Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

Compressive behavior and stress–strain relationships of confined and

unconfined UHPC
Negar Naeimi a, Mohamed A. Moustafa b,⇑
a
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Nevada, Reno, United States
b
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Nevada, Reno, NV 89523-0258, United States

h i g h l i g h t s

Comprehensive experimental testing of more than 130 UHPC cylinders.

Varied parameters include unconfined versus confined UHPC.

Varied steel fibers ratio (0%, 2%, 4%) and transverse reinforcement (0%, 2%, 4%, and 8%)

Considered two cylinder sizes (2  4 in and 3  6 in) and specimen geometry aspects.

Full stress–strain relationships of confined and unconfined UHPC are provided.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Superior physical and mechanical behavior of ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC) has attracted lots
Received 7 June 2020 of interest for its use in joints and connections of prefabricated elements. However, there is still a great
Received in revised form 2 October 2020 potential for application of UHPC for larger applications and full structural elements, such as bridge col-
Accepted 24 November 2020
umns. Some fundamental knowledge gaps at the material level still need to be filled to promote future
Available online 22 December 2020
structural designs. One of these gaps is understanding the compressive behavior of confined UHPC as
compared to unconfined UHPC. To date, no extensive studies examined the confining effects of spirals
Keywords:
representing transverse reinforcement in typical columns. This study focused on UHPC cylinders to estab-
Ultra-high performance concrete
Steel fibers
lish a better understanding of the compressive behavior and stress–strain relationships of confined UHPC
Confinement materials. More than 130 unconfined UHPC and UHPC cylinders confined with steel spirals with varying
Stress–strain relationships volumetric ratios of steel fibers (0%, 2%, 4%) and transverse reinforcement ratios (0%, 2%, 4%, and 8%) were
tested under uniaxial compression. Two cylinder sizes were considered (2  4 in and 3  6 in) and effects
of different specimen geometry aspects (e.g. end planeness) as well as test setup were investigated. The
behavior of confined UHPC cylinders was obtained and compared with reference unconfined UHPC cylin-
ders. Overall, the study shows that both steel fibers and steel spirals have contributory roles in confining
effects but the effect of steel spirals is more compelling. Moreover, full stress–strain relationships of con-
fined and unconfined UHPC are provided for future use.
Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction to its unique mixture and proper particle packaging. UHPC is a

Ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC) is commonly defined
as a cementitious material, reinforced by fiber, which has compres-
sive and tensile strength more than 150 MPa (21.7 ksi) and 5 MPa
(0.72 ksi), respectively [1]. It is noted that the compressive strength
of conventional concrete is in the range of 28 to 55 MPa (4 to 8 ksi),
and its tensile strength is between 3 and 5 MPa (0.4 to 0.72 ksi).
The outstanding mechanical behavior of UHPC can be attributed
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mmoustafa@unr.edu (M.A. Moustafa).
combination of Portland cement, silica fume, fine sand, ground
quartz, high-range water reducer (superplasticizer), less than
0.25 water-to-cement (W/C) ratio, and fibers (mostly steel fibers).
Due to low w/c ratio, the superplasticizer is added to provide the
desired workability for casting. Finely ground sands, nano-
materials and fillers reduce the pores, and make UHPC a highly
homogeneous material with high strength and durability.
Although, steel fibers are, dimensionally, the largest constituent
of UHPC, they play a crucial role in enhancement of the strength
and ductility of UHPC in both tension and compression. Numerous
experimental tests e.g. [2–5] were carried out to evaluate direct

