 1131.2 1.0 4.1
C3T4 1629 1421.5 1.1 12.7
C3T5 1637 1608.0 1.0 1.8

1637
1629
1608
CECS 28:90, No
1421.5
(kN)
Axial load (kN)
1179
1175
1131.2
999.7
722
716
689.7
612.9

CFST Specimen
and CECS 28:90
The behavior of axial load capacity of concrete filled steel tube columns for non-greased
CFST specimens at 600 °C and 800 °C for quenching with CECS 28:90 is compared and listed
160
in Table 4.30 and 4.31 respectively. At 600 °C, the difference observed in axial load carrying
capacity of non-greased CFST columns with 4mm thickness of steel tube having diameter 100
mm, 125 mm and 150 mm for the results obtained from the experimental work and CECS 28:90
was 18.2%, 14.6% and 14.5% respectively and for 5 mm thickness of steel tube with diameter
100 mm, 125 mm and 150 mm, the variation was 9.7%, 4.3% and 3.5% respectively.
quenching
CECS
No
Ne (kN)
(kN)
C1T4 749 612.9 1.2 18.2
C1T5 764 689.7 1.1 9.7
C2T4 1170 999.7 1.2 14.6
C2T5 1182 1131.2 1.0 4.3
C3T4 1662 1421.5 1.2 14.5
C3T5 1667 1608.0 1.0 3.5
The variation in axial load carrying capacity of non-greased concrete filled steel tube
specimens at 800 °C with 4mm thick steel tube of diameter of 100mm, 125mm and 150mm on
the basis of experimental result, consistent with CECS 28:90 was observed as 11%, 13% and
11.4% respectively and for steel tube of 5mm thickness with diameters of 100mm, 125mm and
150mm, the variation observed was 0.2%, 2.1% and 0.3% respectively. The largest difference
between experimental results and Chinese code (CECS 28:90) for the non-greased specimens
with 4 mm steel tube thickness was found to 13% and 18.2% for C2T4 and C1T4 specimen
respectively. The average Ne/No for the non-greased columns at 600 °C and 800 °C for
quenching was 1.1. The least difference between experimental results and Chinese code (CECS
28:90) for non-greased specimens with 5 mm steel tube thickness was found 0.2% and 3.5% at
600 °C and 800 °C. Also, an increase in the load carrying capacity with increase in thickness
161
of external steel tube from 4 mm to 5 mm was observed in CFST columns. The percentage
error was found to be decreased with the increase of temperature from 600 °C and 800 °C, as
shown in Figure 4.39 and 4.40.
1667
1662
1608
(kN)
CECS 28:90, No
1421.5
(kN)
Axial load (kN)
1182
1170
1131.2
999.7
764
749
689.7
612.9

CFST Specimen
and CECS 28:90
quenching
CECS
No
Ne (kN)
(kN)
C1T4 688 612.9 1.1 11.0
C1T5 691 689.7 1.0 0.2
C2T4 1148 999.7 1.1 13.0
C2T5 1156 1131.2 1.0 2.1
C3T4 1605 1421.5 1.1 11.4
C3T5 1613 1608.0 1.0 0.3
162
1613
1608
1605
CECS 28:90, No
1421.5
(kN)
Axial load (kN)
1156
1148
1131.2
999.7
691
689.7
688
612.9

CFST Specimen
and CECS 28:90
4.12 RESULTS FROM NUMERICAL ANALYSIS
For all specimens, C1T4, C1T5, C2T4, C2T5, C3T4, and C3T5, a detailed numerical si
mulation was performed on concrete filled steel tube columns against axial loading. For all co
lumns against axial loading, parameters such as load carrying capacity, failure mode, displace
ment, and stresses in concrete filled steel tube columns were considered. The experimental ob
served value of CFST columns was compared to the simulation results for validation.
4.12.1 Mesh conversion analysis

