International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 8, Special May Issue 5, 2018)

Study on Plain Surface With Wave Type Configuration

Bar Reinforced Concrete Frame Subjected To Lateral
Loads
Jaymesh V. Soni1, Vijay R. Panchal2, Nirpex A. Patel3
1
Post Graduate Student (Structural Engineering), M. S. Patel Department of Civil Engineering, Chandubhai S. Patel Institute of
Technology, Charotar University of Science and Technology, Changa, Gujarat, India
2
Professor and Head, M. S. Patel Department of Civil Engineering, Chandubhai S. Patel Institute of Technology, Charotar
University of Science and Technology, Changa, Gujarat, India
3
Assistant Professor, M. S. Patel Department of Civil Engineering, Chandubhai S. Patel Institute of Technology, Charotar
University of Science and Technology, Changa, Gujarat, India

Abstract— The purpose of this study is to investigate the
behaviour of concrete frame reinforced with Plain Surface
with Wave Type Configuration (PSWC) bar under
application of lateral loads. In this study, Finite Element (FE)
3D model of Reinforced Concrete (RC) frame is developed
using ABAQUS for quasi-static solution. Concrete Damage
Plasticity (CDP) is developed for M-30 grade concrete used
for RC frame. Displacement based loading condition is
applied. A finite element analysis is carried out for PSWC-bar
with different pitch distances and offsets. In order to find
effectiveness of PSWC-bar RC frame, a comparison is made
with conventional bar RC frame under lateral loads. It is
observed that application of PSWC-bar as a reinforcement
improves the performance of RC frame compared to
conventional bar.
Keywords— CDP; Conventional bar; FEA; Lateral load;
Offset; Pitch; PSWC-bar; RC frame.
Previous study showed that the use of PSWC-bar as
reinforcement in beam as well as column and beam-column
junction as reinforcement increased flexural load-carrying
capacity and axial load-carrying capacity and moment
resisting capacity of the structure [3-5].
In this study, analysis of Reinforced Concrete (RC)
frame with PSWC-bar is conducted to compute the
displacement and load carrying capacity of RC frame. For
this study, PSWC- bar used with different pitches and
offsets. Offset is the distance between central axis of the
bar and the highest point of the curvature that is provided to
the bar. Pitch distance is entire length of the wave formed
in PSWC –bar. The objective of this study is to compare
the effectiveness of conventional bar with PSWC-bar (with
different pitches and offsets).

I. INTRODUCTION II. VALIDATION AND MODELING

Reinforcement play an important role in contributing
strength to structure. It strengthens the tension zone of the
structure. Earlier traditional bars with plain surface were
used as reinforcement. Conventional bar had high strength
as compared to traditional bar, but it had surface protrusion
because of lugs. Recent studies found that reinforced
concrete structure with conventional bar as reinforcement
has shorter life span as compared to structure reinforced
with traditional bar. This led to invention of plain surface
with wave type configuration (PSWC) bar. As it was
mainly invented to substitute conventional bar as it
increased the life span of the structure [1, 2].
3D non-linear model of RC frame is developed using
ABAQUS for validation work. Figure 1 shows RC frame
model reinforced with conventional bar. The size of beam
is 300 × 400 mm with 4 nos. 20mm ϕ at top and bottom
and stirrup of 10 ϕ @150 mm. The size of column is 300 ×
400 mm with 4 nos. 20 mm ϕ and stirrup of 10 mm ϕ @125
mm. Grade of concrete is M30. Table I & II show the
nonlinear material properties of concrete and steel bar. For
concrete, the concrete damage plasticity model is
developed.
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 7, Issue No., Current Month 2017)

349 0.004
Plasticity parameter (stirrups - 10 mm ϕ)
Yield stress (N/mm2) Plastic strain
334.56 0
454.33 0.0695

Figure 2. Model of RC frame developed in ABAQUS

Figure 1. Structural detailing of RC frame utilized for finite

simulation

TABLE I
CDP PARAMETERS
fck
kc
(N/mm2)
0.7 1.16 0.1 0 30

TABLE II
MATERIAL PROPERTIES OF MAIN BAR AND STIRRUPS
Modulus of elasticity (N/mm2) 210 × 103
Poisson’s ratio 0.3
Density (ton/mm3) 7.85 × 10-6
Plasticity parameter (main reinforcement -20 mm ϕ) Figure 3. Boundary condition and displacement application
Yield stress (N/mm2) Plastic strain
370 0 Fixed boundary condition is applied on surface-2 and
395 0.0001 surface-3. Static general displacement is applied up to 120
418 0.0012 mm at the reference point (RP-1) which is tied to the free
18
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 7, Issue No., Current Month 2017)

end surface-1 in the horizontal direction as shown in Figure

3.
The analytical result is very close to the result obtained
by Francisco et al. [6], the error is 0.15% shown in Figure Figure 7. PSWC-bar with 20 mm offset and 360 mm pitch
4. distance

Figure 8. PSWC-bar with 22 mm offset and 420 mm pitch

distance
PSWC-bar with five different offsets and four different
pitches are used as reinforcement in concrete frame for this
study.
Models with PSWC-bar as reinforcement are created
with various pitch distances and offsets. Total 20 models
with PSWC-bar are developed.

Figure 4. Comparison of Load Vs displacement graph

III. PSWC-BAR AND MODELING DETAILS

Rebar with lugs are corroded faster as compared to plain
surface bar. Therefore, Kar invented PSWC-bar [1].
PSWC-bar with 16 mm, 18 mm, 20 mm and 22 mm
offset with 240 mm, 300 mm, 360 mm and 420 mm pitch
distance is shown in Figures 5 to 8. Concrete frame is
reinforced with PSWC-bar with different offsets and pitch
distances.