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.121844
0950-0618/Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa
tensile behavior of UHPC and verify the dependency of tensile
behavior of UHPC on volumetric ratio of fibers. Direct tensile
behavior of UHPC can be idealized into three parts: elastic,
strain-hardening, and softening behavior [2]. In the strain-
hardening part, UHPC experience multiple cracking stage, in which
steel fibers tend to close the small cracks through the effect of
bridging forces. Likewise, UHPC exhibits high strength and
enhanced stiffness under compression, which also benefits from
the confining effects of fibers. However, more work is still needed
to fully characterize the compressive stress–strain behavior of
UHPC, especially as it relates to internal fiber confinement or exter-
nal confinement due to steel spirals for instance. Such confinement
effects need to be considered for typical column designs, but yet to
be characterized for UHPC for informing future designs.
There is a growing interest for application of UHPC in bridge
deck joints and connections [6], retrofitting of damaged structural
elements [7–9], etc. However, most of the popular UHPC applica-
tions are relatively small-scale applications and there is still an
unfulfilled potential for extending its use to the larger structural
elements [10–13]. To achieve this goal, unique design methods
for UHPC components, which consider the superior material char-
acteristics, need to be developed. Exploring the full structural
design capacities using UHPC still requires comprehensive under-
standing of the fundamental material behavior so that well-
defined constitutive model can be eventually developed to explore
best structural design approaches and requirements. A compre-
hensive constitutive model should be simple but capable of prop-
erly simulating the material behavior. In general, the most
common way to define the material behavior is by uniaxial
stress–strain curves, obtained through the uniaxial tension and
compression tests. As previously mentioned, more work has been
done to characterize the full tensile behavior of UHPC using direct
tension testing as opposed to the full compressive behavior.
Accordingly, this study aims at investigating the uniaxial com-
pressive behavior of both confined and unconfined UHPC speci-
mens with different fiber ratios and confinement ratios, and
using different test setups, loading control, and cylinder sizes.
The specific objective is to obtain and provide comprehensive
stress–strain relationships that can characterize the material
behavior of unconfined and confined UHPC, which could be used
in the future to develop uniaxial constitutive models for analysis
and design of UHPC columns. The paper first presents a compre-
hensive literature review of previous studies that focused on com-
pressive behavior of UHPC and confinement effects. Next, the
experimental program utilized in this study is presented along
with the varied testing parameters. The test results and discussions
are then presented and grouped in various subsections to investi-
gate the effect of various testing and material parameters.
2. Literature review
During the last decade, compression behavior of unconfined
UHPC specimens was investigated by a number of researchers
[14–20]. Graybeal [14] tested steam-treated and untreated UHPC
cylinders in compression with the focus on the ascending branch
of stress–strain curve. He observed that uncured UHPC obtains
its initial 70 MPa (10 ksi) compressive capacity within 2 days.
However, steam-treatment dramatically enhances the stabilized
UHPC strength at 193 MPa (28 ksi). Based on that research, the
ACI 363R equation was found to fairly predict the modulus of elas-
ticity for UHPC with compressive strength in the range of 25 to
193 MPa (3.6 to 28 ksi), specially for the higher strengths.
Nonetheless, Graybeal [14] proposed a modified version of the
ACI 318 equation for the modulus of elasticity which is more accu-
rate within the full range of compressive strengths up to 30 ksi
2
Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844
(207 MPa). This study also found the compressive stress–strain
behavior of untreated UHPC, after 8 weeks from casting, is almost
linear elastic to 70% of its compressive strength.
Graybeal and Marshall [15] conducted compression tests on 50,
75, and 100 mm (2, 3, and 4 in) diameter cylinders, along with 50,
70, and 100 mm (2, 2.78, and 4 in) cube specimens to examine the
specimen size and shape effects on the compressive strength. They
found 75 mm (3 in) cylinders as well as 70 and 100 mm (2.78 and 4
in) cubes, as the acceptable alternatives for the standard 100 mm
(4 in) cylinders. They proposed a factor of 0.96 to convert the
results from the cube to 75 mm (3 in) cylinder strength. Besides,
they indicate that the smaller specimens, including 50 mm (2 in)
cylinders and cubes demonstrate a considerable strength variation.
Based on their study, extraction of fiber reinforcement from the
UHPC at failure may lead to the increased variation of compressive
strength.
Hassan et. al. [16] investigated the effect of steel fibers on mod-
ulus of elasticity, stress–strain curves and post-peak behavior of
UHPC in tension and compression. They obtained the complete
compressive stress–strain curve using controlled closed-loop test-
ing machines and Linear Variable Displacement Transducers
(LVDTs). The authors noted that conducting the tests according
to the BS 1881–121:1983 method cannot capture the post-peak
behavior of UHPC specimens in compression, and the concrete sur-
face strain gauges are detached due to the concrete spalling after
the peak strength. Similarly, they observed that ASTM C469 is
not suitable to capture the post-peak behavior of specimens, and
noted the rotation of clamping screws of compressometers after
the formation of first cracks. Thus, they recommended the use of
compressometers to measure the vertical shortening of the speci-
men only in the elastic part, and LVDTs, placed parallel to the spec-
imen, to measure the movement of machine crosshead, in the post-
peak region, which is the procedure followed here in this study.
Aghdasi et. al. [17] carried out compression tests on 70 mm
(2.78 in) cubic specimens cast from their proposed UHPC mixture.
They used a pair of LVDTs to determine the deformation for the
entire compressive stress–strain curve. They reported an average
28-day compressive strength of 192 MPa (27.8 ksi) with corre-
sponding strain of 0.84%, and 1.5% and 3% strains, respectively, at
90.5% and 61.7% of the peak strength. Shafieifar et. al. [18] per-
formed compression tests on five 75 mm (3 in) diameter cylinders
and on five, 50 mm and 75 mm (2 and 3 in) cubic specimens, made
from the proprietary Lafarge DuctalÓ mix. Based on their observa-
tions, UHPC behave elastically up to 50% of its compressive
strength. They reported the entire stress–strain curves for the
specimens.
In another comprehensive and recent study, El Helou [19] cap-
tured compression behavior of unconfined UHPC, with fiber vol-
ume content of 0%, 2.0% and 4.0%, including linear, non-linear,
peak, and post-peak regions of the response. Thirty
75  150 mm (3  6 in) cylindrical UHPC specimens were tested,
between 400 and 410 days after placement, to characterize the
stress–strain curves. These cylinders were tested using SATEC
1,334-kN (300 kips) capacity compression machine and were
displacement-control with a constant circumferential displace-
ment rate of 2.1  10-4 mm/s (8.3  10-6 in/s) until the peak axial
stress was reached, after which the displacement rate was
increased to 2.5  103 mm/s (9.8  10-5 in/s) and 8.5  103
mm/s (3.3  10-4 in/s), respectively. An averaging axial extensome-
ter was used to measure axial displacement and avoid end effects.
Total displacement and circumferential expansion were measured
respectively using two LVDTs and a circumferential extensometer.
Moreover, 15 cylinders of 75  150 mm (3  6 in) and 254 cubes
with side length of 25 mm (1 in) were tested respectively to obtain
Poisson’s ratio and evaluate f´c. He reported that the average mod-
ulus of elasticity of UHPC, with and without fibers, is almost similar
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa
and can be expressed as 53.7 GPa (7789 ksi) ± 4%. The average
maximum compressive strength, increases by about 30% when
fibers are added. No significant increase in maximum strength
was observed when fiber contents increased from 2% to 4%. How-
ever, fibers improved the UHPC ductility. That study also showed
that UHPC with 2% and 4% fibers reaches 50% of compressive
capacity at axial strains of 0.006 and 0.009, respectively.
Yang et. al. [21] conducted compression tests on 3 unconfined
and 18 confined UHPC cylinders using steel spirals with yield stress
of 414 MPa (60 ksi). The used UHPC was the Lafarge DuctalÓ mix
with 2% steel fibers, cast into 100  200 mm (4  8 in) cylindrical
molds. They used two different diameters of steel wires: 5.1 and
7.6 mm (0.2 and 0.3 in), and four different pitch sizes of spiral,
ranging from 13 to 50 mm (0.5 to 2.0 in). The volumetric ratio of
confining steel was in the range of 1.6% to 16.7%. All specimens
were tested using a 2,890 kN (650-kips) compression machine
with the loading rate of 133 kN/min (30 kips/min). Tests were car-
ried out in relatively high load control rate, and hence, post-peak
strain data represented the lower bounds of the ductility of UHPC.
They observed a specific trend for the specimens with highest vol-
umetric ratio (16.7%) of steel spirals. For these specimens, failure
occurred with crushing of UHPC around the mid-height along with
some cracks in the vertical direction, with a gradual load drop after
peak strength. However, no specific failure mode was observed for
the other specimens, they only showed the sudden drop after peak
load. Based on their observations, stress–strain behavior of con-
fined specimens could be preliminarily categorized into three dif-
ferent parts. The initial linear part is following by the nonlinear
inelastic hardening region, and then by the gradual load decrease
or the sudden load drop after the peak strength, while the uncon-
fined UHPC response is relatively linear up to the peak strength,
following by a sudden load drop.
In the study by Yang et al. [21], the authors compared the
results against different models in the literature, and noted that
Mander’s model [22–23] was able to predict only pre-peak behav-
ior of UHPC, and was relatively more accurate than other models
for high strength concrete such as Salim and Murat [24]. Moreover,
none of these models could properly predict the post-peak behav-
ior of UHPC. The authors mentioned that using Mander’s model
equation for ultimate strain seems to be more accurate than the
energy balance approach. They also found steel reinforcement
more efficient than FRP for confinement of UHPC, except for very
large confinement ratios, where FRP becomes more effective.
Moreover, for the same confinement ratio, steel-confined UHPC is
found to have a larger ultimate strain than FRP-confined UHPC.
Chang et. al. [25] recently published their work on compressive
behavior of confined and unconfined UHPC cylindrical specimens.
They tested 24, 150  300 mm (6  12 in) specimens in four differ-
ent groups under uniaxial compression. Four specimens were
unconfined; 10 specimens were confined by spiral stirrups and
10 other specimens were confined with both steel spirals and car-
bon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP). Specimens were cast from
UHPC with two different mix designs with compressive strength
of 100 MPa (14.5 ksi) and 120 MPa (17.4 ksi) and reinforced with
four longitudinal reinforcement of Grade 600 with diameter of
10 mm (0.4 in). They used steel spirals of Grade 970 with diameter
of 7 mm (0.28 in) in volumetric ratio of 0%-2% and two layers of
CFRP laminates. Six different ratios of transverse reinforcement
were compared: 0, 1%, 1.2%, 1.4%. 1.6% and 2.0%. They observed
brittle failure of unconfined specimens, which could be improved
to ductile behavior with increase of steel spiral volumetric ratio.
They observed that peak stress, peak strain, ductility and tough-
ness of confined UHPC increased with concrete strength, volumet-
ric ratio of transverse reinforcement and CFRP. This increasing ratio
was less for specimens with higher strength and ratios of
transverse reinforcement and CFRP. They found existing models
3
Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844
for normal strength concrete (NSC), high strength concrete (HSC),
and very-high strength concrete inapplicable to predict peak stress
and strain of confined UHPC.
In addition to material testing, few studies looked at confine-
ment effects of UHPC columns e.g. [26,27]. One example study
is discussed here for brevity. Shin et. al. [26] studied the pure
axial compressive load behavior of 9 square columns confined
by transverse reinforcement with volumetric ratios of 0.9–9.9%.
All the columns had 220  220 mm (8.7  8.7 in) cross section,
total height of 900 mm (35.4 in), and clear cover of 15 mm (0.6
in). Columns were cast from 1.5%-hybrid-micro-steel-fiber UHPC,
in two groups with different compressive strengths of 163 MPa
(23.6 ksi) and 181 MPa (26.3 ksi). Columns of each group had
same compressive strength but different spacing and configura-
tions of transverse reinforcement. One configuration was a single
peripheral hoop with confinement effectiveness factor of 2.0, and