The CFST columns were analyzed for different mesh sizes of 10 mm, 20 mm, and 30
mm to decide the best mesh size for the validation of data. Table 4.32 lists the load carrying
capacity of CFST specimens C1T4, C1T5, C2T4, C2T5, C3T4, and C3T5 corresponding to
mesh sizes of 10 mm, 20 mm, and 30 mm. The simulation results were compared to the
experimental results. The load carrying capacity of a concrete filled steel tube column obtained
through finite element modelling and experimental testing was in good agreement with the
corresponding mesh size of 10 mm, as shown in Figure 4.41.
163
Table 4.32 Mesh convergence study
Simulated Load (kN)

Experimental
Specimens with Mesh Size
Load (kN)
10 mm 20 mm 30 mm
C1T4 843 865 890 834
C1T5 849 873 897 836
C2T4 1261 1285 1308 1252
C2T5 1268 1305 1334 1263
C3T4 1756 1788 1805 1749
C3T5 1774 1795 1833 1768
2000
Simulated Load (kN) mesh size (10 mm)
1800
Simulated Load (kN) mesh size (20 mm)
1600 Simulated Load (kN) mesh size (30 mm)
1400 Experimental Load (kN)
Axial load (kN)
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Figure 4.41 Comparison of experiment and simulated load with mesh size of 10 mm, 20 mm and 30 mm
4.12.2 Load carrying capacity of concrete filled steel tube columns

As shown in Table 4.33, the load carrying capacity of CFST columns increased as the
diameter of circular columns increased. Three different CFST column diameters were
considered: 100 mm, 125 mm, and 150 mm, with two different outer steel thicknesses of 4 mm
and 5 mm for all CFST columns. The %age difference in load ability of the simulated model
and test specimens ranged from 0.34% to 1.53%. Thus, the simulation results revealed that the
observed load carrying capacity of concrete filled steel tube column by finite element
164
modelling was in good agreement with experimental observed values corresponding to a mesh
size of 10 mm.
Table 4.33 Comparison of load carrying capacity of CFST columns
Size Simulated
Specimens (D X Ts X H Load
mm) Capacity (kN)
C1T4 100 × 4 × 600 843
C1T5 100 × 5 × 600 849
C2T4 125 × 4 × 600 1261
C2T5 125 × 5 × 600 1268
C3T4 150 × 4 × 600 1756
C3T5 150 × 5 × 600 1774
4.12.3 Deformation in concrete filled steel tube columns

In contrast to infilled concrete, the most deformation was obtained at the middle of the
outer steel tube in C1T4 and C1T5 specimens. Figures 4.42 (a, b), 4.43 (a, b), 4.44 (a, b), Figure
4.45 (a, b), Figure 4.46 (a, b), and Figure 4.47 (a, b) show the deformation results obtained
from simulation of the specimens C1T4, C1T5, C2T4, C2T5, C3T4, and C3T5, respectively.
The deflection of CFST columns was regulated as the diameter of the columns was increased,
resulting in a constant height of columns. The concentration of deformation decreased linearly
towards the bottom of the column, with the highest deformation found in the middle. The
variance in the findings may be due to variations in the L/D ratio and the thickness of the outer
steel tube.
165
(a) Concrete core (b) Outer steel tube
Figure 4.42 Deformation pattern in C1T4 column (a) Concrete core (b) Outer steel tube


166


167
4.12.4 Stress in concrete core and outer steel tube of concrete filled
steel tube columns
Table 4.34 displays the effects of numerical calculations using ABAQUS/CAE 6.14 to assess
the stress inside the concrete core and outer steel tubing for all specimens. As shown in Figure
4.48 (a, b), the stress in the outer steel tube was higher than that in the concrete core.
Maximum stress Maximum stress in

in concrete below concrete above the
the loading point bottom support
Maximum stress
in steel tube below Maximum stress in
the loading point steel tube above the
bottom support
(a) Stress in infilled concrete (b) Stress in outer steel tube