Figure 5. PSWC-bar with 16 mm offset and 240 mm pitch

distance

Figure 6. PSWC-bar with 18 mm offset and 300 mm pitch

distance

19
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 7, Issue No., Current Month 2017)

Figure 9. Model concrete frame with PSWC-bar as reinforcement

Figure 11. Stresses developed in reinforcement at 120 mm

Figure 10. Stresses developed in concrete at 120 mm displacement
displacement After performing analysis of all models in ABAQUS,
Parts like concrete frame, PSWC-bar and stirrups as a the comparison of conventional bar with PSWC-bar with
reinforcement for beam as well as column are created. All different pitches and offsets is shown in Figures 12 to 15.
the parts are assembled as shown in Figure 9 with a
replacement of conventional bar as per structural details as
shown in Figure 1.
An embedded region constraint allows to embed the
model within a “host” region of the model or within the
whole model. In this case, concrete is host region and steel
is embedded region. Embedded region defines interaction
between different sections working together in entire
model.
The effect of stress on RC frame and also on
reinforcement is shown in Figures 10 & 11. Load vs
displacement graph for all 4 different pitches and 5
different offsets are plotted.

20
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 7, Issue No., Current Month 2017)

Figure 12. Load vs displacement graph of PSWC-bar RC frame

with different offsets with 240 mm pitch and conventional bar Figure 14. Load vs displacement graph of PSWC-bar RC frame
with different offsets with 360 mm pitch and conventional bar

Figure 13. Load vs displacement graph of PSWC-bar RC frame

with different offsets with 300 mm pitch and conventional bar Figure 15. Load vs displacement graph of PSWC-bar RC frame
with different offsets with 420 mm pitch and conventional bar

21
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 7, Issue No., Current Month 2017)

Percentage increment in the load carrying capacity of

PSWC-RC frame with different pitches and offsets
TABLE III compared to conventional bar is described in Table V. The
LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY DATA OF DIFFERENT PITCHES DISTANCE observation shows that the different pitches with 16 mm
RELATED TO OFFSETS offset gives 14% to 16% increments in load carrying
Offset capacity compared to conventional bar.
Pitch 16 18 20 22 24 TABLE IV
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY DATA OF DIFFERENT OFFSETS RELATED TO
Load (kN) PITCHES
240 374.6 368.6 367.8 339 346.9 Pitch Pitch Pitch Pitch
300 377.1 370.1 365.5 357.8 348.8 Offsets 240 mm 300 mm 360 mm 420 mm
360 377.5 376.8 375.7 370.6 350.8 (mm)
Load (kN)
420 382.4 379.7 376.3 373.3 369.5 16 374.666 377.175 377.539 382.429
18 368.666 370.175 376.842 379.754
20 367.829 365.596 375.706 376.306
22 339.03 357.815 370.624 373.306
24 346.932 348.804 350.867 369.523

TABLE V
PERCENTAGE VARIATION IN LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY OF CONCRETE
FRAME REINFORCED WITH PSWC-BAR WITH DIFFERENT PITCH AND
OFFSET TO CONVENTIONAL BAR
PSWC-bar Offset (mm)
Models
16 18 20 22 24
240 14% 12% 12% 3% 5%
Figure 16. Load carrying capacity of PSWC- bar RC frame with Pitch 300 15% 13% 11% 9% 6%
different pitch distance related to offsets
(mm) 360 15% 15% 14% 13% 7%
420 16% 15% 14% 14% 12%

Figure 17. Load carrying capacity of different offsets related to
pitch
Load carrying capacity data and graph of different
pitches distance related to different offsets is shown in
Tables III & IV and Figures 16 & 17.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
Using ABAQUS, the PSWC-bar RC frame is analyzed
with different pitches and offsets. A comparison is made
between load carrying capacity of PSWC-bar RC frame
and conventional bar RC frame in order to find the
effectiveness of PSWC-bar in RC frame. The conclusion
derive from this comparative study are as follows.
1) Enhancement is observed in load carrying capacity of
concrete frame reinforced with PSWC-bar for adopted
all offsets with varying in pitch distance 240 mm, 300
mm, 360 mm & 420 mm.
2) Decrement is observed in load carrying capacity of
concrete frame reinforced with PSWC-bar for all
adopted pitch distance with varying offset 16 mm, 18
mm, 20 mm, 22 mm & 24 mm.
3) Area under the curve of load vs displacement graph for
PSWC - bar with different offsets & pitch distances is
22
 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 7, Issue No., Current Month 2017)

higher as compared to conventional bar. It indicates

improvement in behaviour of entire RC frame.

References

[1] Kar, Anil K., (2010) "Rebar for Durable Concrete Constructions”,
New Building Materials & construction world; Vol. 39, pp. 59-65.
[2] Kar, A. K., and Vij, S. K., (2009) "Enhancing the Life Span of
Concrete Bridges," New Building Materials & Construction World,
Vol. 15, pp. 114-156.
[3] Varu, R., (2014) "Study on C-bar as reinforcement in column", M.
Tech thesis, Nirma University, Ahmedabad.
[4] Patel, N. A., (2015) “Study on PSWC-Bar as Reinforcement for
Beams”, M. Tech thesis, Nirma University, Ahmedabad.
[5] Patel, A. R., Panchal, V. R., Chauhan, N., and Patel, N. A., (2017)
“Analytical Study on PSWC-bar as Reinforcement in RCC Beam-
Column Junction”, M. Tech thesis.
[6] Francisco, L. A., Bashar, A., Sergio, O., (2014) “Numerical
Simulation of RC Frame Testing with Damaged Plasticity Model.
Comparison with Simplified Model”, Second European Conference
on Earthquake Engineering and Seismology, Istanbul

23