the other was combination of peripheral and inner diamond-
shaped hoop with confinement effectiveness factor of 1.33. Longi-
tudinal reinforcement for all the specimens were eight D16
deformed reinforcing bars (longitudinal ratio of 3.28%) of Grade
500, and additional transverse reinforcement and external steel
clamps were provided at both ends of columns to prevent local
failure. Eight columns were designed based on seismic provisions
of CSA A23.3–14 and one based on ACI 318–14. The columns
were detailed to satisfy different ductility requirements. The
study showed that CSA A23.3–14 can represent post-peak behav-
ior with distinct second peak loads and gradual decrease of
strength which was imposed by ductility level chosen for the
design. The ACI 318–14 provisions resulted in higher second load
than the first peak load and more gradual decrease of strength
with higher ductility, compared to CSA A23.3–14. Based on their
results, the volumetric ratio of transverse reinforcement is the
compelling factor that controls the post-peak behavior of UHPC
columns under axial load. However, for a certain amount of trans-
verse reinforcements, configuration and spaces between the
transverse reinforcements plays an imperative role in post-peak
behavior and toughness of the UHPC columns. The 1.5%-hybrid
micro-steel fibers were able to properly control cover spalling
and contribute to transverse reinforcements towards confining
effects resulting in ductile post-peak behavior.
In summary, despite of the conducted research listed above,
there is still need for more data from experimental tests on com-
parative unconfined and confined UHPC specimens. The conducted
tests on confined UHPC cylinders are very limited where each
study considered no more than 10 to 20 specimens. More compre-
hensive and statistically significant data is urgently needed to
assess the effect of different steel fiber ratios and confinement
ratios on UHPC behavior, to develop a comprehensive constitutive
model for confined and unconfined UHPC for future designs. This
study attempts to fill this knowledge gap and enrich the literature
with more than 130 new tests that covered wide range of param-
eters of unconfined and confined UHPC specimens with steel spi-
rals. The study presents a set of compressive stress–strain
relationships that could be the basis of future constitutive model
for analysis and design of UHPC columns.
3. Experimental tests
In total, 133 confined and unconfined UHPC specimens, cast
from four different pours, were tested under uniaxial compression
loading to capture the whole unconfined and confined stress–
strain curves. In addition to evaluating the effect of volumetric
ratio of steel fibers and steel spirals on UHPC compressive behav-
ior, the effect of age, specimen’s size, and load setup are evaluated
as well for more confidence in the presented results.
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa
3.1. Material, mix design, and casting
In this study, a commercially available UHPC (DuctalÓ JS1000)
was used for all casting series. DuctalÓ is composed of the premix,
which is a proprietary blend of cement, silica sand, silica flour and
silica fume, super plasticizer, and 2% steel fibers. However, in this
study, to investigate the effect of different steel fiber ratio, three
different ratios (0%, 2% and 4%) of steel fibers were used in three
different batches of one of the castings. In Table 1, the DuctalÓ
mix proportions with 2% fiber are presented. These proportions
were used for all of the batches and only the steel fibers were
removed or doubled to represent the 0% and 4% steel fiber mixes.
Based on the provided datasheets, steel fibers have 399 ksi
(2750 MPa) yield stress, 0.5 in (13 mm) length, and 0.008 in
(0.2 mm) diameter. For each batch, UHPC was mixed following rig-
orous mixing and sampling procedures. Materials were accurately
weighed and mixed using the high shear Imer Mortarman 360
mixer. The premix, superplasticizer and water (or ice when was
needed in days of high ambient temperature) were initially mixed
for about 15–20 min until a good consistency was reached. Next,
the steel fibers were added slowly to the paste and mixed for an
additional 10–15 min. As soon as mixing was completed, the cast-
ing and sampling of test specimens was completed. The UHPC was
scooped into the plastic molds and was not rodded to avoid fibers
segregation. The UHPC cylinders were just hit by a hammer on the
side to allow the trapped air to exit. The steel spirals used for con-
finement were carefully prepared for this study as illustrated in
Fig. 1 and put inside the plastic molds. No UHPC cover on the spi-
rals was considered to ensure the whole cylinder section work as
confined UHPC. Two ends of steel spirals were bent to provide
essential development length for them in the concrete. Several
UHPC batches were mixed and used to prepare the various test
specimens. An example of mixing and material sampling from
one of the batches is shown in Fig. 2. All cylinders were capped
and stored outdoors to represent actual performance of UHPC in
typical construction and site conditions. It is noted that the UHPC
paste and ambient temperature were measured and controlled to
be in the allowable range during the mixing and casting. Moreover,
static and dynamic flow tests were performed to control the qual-
ity of the UHPC paste during casting.
3.2. Test specimens
A total of 41 unconfined and 92 confined specimens were cast
from six different batches into 3  6 in (75  150 mm) and
2  4 in (50  100 mm) plastic cylindrical molds and demolded
after at least 10 days of casting. Specimens were tested at least
28 days after casting. Several parameters were varied for the con-
sidered experimental program which included size of the speci-
mens and test setups as well as volumetric ratio of steel fibers
and steel spirals. Table 2 summarizes the age, number of tested
specimens, and the testing machine for each group of specimens.
In this table, the nomenclature of specimens is based on the infor-
mation of UHPC mix and confinement of specimens: C is followed
by number for casting identification; SF followed by number for
Table 1
UHPC mixture by DuctalÓ (based on number of premix bags).
kg/m3 lb/yd3 Percentage by weight
Premix (kg) 2,195 3,700 87.4
Water (or ice if needed) 130 219.1 5.2
Superplasticizer (Premia 150) 30 50.6 1.2
Steel fiber (2% volume) 156 263 6.2
4
Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844
steel fiber ratio; U indicates unconfined specimen; SS is volumetric
ratio of steel spirals in confined specimens; and 2  4 and 3  6
represent the specimens size.
Confined 75  150 mm (3  6 in) cylinders were reinforced by
steel spirals of three different pitch sizes: 25, 13 and 6 mm (1, 0.5,
and 0.25 in). On the other hand, 50  100 mm (2  4 in) cylinders
were confined by steel spirals of these pitch sizes: 13, 6, and 3 mm
(0.5, 0.25, and 0.125 in). These pitch sizes correspond to volumetric
ratio of approximately 2%, 4% and 8%, for both specimens’ sizes.
Spiral wires were of low carbon steel with 483 MPa (70 ksi) tensile
strength. Wires with diameter of 3.4 mm (0.135 in) and 2 mm
(0.080 in) were used for 75  150 mm (3  6 in) and
50  100 mm (2  4 in) specimens, respectively. To prepare the
specimens for the uniaxial compression tests, top end of the con-
fined and unconfined specimens was firstly cut using a saw
machine. Then, both ends were ground using a dedicated grinding
machine except for the specimens of casting C3. Effect of non-
planeness and grinding effectiveness of these specimens is investi-
gated in a later section. Based on the DuctalÓ Operating Proce-
dures for Cylinders End-Grinding, approximately 10–12 mm
(0.41–0.47 in) of top of the cylinders shall be cut using a concrete
saw while the ultimate length of the cylinders should be
150 mm ± 1 mm (5.9 in ± 0.04 in) for 3  6 cylinders. The two ends
of the cylindrical specimens are then polished using a special grin-
der. Fig. 3 illustrates the procedure followed in this study to pre-
pare the UHPC cylinders.
It is noted that the cylinders’ molds could be 75  165 mm
(3  6.5 in) and 50  114 mm (2  4.5 in) but the molds used in
this study were strictly closer to 150 mm (6 in) and 100 mm (4
in). Accordingly, the finished height of the specimens was less than
6 in (150 mm). Hence, the effect of specimens’ height on the com-
pressive strength is investigated and discussed along with plane-
ness effects in section 4.2. For stress and strain calculation, the
actual height of each specimen was calculated as the average of
four lengths measured in two perpendicular directions at the cross
section. The diameter of each specimen was also measured at three
locations along the height: top, mid-height and bottom. At each
height level, the diameter was measured in two perpendicular
directions. Thus, the diameter of each cylinder is the average of
six measurements at different locations at height and cross section.
The average diameter was used to calculate the cross-section area
of the cylinders for stress calculations. The strain was then calcu-
lated from the average displacement captured from three LVDTs
(novotechniks) divided by the average specimen height.
3.3. Instrumentation and test setups
All 75  150 mm (3  6 in) specimens of casting C2, C3 and C4
were tested under uniaxial compression loading using a Tinius-
Olsen 1334 kN (300 kip) compression testing machine. Specimens
of casting C5 were tested using SATEC 2224 kN (500 kip) and
50  100 mm (2  4 in) specimens of casting C2 using MTS
machine. In Tinius and SATEC machine, the loading rate was con-
stantly applied at approximately equal to 133 kN/min (30 kip/
min) until the peak load was reached. A deformation rate of
0.5 mm/min (0.02 in/min) was then maintained to capture the
post-peak behavior of the UHPC. Three different novotechnik
devices were placed around the perimeter with 120° angle in
between to measure the axial shortening of the specimens. All dif-
ferent testing machines, test setups, and instrumentation are
shown in Fig. 4. For the tests using the MTS machine, the loading
rate was constantly maintained at 0.15 mm/min (0.006 in/min)
and two novotechnik devices were used to measure the axial
shortening of the specimens. The axial load and the vertical dis-
placement were both measured at sampling rate of at least 256 Hz.
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa
Fig. 1. Preparing and assembling steel spirals inside the molds.
Fig. 2. Illustration of UHPC mixing procedure and specimens sampling.
4. Test results and discussion
The overall behavior of confined and unconfined specimens is
evaluated using the stress–strain curves captured from the uniaxial
compression tests. These curves are presented for different ratios
of steel fibers in the UHPC mix and confining steel spirals. The
mechanical properties of confined and unconfined UHPC speci-
mens are reported in term of modulus of elasticity, peak strength,
strain at peak stress, and ultimate strain. The effect of age and
specimen geometry, i.e. size, aspect ratio, and degree of non-
planeness, are assessed and presented in sections 4.1 and 4.2,
respectively. Next, the observed modes of failure are discussed in
section 4.3. All the obtained individual and average stress–strain
curves are presented in section 4.4 then followed by a detailed dis-
cussion on confining effects of steel fibers and spirals in sections
4.5 and 4.6, respectively.
4.1. Effect of age of specimens
Graybeal [14] reported that untreated UHPC tends to gain more
strength up to 8 weeks after casting. However, Pourbaba et al. [28]
mentioned that UHPC specimens gain almost 99% and 100% of their
ultimate strength after 28 and 42 days after casting, respectively.
In this study, all of the UHPC specimens were tested after 28 days
5
Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844
to avoid any premature age effects on the UHPC specimens’
behavior. However, due to the large number of specimens, the test-
ing program was conducted over a year or more. Thus, Fig. 5
reports the obtained UHPC strength at different ages of testing to
depict the effect of age on compressive strength of unconfined
and confined UHPC specimens with 2% fibers. Fig. 5a is representa-
tive of age effects on compressive strength of unconfined UHPC.
Comparing compressive strength of one of the specimens of casting
C5, i.e. 184 MPa (26.72 ksi), which was tested at 28 days with the
average of compressive strength of specimens of the same casting
tested at 265 to 277 days, i.e. 183 MPa (26.59 ksi), confirm the neg-
ligible age effects on the compressive strength after 28 days. Note
that the lower average compressive strength of specimens from
casting C3, i.e. 141 MPa (20.42 ksi), could be attributed to the
non-planeness of specimen ends which is further discussed in
the next section. The average of compressive strength of uncon-
fined specimens from castings C2 and C4, i.e. 209 MPa (30.26 ksi)
and 206 MPa (29.93 ksi) respectively, show that approximately
the same strength is obtained irrespective of the different batches
and testing at different ages. In specimens of casting C5, some
clumps of unreacted cement or premix were observed. This had
only small adverse effects on the compressive strength of the
unconfined specimens, where the steel spiral effects in confined
specimens overcame this deficiency. The average compressive
strength of unconfined specimens of casting C5 is 183 MPa
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844

