RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The confined concrete strength f’cc using Mander confined concrete model (Mander et al., 1988) was
determined by multiplying the f’c by K using the graph of Mander in Fig. 3-4 resulting from effective
lateral confining stress ratio in x axis to from eeffective lateral confining stress ratio in x axis. So the
concrete strength f’c was increase by 160% which means that the column now can sustain large
deformation and improved the ductility of concrete. The increase in compressive force of concrete
will automatically improve the nominal capacity of column subjected to axial force and bending moment, or in other
words, the interaction diagram of the column is enlarged

Table 3.1 is the summary of the significant points of uniaxial P - M about x and y axes in which at point A
since the it is pure axial so the moment is zero and obtained the highest axial load capacity. The result
shows that the load capacity is 85% times the maximum confined axial load capacity. While in point B
represents the onset of cracking of the least compressed side of the column. The result displays that the
load capacity is 50% times the maximum confined axial load and 65% times the maximum confined
moment capacity because tensile stresses in the concrete are ignored in the strength calculations,
failure loads below point B in the interaction diagram represent cases where the section is partially
cracked. At point C in Fig. 3-5 corresponds to a strain distribution with a maximum compressive strain of
0.003 on one face of the section, and a tensile strain equal to the yield strain, 𝜖y in the layer of
reinforcement farthest from the compression face of the column of 0.002. The result indicated that the
load capacity is 25% times the maximum confined axial load and 85% times the maximum confined
moment capacity since a balanced failure in which both crushing of the concrete on the compressive
face and yielding of the reinforcement nearest to the opposite face of the column (tensile face) develop.
On the other hand, Point D in Fig. 3-5 corresponds to a strain distribution with 0.003 compressive strain
on the top face and a tensile strain of 0.005 in the extreme layer of tension steel (the layer closest to the
tensile face of the section.) The result indicated that the load capacity is 10% more or less the maximum
confined axial load and 70% times the maximum confined moment capacity so the failure of such a
column will be ductile, with steel strains at failure that are about two and a half times the yield strain
(for Grade-60 steel). At point E the axial load is negligible but the moment capacity is 50% times the
maximum confined moment capacity.

Using the XTRACT software to run the section analysis, it is observed that in the graph, the percentage of
accuracy of axial load capacity from the XTRACT to the analytical calculation using Mander (1988) model
is excellent since at point A & B has the accuracy of 97%, at point C is 99%, at D is 84% and at point D is
99%. On the other hand the moment capacity accuracy at point A is 99%, at point B is 92%, at point C is
94%, at point D is 95% and lastly at point E is 84%.So, the overall accuracy ranging from 84% to 100%.
Therefore, the analytical solution using the model develop by Mander (1988) is excellent compare to
XTRACT software.