Figure 4.48 Maximum Stress in(a) Infilled concrete(b) Outer steel tube
Table 4.34 Stress behavior of concrete core and outer steel tube
Size Stress in Stress in
Specimens (D X Ts X H concrete core outer steel
mm) (MPa) tube (MPa)
C1T4 100 × 4 × 600 116.5 698.8
C1T5 100 × 5 × 600 119.8 568.9
C2T4 125 × 4 × 600 105.8 829.3
C2T5 125 × 5 × 600 112.2 672.7
C3T4 150 × 4 × 600 104.9 957.1
C3T5 150 × 5 × 600 107.5 778.9
168
4.12.5 Maximum confining pressure (fcp-max)
The CFST members owe their unique properties to the radial confining pressure applied on
concrete by steel tube that improves the ductility and compressive strength of concrete.
Estimating the right value of this parameter is pivotal to find the load resistance of CFST
member under any given type of loading.
Maximum contact
pressure at top
surface of
concrete and steel
Figure 4.49 Contact pressure at surface node in concrete and steel
10
9 8.74 8.36
Confining Pressure (N/mm2)
7.78
8
7
6 6.62 6.84
5
5.28
4
3
2 Maximum confining Pressure (fcp-max), N/mm2
1
0
CFST Specimens
Figure 4.50 Maximum confining pressure of non-greased CFST columns
The experimental measurement of the value of confining pressure at any section is

extremely difficult and required sophisticated equipment. Hence, the FEM model has been used
169
to study its variations alongside the peak, and therefore, the circumference of the specimens.
Figure 4.49, demonstrates the confining pressure distribution for the specimen was observed
throughout the peak from the highest of column specimens. The confining pressures of all
specimens from the highest supports are shown in Figure 4.50. The fcp-max of non-greased
CFST columns is given in Table 4.35.
Table 4.35 Maximum confining pressure of non-greased CFST columns
Maximum confining
Specimens
Pressure (fcp-max), N/mm2
C1T4 6.6
C1T5 7.8
C2T4 6.8
C2T5 8.7
C3T4 5.3
C3T5 8.4
4.13 VALIDATION OF RESULTS

4.13.1 Failure pattern of experimental and simulated CFST columns
Figures 4.51, 4.52, and 4.53 represent the failure pattern of test specimens and
numerical models C1T4, C1T5, C2T4, C2T5, C3T4, and C3T5 after testing and
simulation. Under axial loading, the CFST columns failed with inward buckling at the
centre. The diameter and thickness of the outer steel tubes were also found to influence
the inward buckling of CFST columns. The failure mode found in simulation was very
similar to the findings of the experimental studies. The differences in property and errors
between test models and finite element models allow the results of experimental and
analytical tests to differ.
170
Simulation of C1T4 specimen Simulation of C1T5 specimen
Experiment
Concrete Steel Concrete Steel
Figure 4.51 Failure pattern comparison of experiment and simulation of C1T4 and C1T5 specimens
Experiment
Experiment
171
4.13.2 Experimental vs. Simulated load-deflection curve
The comparison of load-deformation behavior of non-greased CFST columns between

experimental and analytical results for specimens C1T4, C1T5, C2T4, C2T5, C3T4 and
C3T5 is presented in Figure 4.54.
2000
Experimental load capacity
1800
(kN)
1600 Simulated Load Capacity (kN)
1400
Axial load (kN)
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
CFST Specimen
Figure 4.54 Experimental and simulated load capacity of CFST columns
The load carrying capacity of the CFST column increased as the diameter and thickness
of the outer steel tube increased. The simulation results indicated that the observed load
carrying ability of a concrete filled steel tube column by finite element modelling was very
similar to the experimental observed values, with the variation of load from 0.34% to 1.53%
as listed in Table 4.36.
Table 4.36 Comparison of load carrying capacity of CFST columns
Size Simulated
Experimental %age
Load
Specimens (D X Ts X H load capacity
Capacity difference
mm) (kN)
(kN)
C1T4 100 × 4 × 600 834 843 1.08
C1T5 100 × 5 × 600 836 849 1.53
C2T4 125 × 4 × 600 1252 1261 0.71
C2T5 125 × 5 × 600 1263 1268 0.39
C3T4 150 × 4 × 600 1749 1756 0.40
C3T5 150 × 5 × 600 1768 1774 0.34
172
Figures 4.55 (a, b), Figure 4.56 (a, b), and Figure 4.57 display the load-deformation actions of
CFST columns, namely C1T4, C1T5, C2T4, C2T5, C3T4, and C3T5 (a, b). The deformation
of concrete-filled steel tube columns was found to increase as the loading was increased in the
current analysis. It may be because the combined axial loading has a wide area of use. The
highest gain was observed in the middle of the column, and deformation was reduced in
sequence to the bottom of the column. Material properties, site conditions, and defects between
test samples and finite element models may have caused the disparity in results between
analytical and test.
1000 1000
800 800
Axial load (kN)