Table 2
Summary of different variables and testing parameters of UHPC cylinders.

Casting ID Number of Steel fibers Testing Age (days) Confinement Steel Spiral Spiral Specimen Number of Group ID
Batches ratio (%) Machine ratio (%) Pitch (in) Size (in) Specimens
C2 1 2 Tinius 29 & 71 Unconfined 0 – 36 5 C2SF2U-3  6
C3 1 2 Tinius 48–53 Unconfined 0 – 3 C3SF2U-3  6
Confined 2 1 4 C3SF2SS2-3  6
Confined 4 0.5 5 C3SF2SS4-3  6
C4 1 2 MTS 170–179 Unconfined 0 – 24 6 C4SF2U-2  4
Confined 2 0.5 4 C4SF2SS2-2  4
Confined 4 0.25 3 C4SF2SS4-2  4
Confined 8 0.125 4 C4SF2SS8-2  4
Tinius 123–127 Unconfined 0 – 36 6 C4SF2U-3  6
Confined 2 1 5 C4SF2SS2-3  6
Confined 4 0.5 6 C4SF2SS4-3  6
Confined 8 0.25 5 C4SF2SS8-3  6
C5 3 0 SATEC 28 & 217–277 Unconfined 0 – 36 5 C5SF0U-3  6
Confined 2 1 6 C5SF0SS2-3  6
Confined 4 0.5 5 C5SF0SS4-3  6
Confined 8 0.25 5 C5SF0SS8-3  6
2 SATEC 28 & 216–277 Unconfined 0 – 36 6 C5SF2U-3  6
Confined 2 1 4 C5SF2SS2-3  6
Confined 4 0.5 7 C5SF2SS4-3  6
Confined 8 0.25 7 C5SF2SS8-3  6
4 SATEC 28 & 221–277 Unconfined 0 – 36 10 C5SF4U-3  6
Confined 2 1 6 C5SF4SS2-3  6
Confined 4 0.5 8 C5SF4SS4-3  6
Confined 8 0.25 8 C5SF4SS8-3  6

Fig. 3. UHPC cylinder preparation using saw cutting and surface grinding.

(26.59 ksi). The effect of age on the modulus of elasticity of the
specimens was also assessed and reported in Fig. 6. The modulus
of elasticity was determined, as the slope of the fitted line between
10% and 30% of the peak compressive strength, by linear regression
on stress–strain curves, as suggested by Graybeal [29]. Similar
trends and explanation as for compression strength are observed
for the modulus of elasticity. The numerical values for the average
compressive strength and modulus of elasticity among other prop-
erties are summarized for each group later in section 4.4.
4.2. Effect of geometry of specimens
Better understanding of specimen size effects on stress–strain
relationship of UHPC is important specially when the characteristic
tests results are intended to be used as the material properties to
analyze and design large-scale structures. As a common practice,
size effect coefficients or correction factors are required to be
determined to apply results from testing at the material level to
the structural level, which was not part of the scope covered in
the present study but is recommended for future studies. Tradi-
tionally 100  200 mm (4  8 in) or 150  300 mm (6  12 in)
6
cylinders are used to characterize the mechanical properties of
NSC. However, most of the laboratories around the nation do not
have the capacity to test UHPC specimens of that size due to the
high compression strength of material. Graybeal and Marshall
[15] reported the 75  150 mm (3  6 in) cylinder is an acceptable
alternative to the standard 100  200 mm (4  8 in) cylinder spec-
imen. Nevertheless, in some cases, the peak strength of
75  150 mm (3  6 in) cylinders also exceed certain machines
capacity if a displacement or strain-rate control testing is desired.
Hence, 50  100 mm (2  4 in) cylinders can be the next suitable
alternative. In this study, results of tests from casting C4 on two
different sizes of cylinders (2  4 in and 3  6 in) are compared
to investigate the effect of specimen size and loading type on the
obtained stress–strain curves. Stress strain curves for the four dif-
ferent groups of steel spiral confinement are illustrated in Fig. 7.
According to this figure, the 50  100 mm (2  4 in) cylinders
demonstrated a slightly less modulus of elasticity and somehow
larger compressive strength except for confined specimens with
8% steel spirals that showed opposite trend. This can be attributed
to reinforcement congestion in the small specimens which led to
non-uniform distribution of steel fibers. The values of modulus of
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844

Fig. 4. Different testing machines and setups using: (a) SATEC, (b) Tinius-Olsen, and (c) MTS machines and arrangement of LVDTs (additional LVDTs are behind specimens in
(a) and (b)).

36 248 36 248
Compressive Strength (MPa)

Compressive Strength (MPa)

Compressive Strength (ksi)

32 221
Compressive Strength (ksi)

32 221
28 193 28 193
24 165 24 165
20 138 20 138
16 110 16 110
12 C2 83 12 83
C3 C3
8 55 8 55
C4 C4
4 (a) 28 4 (b) 28
C5 C5
0 0 0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Age (Day) Age (Day)
36 248 36 248
Compressive Strength (MPa)
Compressive Strength (MPa)
Compressive Strength (ksi)
Compressive Strength (ksi)

32 221 32 221
28 193 28 193
24 165 24 165
20 138 20 138
16 110 16 110
12 83 12 83
C3
8 55 8 55
C4 C4
4 (c) 28 4 (d) 28
C5 C5
0 0 0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Age (Day) Age (Day)
Fig. 5. Effect of age on compression strength of (a) unconfined and confined UHPC with 2% fibers using (b) 2% steel spirals, (c) 4% steel spiral, and (d) 8% steel spirals.

7
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844

10000 69 10000 69
9000 62

Modulus of Elasticity (GPa)

9000 62

Modulus of Elasticity (GPa)

Modulus of Elasticity (ksi)

Modulus of Elasticity (ksi)

8000 55 8000 55
7000 48 7000 48
6000 41 6000 41
5000 34 5000 34
4000 28 4000 28
3000 C2 21 3000 21
C3 C3
2000 14 2000 14
C4 C4
1000 (a) 7 1000 (b) 7
C5 C5
0 0 0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Age (Day) Age (Day)
10000 69 10000 69
9000 62 9000 62

Modulus of Elasticity (GPa)

Modulus of Elasticity (GPa)
Modulus of Elasticity (ksi)
Modulus of Elasticity (ksi)

8000 55 8000 55
7000 48 7000 48
6000 41 6000 41
5000 34 5000 34
4000 28 4000 28
3000 21 3000 21
2000 C3 14 2000 14
C4 C4
1000 (c) 7 1000 (d) 7
C5 C5
0 0 0 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Age (Day) Age (Day)