Axiial load (kN)
600 600
400 400
200 200 C1T5-EXPERIMENT

C1T4-EXPERIMENT C1T5-SIMULATED
C1T4-SIMULATED 0
0
0 5 10 15 20
0 5 10 15 20
(a) Experiment and simulated load-deformation be (b) Experiment and simulated load-deformation beh
havior for C1T4 avior for C1T5
Figure 4.55 Comparison of Experiment and simulated load-deformation curves for (a) non-greased C1T4 (b)
Non-greased C1T5
1400 1400
1200 1200
Axial load (kN)
Axial load (kN)
1000 1000
800 800
600 600
400 400
C2T4-EXPERIMENT
200 C2T5-EXPERIMENT
200 C2T4-SIMULATED C2T5-SIMULATED
0
0
0 5 10 15 20
0 5 10 15 20
(a) Experiment and simulated load-deformation (b) Experiment and simulated load-deformation
behavior for C2T4 behavior for C2T5
Figure 4.56 Comparison of experiment and simulated load-deformation curves for (a) non-greased C2T4
(b) Non-greased C2T5
173
2000 2000
1800 1800
1600 1600
1400 1400
Axial load (kN)

Axial load (kN)
1200 1200
1000 1000
800 800
600 600
400 C3T5-EXPERIMENT
400 C3T4-EXPERIMENT
200 C3T5-SIMULATED
200 C3T4-SIMULATED
0
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Deformation (mm)
Deformation (mm)
(a) Experiment and simulated load-deformation (a) Experiment and simulated load-deformation
behavior for C3T4 behavior for C3T5
Figure 4.57 Comparison of Experiment and simulated load-deformation curves for (a) non-greased C3T4 (b)
Non-greased C3T5
4.14 PARAMETRIC STUDY ON CFST COLUMNS

The effects of D/T, steel grade, and L/D ratio under axial loading on CFST columns were
investigated through a parametric analysis using the proposed model. The yield strength of
steel was varied from 288 to 440 MPa in this analysis, while concrete compressive strength
was kept steady at 36.7 MPa in the filled centre of CFST columns D/T was ranged from 20 to
37.5, and L/D was varied from 4.0 to 6.0, covering external steel tube thicknesses of 4 mm to
5 mm, and concrete filled steel tube specimen diameters of 100 mm to 150 mm. On both
specimens, the overall height was maintained at 600 mm. The ratio of diameter to thickness
(D/T), slenderness ratio, and yield strength of steel (fy) all influence the behavior of circular
CFST columns.
4.14.1 Axial load behaviour of CFST column Vs Diameter to thickness ratio (D/T)
Six circular CFST columns are used in this study for studying the influence of thickness
variance on CFST column behavior. The D/T ratio varied between 20 and 37.5 in this study.
The growth of D/T ratio can be a result of the diameter (from 100 to 150 mm) or thickness of
the segment (4 mm to 5 mm). As a result, for the same diameter, the declined ratio of D/T with
increase in thickness represents a cross sectional difference in the steel frame, resulting in
greater section loading capability. The influence of changing the D/T ratio on the CFST column
loading capacity is shown in Figure 4.58. The axial load capacity of CFST columns was shown
to be influenced by the decrease in diameter to thickness ratio. CFST column’s axial loading
capacity can also be improved by raising steel tube thickness with or without increasing the
174
overall column diameter. The loading capacity of CFST columns was improved to 33.4% by
increasing the D/T ratio from 25 to 31.3 and increasing the diameter of CFST columns from
100 to 125 mm while keeping the outer steel tube thickness at 4 mm. The loading capacity of
CFST columns was raised to 28.4% when the D/T ratio was changed from 31.3 to 37.5 and the
diameter of CFST columns was increased from 125 to 150 mm with a constant thickness of
outer steel tube of 4 mm. When the D/T ratio was increased from 20 to 25 and the diameter of
the CFST columns was increased from 100 mm to 125 mm, the loading capacity of the CFST
columns was increased to 33.8%. When the D/T ratio was increased from 25 to 30 and the
diameter of the CFST columns was increased from 125 mm to 150 mm, the loading capacity
of the CFST columns was increased to 28.6%.
Table 4.37 Loading capacity of CFST columns with varying D/T ratio
Size D/T Experimental Simulated