Fig. 6. Effect of age on modulus of elasticity of (a) unconfined and confined UHPC with 2% fibers using (b) 2% steel spirals, (c) 4% steel spiral, and (d) 8% steel spirals.

elasticity and peak strength for both sizes of specimens of casting grinding machine. However, results from C3 are presented here
C4 are presented in Table 3. On average, modulus of elasticity of in Fig. 9 to illustrate the adverse effects of poor specimen prepara-
50  100 mm (2  4 in) cylinders is about 15% less than tion or surface grinding. The figure suggests that the obtained stiff-
75  150 mm (3  6 in) cylinders. On the contrary, the compressive ness and strength were less than expected. The average modulus of
strength of 50  100 mm (2  4 in) cylinders is about 10% more elasticity and peak strength of unconfined specimens of casting C3
than the 75  150 mm (3  6 in) cylinders. were found to be 46% and 28% less than average values of uncon-
Overall, when the stress–strain relationship for confined UHPC fined specimens from castings C2, C4 and C5. These are 26 GPa
specimens with the 8% transverse reinforcement is neglected, it (3776 ksi) and 141 MPa (20.4 ksi) versus 48.0 GPa (6957 ksi) and
is shown that the compressive strength increases with decrease 195 MPa (28.27 ksi) for E and f’c, respectively.
in specimen size. This agrees with what Kazemi and Lubell [30] The last considered aspect of specimen geometry is cylinders
reported where they found similar size effect on the compressive aspect ratio. As previously mentioned, the UHPC specimens were
strength for UHPC with 0 to 5% steel fibers. This size effect is on cast in 75  150 mm (3  6 in) and 50  100 mm (2  4 in) cylin-
the conservative side when 3  6 cylinders are used and more rep- ders and after end cut and grinding, the aspect ratio, i.e. ratio of
resentative of actual applications of UHPC. specimen diameter to height, would be more than 0.5. Thus, the
Another aspect of the specimen geometry is the out-of-degree effect of aspect ratio on the compressive strength of UHPC cylin-
planeness of cylinders, which is another factor that may affect ders is investigated and presented in Fig. 10. Based on this figure,
the stress–strain behavior of specimens. Degree of out-of- the aspect ratio of the specimens ranged from 0.53 to 0.62 but
planeness of cylinders after grinding must be under 1 degree to no specific effect is observed on the test results and obtained com-
assure that pure axial load is applied; otherwise, the specimen pressive strength.
must be reground [29]. The degree-of-planeness was determined
for all tested specimens and was confirmed to be less than 1 4.3. Mechanical modes of failure
degree. Nonetheless, it was desired to check whether the variation
in the degree of out-of-planeness or distortion of the cylinders of Under the uniaxial compression loading, unconfined UHPC
casting C5 had any effects on the compression strength as illus- cylinders typically failed by gradual widening of multiple cracks
trated in Fig. 8. The figure confirms that acceptable out-of- in the vertical direction. In case of confined cylinders, steel spirals
planeness values, i.e. less than 1°, do not have any significant stopped the progression and widening of the vertical cracks and
impact on the compressive strength. However, large degree of prevented sudden failure of the specimens. The mode of failure
out-of-planeness (greater than1°), which is expected if only saw for confined cylinders was a combination of small vertical cracks
cutting is used with no surface grinding, may have a large effect and spalling or crushing of UHPC in between the spirals. The typi-
on the stiffness and strength of specimens. In this study, the cylin- cal failure mode of each group of UHPC specimens considered in
ders of casting C3 were not ground, due to a breakdown in the this study is illustrated in Fig. 11. Effect of steel fibers on the failure
8
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 7. Average stress–strain relationships for UHPC with 2% fiber for two specimen sizes for (a) unconfined and confined UHPC with (b) 2%, (c) 4%, and (d) 8% steel spirals.

Table 3
Comparison of mechanical properties of 2  4 in and 3  6 in UHPC cylinders of casting C4.

Steel spiral (%) Modulus of elasticity, E (ksi [GPa]) Peak strength, f’c (ksi [MPa])
36 24 Ratio 2  4/3  6 36 24 Ratio 2  4/3  6
0 7113 [49.0] 6162 [42.5] 0.87 29.93 [206.4] 32.89 [226.8] 1.10
2 7406 [51.1] 6044 [41.7] 0.82 28.27 [194.9] 30.57 [210.8] 1.08
4 7673 [52.9] 6279 [43.3] 0.82 30.86 [212.8] 34.60 [238.6] 1.12
8 7388 [50.9] 6589 [45.4] 0.89 31.73 [218.8] 30.18 [208.1] 0.95

40 276
SF0U
35 SF0SS2 241
Compressive Strength (MPa)

SF0SS4
Compressive Strength (ksi)

30 207
SF0SS8
25 SF2U 172
SF2SS2
20 SF2SS4 138
SF2SS8
15 103
SF4U
10 SF4SS2 69
SF4SS4
5 34
SF4SS8
0 0
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80
Degree of out-of-planeness

Fig. 8. Effect of end planeness of cylinders on compressive strength of cylinders of casting C5.

mode of UHPC was similar to confining effects of steel spirals fibers. Steel fibers changed the explosive failure of specimens,
where the spalling of concrete in unconfined and confined UHPC which occurred with widening and opening of cracks at the peak
without fibers was enhanced with addition of 2% and 4% steel load, to a more controlled fashion with formation of multi-cracks.
9
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 9. Average stress–strain curves of (a) unconfined and confined UHPC with 2% fibers with (b) 2%, (c) 4%, and (d) 8% steel spirals for poorly (C3) and properly (C2, C4, or C5)
prepared cylinders.

4.4. Stress-strain curves
The full stress–strain curves for all the tested confined and
unconfined cylinders were obtained. Fig. 9 above shows the aver-
age stress–strain curves for unconfined and confined UHPC with
2% fibers tested from different series of casting, and other cases
are presented and discussed here in details. It is noted again that
stress–strain relationships from casting C2, C4 and C5 were similar
and comparable. Only the average stress–strain curve of casting C3
exhibited lower slope in the elastic region and less peak stress as
already mentioned in section 4.2. Such results from casting C3
were included before to comment on importance of proper speci-
mens preparation and surface grinding. However, these test results
from this group are not included further in the investigation of
confining effects. Fig. 12 provides all individual and group average
stress–strain relationships for specimens of casting C5. The figure
includes 12 groups from three different fiber ratios (0%, 2%, and
4%) and four different confinement or transverse steel ratios (0%,
2%, 4%, and 8%).
As seen in Fig. 12a through 12c, unconfined UHPC behave
almost linearly until the peak strength followed by a sudden and
significant drop in load capacity which is accompanied by an
explosive failure in UHPC without fibers (Fig. 12a). The post-peak
drop is less steeper when either steel fiber or transverse

40 276
SF0U
35 241
Compressive Strength (MPa)

SF0SS2
Compressive S trength (ksi)

30 SF0SS4 207
SF0SS8
25 SF2U 172
SF2SS2
20 138
SF2SS4
15 SF2SS8 103
SF4U
10 SF4SS2 69

5 SF4SS4 34
SF4SS8
0 0
0.50 0.51 0.52 0.53 0.54 0.55 0.56 0.57 0.58 0.59 0.60 0.61 0.62 0.63 0.64
D/H

Fig. 10. Effect of cylinders diameter-to-height ratio on compressive strength of cylinders.

10
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa
0% trans. rft. 2% trans. rft.
0% steel
fibers
2% steel
fibers
4% steel
fibers
Fig. 11. Modes of failure for 12 different groups of UHPC cylinders with varying steel fiber and transverse reinforcement ratios.
reinforcement is added. To evaluate the post-peak behavior and
ductility of the specimens, the ultimate strain was determined
for each specimen. For this study, the ultimate strain was defined
as the strain at which the UHPC peak strength has already
decreased by 20%. The average value of ultimate strain is summa-
rized in Table 4 among other results for each group. The increased
ultimate strains reflect higher ductility which consistently
increased by the increase of either steel fiber or confinement ratio.
It is noted that for unconfined UHPC specimens a sudden drop typ-
ically occurred after peak strength is reached and accordingly, for
some specimens, an accurate post-peak behavior or ultimate strain
values were not determined.
More discussion on the stress–strain curves is provided in the
next two subsections in light of investigating the effects of confine-
ment. Nonetheless, a summary of all the average values of modulus
of elasticity, peak strength and its corresponding strain, ultimate
strain, confinement ratio and confinement effectiveness for each
group of specimens from all castings is provided in Table 4.
According to table 4, ignoring results of casting C3, the modulus
of elasticity is found to vary in the range of 41.7 GPa (6,044 ksi) to
52.9 GPa (7,673 ksi) for both unconfined and confined UHPC spec-
imens with different steel fiber ratios. The peak strength is in the
range of 166 MPa (24.1 ksi) to 240 MPa (34.8 ksi) and the corre-
sponding strain at the peak value is between 0.004 and 0.007.
The ultimate strain, as previously defined, ranged from 0.0056 to
0.0116. For confined specimens, the confinement ratio and con-
finement effectiveness are calculated and summarized in Table 4
as well. However, their definition and discussion are presented in
the next sections.
11
Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844
4% trans. rft. 8% trans. rft.
Before getting to the confinement discussion, Fig. 13 depicts the
peak strength versus the strain at the peak. Each data point repre-
sents data from individual tested specimen from casting C5.
According to this figure, an almost linear trend and correlation
can be observed between the peak compressive strength and its
corresponding strain. The strain at peak roughly varied from
0.0035 to 0.0075 where the increase in strain is tied to the increase
in the peak compressive strength.
4.5. Confining effects of steel spirals
Using steel spirals for transverse reinforcements to confine the
concrete core is a well-known method to enhance the ductility and
prevent brittle failures [24–26]. The efficiency of spiral reinforce-
ment is found to be approximately 1.7 times better than square
hoops [31]. Hence, it could be considered as an economical solu-
tion to confine UHPC columns. To better illustrate the confining
effect of steel spirals, Fig. 14 compares the average stress–strain
relationships under different transverse reinforcement ratios for
three cases of UHPC with 0%, 2%, and 4% fibers.
Fig. 14 confirms that unconfined cylinders exhibit a sudden
drop in load capacity and a rapid failure when compared to the
confined cylinders that show a smoother behavior as the peak
strength is approached and in the post-peak. Similar to what Yang
et. al. [21] obsevred from limited number of specimens, the stress–
strain curves for confined UHPC can be categorized to three differ-
ent phases. The first phase is the elastic phase in which the trans-
verse reinforcements are not yet active and the UHPC core mainly
tolerate the load. The behavior of confined cylinders with 2%, 4%
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa
0% fiber
Unconfined
(a) (b)
2.0% trans. rft.
(d) (e)
4.0% trans. rft.
(g) (h)
8.0% trans. rft.
(k)
Fig. 12. Stress- strain relationships for specimens of casting C5.
and 8% steel spirals is found to be almost linear up to approxi-
mately 80%, 70%, and 60% of the peak strength, respectively (see
Fig. 9 and 12d through 12l). This long stretch of linearity is favor-
able since it limits the deflection of structures. In the second phase,
small cracks and dilation of the UHPC core begin to occur, which in
turn, activate the transverse reinforcements. Finally, in the last
phase, UHPC reach its strength limit and a gradual load decrease
starts. The shape of the curves in the second and third phases are
apparently dependent on the volumetric ratio of the steel spirals.
The higher the volumetric ratio of the steel spiral, the more energy
dissipates through plastic deformations. This is exactly what is
desirable for bridge columns designed for severe seismic loading.
Therefore, confinement of UHPC columns can be as beneficial as
it is used in NSC columns to boost the ductility and strength of a
cross-section.
The effect of steel spirals or transverse reinforcement ratio on
the modulus of elasticity, peak strength, and strain at the peak is
Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844
2.0% fiber 4.0% fiber
(c)
(f)
(i)
(l)
quantified and illustrated in Fig. 15. In general, higher ratios of
steel spirals lead to higher peak strength and strain. However, for
UHPC with 2% and 4% fibers, a decreasing trend is first observed
for the modulus of elasticity and then followed by an increasing
trend as the steel spiral ratio increase. Although this decrease in
value of modulus of elasticity is slight, it can be attributed to
non-uniform dispersion of steel fibers due to steel spirals. How-
ever, for high ratios of steel spirals (8%) the behavior is almost
independent from the amount of steel fibers and mostly governed
by the steel spirals.
According to Table 4 above, the ultimate strain of unconfined
UHPC with 0%, 2%, and 4% fibers increases from 0.0056, 0.0068,
and 0.0061, respectively, to 0.0097, 0.0116, and 0.0101 for confined
UHPC specimens with 8% steel spirals. To quantify confining effects
of steel spirals, the confinement ratio and confinement effective-
ness are calculated and presented in Table 4. Mander et al. [22]
defined the confinement effectiveness as the ratio of compressive
12
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844

Table 4
Summary of average values of mechanical properties of specimens of each group.