Specimens
(D × Ts × H) Load (kN) Load

(mm) Capacity
(kN)
C1T4 100 × 4 × 600 25.0 834 843
C1T5 100 × 5 × 600 20.0 836 849
C2T4 125 × 4 × 600 31.3 1252 1261
C2T5 125 × 5 × 600 25.0 1263 1268
C3T4 150 × 4 × 600 37.5 1749 1756
C3T5 150 × 5 × 600 30.0 1768 1774
175
2000
1600 Simulated Load (kN)
1400
Axial Load (kN)
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
25 20 31.3 25 37.5 30
D/T
Figure 4.58 Effect of D/T on axial load behaviour of CFST columns
4.14.2 Axial load behaviour of CFST column Vs Length to diameter ratio (L/D)
This study uses three circular concrete filled steel tube columns to explore the influence
of diameter variation on the CFST columns’ behavior. The L/D ratio ranges from 4.0 to 6.0 in
this study. The L/D ratio increased as the diameter of CFST columns was reduced (150 mm to
100 mm). As a result, with a constant height of 600 mm for both specimens, the decrease in
L/D ratio represents an increase in steel tube cross section, resulting in greater section loading
capacity. The impact of changing the length to diameter ratio of CFST columns on their loading
capacity is shown in Fig. 4.59. As a result, as the L/D ratio lowers, the CFST's axial load
bearing capacity increases. These columns' axial load strength can be enhanced by increasing
their diameter without increasing their thickness. The load-carrying capacity of the CFST
columns improved by 52.7% as the L/D ratio was reduced from 6.0 to 4.0.
Table 4.38 Loading capacity of CFST columns with varying L/D ratio
Size L/D Experimental Simulated

Specimens
(D × Ts × H) Load (kN) Load

(mm) Capacity
(kN)
C1T5 100 × 5 × 600 6.0 836 849
C2T5 125 × 5 × 600 4.8 1263 1268
C3T5 150 × 5 × 600 4.0 1768 1774
176
2000
1400
Axial Load (kN)
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
6 4.8 4
L/D
Figure 4.59 Effect of L/D on axial load behaviour of CFST columns
4.14.3 Axial load behaviour of CFST column Vs Strength of steel

The influence of steel grade on the axial efficiency of three circular CFST columns is
studied. The CFST column's capability is determined by steel’s yield strength. With the
increase in the yielding strength of steel, a significant improvement in the axial loading
capability of columns is observed. The influence of steel grade variation on the CFST columns’
axial loading strength is shown in Fig. 4.60. It is found that the axial load carrying capacity
improves as yield strength of steel of CFST columns increases. In a straight path, the load-
carrying capacity rises. The capability of a load to carry it falls at an exponential rate. The
ultimate load bearing capacity of the column increases by 52.7% when the steel yield strength
is increased from 288 to 440 MPa.
Table 4.39 Loading capacity of CFST columns with strength of steel
Size Yield Experimental Simulated

Specimens
(D × Ts × H) strength Load (kN) Load

(mm) of Steel Capacity
(MPa) (kN)
C1T5 100 × 5 × 600 288 836 849
C2T5 125 × 5 × 600 380 1263 1268
C3T5 150 × 5 × 600 440 1768 1774
177
2000
1400
Axial Load (kN)
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
288 380 440
Strength of steel (MPa)
Figure 4.60 Effect of strength of steel on axial load behaviour of CFST columns
4.15 SUMMARY
The effectiveness of CFST columns loaded before and after fire exposure at 600 ° C
and 800 ° C was investigated. The action of greased and non-greased steel columns filled with
concrete was examined. The load-deformation characteristics of the greased and non-greased
CFST columns are nearly identical in the elastic region, but there is little difference in the load-
deformation behavior of the greased and non-greased columns as axial loading increases. Non-
greased columns had a higher elastic axial load capacity than greased columns. The axial load
capacity of concrete filled steel tube columns was investigated at 600° C and 800° C in the two
cooling regimes of first annealing and second quenching, suggesting that the CFST columns'
axial load decreased with increasing temperature. In contrast to annealing, the water quenching
process reduced a lot of strength, and after exposure to 800 ° C, the residual strength capacity
increased for all specimens, while ductility and stiffness decreased. The test results are
compared to the design code's suggested equations. There was a strong agreement between the
results of the test and the ACI code. This research also included the development of a nonlinear
element model using the commercial programme ABAQUS/CAE 6.14. Tested concrete filled
steel tube columns were used to validate the FE model, and the test data and the model
performance in terms of axial load capacity and failure mode were found to be in good
agreement. The finite element model's load carrying capacity was very similar to the
experimentally observed values for a mesh size of 10 mm.
178

7. chapter 4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

7. chapter 4

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

7. chapter 4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.2 ANALYSIS OF BEHAVIOR OF GREASED AND NON-GREASED

Table 4.1 Evaluation on loading capability of greased and non-greased columns

Load Carried by Column (kN)

Specimens Greased Column, Non-Greased % Increase in

C1T4 823 834 1.3 1.01

Figure 4.1 Load capacity of greased and non-greased columns

(a) C3T4 concrete filled steel tube column

(b) C3T5 concrete filled steel tube column

4.3 SECANT STIFFNESS

Secant stiffness is obtained by ratio of ultimate compressive load to the displacement at

Specimens Secant Stiffness, (kN/mm)

C1T4 50.6 123.5

C1T5 90.0 151.8

C2T4 124.0 156.5

C2T5 166.4 229.6

C3T4 71.4 87.5

C3T5 86.1 117.9

4.4 DUCTILITY INDEX FOR GREASED AND NON-GREASED

Specimens Ductility Index (DI)

C1T4 1.0 1.1

C1T5 1.2 1.2

C2T4 1.6 2.1

C2T5 1.5 1.9

C3T4 1.2 1.5

C3T5 1.4 1.6

Figure 4.6 Ductility index of greased and non-greased CFST columns

4.5 BEHAVIOR OF CFST COLUMNS AT 600 °C and 800 °C

Axial load (kN)

4.6 EFFECT ON STRENGTH CAPACITY OF CFST COLUMNS AT A

4.7 LOAD-DEFORMATION RESPONSE OF CFST COLUMNS AFTER H

Size Axial load carried by CFST columns (kN)

Axial load (kN)

Axial load (kN)

400 400 C2T5-AB

Secant Stiffness, (kN/mm)

Specimens Annealing Quenching

C1T4 123.5 108.8 93.1 97.3 88.3

C1T5 151.8 123.5 94.1 101.9 93.2

C2T4 156.5 143.8 78.3 117.0 76.5

C2T5 229.6 121.3 88.5 118.2 77.1

C3T4 187.5 145.5 116.4 110.8 89.7

C3T5 217.9 142.1 109.1 111.1 107.5

(a) Secant stiffness for annealing at 600 °C and 800 °C

4.9 DUCTILITY INDEX OF CFST COLUMNS AFTER ELEVATED TE

Table 4.6 Ductility index of CFST columns after exposure of fire

Ductility Index (DI)

Specimens Annealing Quenching

C1T4 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0

C1T5 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.1

C2T4 2.0 1.9 1.7 1.8 1.6

C2T5 1.9 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.2

C3T4 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2

C3T5 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.3

(a) Ductility index for annealing at 600°C and 800 °C

(b) Ductility index for water quenching at 600°C and 800 °C

Residual Strength Index (%)

Specimens Annealing Quenching

600 °C 800 °C 600 °C 800 °C