Group ID Modulus of Peak Strain at peak, ep Ultimate Strain, eu Confinement Ratio, f’l/f’co Confinement Effectiveness, f’cc/f’co
Elasticity, E Strength, f’c
ksi GPa ksi MPa
C2SF2U-3  6 6364 43.9 30.3 209 0.0052 – – –
C3SF2U-3  6 3776 26.0 20.4 141 0.0047 0.0060 – –
C3SF2SS2-3  6 4465 30.8 24.1 166 0.0052 0.0063 0.028 1.18
C3SF2SS4-3  6 4317 29.8 26.7 184 0.0063 0.0079 0.061 1.31
C4SF2U-2  4 6162 42.5 32.9 227 0.0055 – – –
C4SF2SS2-2  4 6044 41.7 30.6 211 0.0056 0.0082 0.019 0.93
C4SF2SS4-2  4 6279 43.3 34.6 239 0.0063 0.0084 0.041 1.05
C4SF2SS8-2  4 6589 45.4 30.2 208 0.0058 0.0095 0.085 0.92
C4SF2U-3  6 7113 49.0 29.9 206 0.0048 – – –
C4SF2SS2-3  6 7406 51.1 28.3 195 0.0049 0.0075 0.019 0.94
C4SF2SS4-3  6 7673 52.9 30.9 213 0.0057 0.0088 0.042 1.03
C4SF2SS8-3  6 7388 50.9 31.7 219 0.0066 0.0102 0.087 1.06
C5SF0U-3  6 6350 43.8 24.1 166 0.0040 0.0056 – –
C5SF0SS2-3  6 6454 44.5 24.7 170 0.0048 0.0066 0.024 1.03
C5SF0SS4-3  6 6552 45.2 26.4 182 0.0058 0.0085 0.052 1.10
C5SF0SS8-3  6 6522 45.0 32.9 227 0.0070 0.0097 0.109 1.37
C5SF2U-3  6 6801 46.9 26.6 183 0.0044 0.0068 – –
C5SF2SS2-3  6 6652 45.9 28.8 198 0.0054 0.0074 0.021 1.08
C5SF2SS4-3  6 6542 45.1 32.0 221 0.0063 0.0087 0.047 1.20
C5SF2SS8-3  6 6703 46.2 33.6 232 0.0067 0.0116 0.098 1.26
C5SF3U-3  6 7118 49.1 28.8 198 0.0044 0.0061 – –
C5SF3SS2-3  6 6923 47.7 29.3 202 0.0051 0.0076 0.020 1.02
C5SF3SS4-3  6 7030 48.5 29.6 204 0.0055 0.0094 0.043 1.03
C5SF3SS8-3  6 7240 49.9 34.8 240 0.0065 0.0101 0.091 1.21

40 276
SF0U

Compressive Strength, f' c (MPa)

35 241
SF0SS2
Compressive Strength, f' c (ksi)

30 SF0SS4 207
SF0SS8
25 SF2U 172
SF2SS2
20 138
SF2SS4
15 SF2SS8 103
SF4U
10 SF4SS2 69

5 SF4SS4 34
SF4SS8
0 0
0.0025 0.0030 0.0035 0.0040 0.0045 0.0050 0.0055 0.0060 0.0065 0.0070 0.0075 0.0080
ɛp
Fig. 13. Peak strength versus its corresponding strain for specimens of casting C5.

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 14. Confinement effect of steel spirals on UHPC specimens of casting C5 (a) without fibers (b) with 2.0% and (c) 4.0% steel fibers.

strength of confined concrete (f’cc) to the unconfined compressive 0 1

fl ¼ ke qs f yh ð1Þ
strength (f’co). The confinement ratio is defined as the ratio of the 2
effective lateral confining pressure (f’l) to the unconfined compres-
sive strength of plain concrete (f’co), where f’l is calculated using where fyh = yield strength of transverse steel; q = volumetric ratio of
Equation (1). transverse confining steel to the confined concrete core; and ke =-
13
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844

confinement effectiveness coefficient, which in turn, is calculated 1.6

using Equation (2).
1.5

Confinement effectiveness (f'cc /f'co)

0
1 s
2ds 1.4
ke ¼ ð2Þ
1  qcc
1.3
where ds = center-to-center diameter of spiral; s΄ = clear spacing 1.2
between spiral wires (pitch) and qcc = ratio of area of longitudinal
steel to area of UHPC, which is zero for this study. Note that Equa- 1.1
tion (1) has been formulated assuming that steel spirals have been
1.0 0.0% SF
yielded at the peak strength of concrete. This assumption is recom-
0.0% SF Avg.
mended to be further evaluated or revisited for UHPC in future 2.0% SF
0.9
studies that could use accurate instrumentation (e.g. reinforcement 2.0% SF Avg.
strain gages) and larger scale specimens. 0.8 4.0% SF
Fig. 16 shows the confinement effectiveness versus confine- 4.0% SF Avg.
ment ratio for each tested specimen of casting C5. Note that 0.7
the filled markers in the figure are representative of the average 0.000 0.025 0.050 0.075 0.100 0.125 0.150
values of confinement effectiveness for each group of specimens.
Confinement ratio (f'l/f'co)
For UHPC with 0% and 2% fibers specimens, confinement effec-
tiveness increases with the increase in confinement ratio. How- Fig. 16. Confinement effectiveness versus confinement ratio for all specimens of
ever, the confinement effectiveness of UHPC with 4% fibers casting C5.
specimens is almost constant (~1.02) for confinement ratio of
0.02 and 0.043 and then increases by about 17% to 1.21 for con-
finement ratio of 0.91. This implies that for UHPC with high
ratios of steel fibers (4%), low and medium ratios of confinement 4.6. Steel fiber effects
do not significantly improve the peak compressive strength and
much higher ratios of steel spiral are needed to enhance the Steel fibers act as crack restrainers which control the lateral
compressive strength by up to 20%. For the 2% fiber UHPC, the strain particularly at the peak load and postpone the threshold of
low, medium, and high confinement increase the peak compres- initial and even unstable cracks [32]. Steel fibers with high
sive strength by about 8%, 20% and 26%, respectively. From strength and rigidity work under tension in cracks to control the
another viewpoint, for specimens confined with low and med- transversal strain and in turn apply confining effects on UHPC
ium ratios of transverse reinforcement, i.e. 2% and 4% spirals, specimens. In this way, steel fibers improve the post peak behavior
UHPC with 2.0% steel fiber gets the highest value of confinement and ductility.
effectiveness at 1.2. For high values of confinement ratio in the The average stress–strain curves from all casting C5 specimens
range 0.9 to 0.11, which corresponds to the high 8% ratio of steel are re-grouped and presented in Fig. 18 to demonstrate the effect
spirals, UHPC without fiber gets the highest confinement effec- of steel fibers for unconfined and confined UHPC. The figure first
tiveness at 1.37. shows a similar observation to what Krahl et. al. [33] reported
The overall results indicate that there is an interaction between where the nonlinear pre-peak behavior is more pronounced for
the steel fibers and steel spirals in enhancement of peak compres- the specimens with less ratio of steel fibers. In other words,
sive strength. One way of further illustrating this interaction is specimens with higher ratios of steel fibers show almost linear
plotting the relationship between the average peak strength and behavior up to the peak strength. After the peak strength, uncon-
average peak strain, which directly reflect the steel spirals confine- fined specimens with no fiber demonstrated a completely brittle
ment, for the 3 cases of 0%, 2%, and 4% fibers as in Fig. 17. Again, the behavior with sharp drop of specimen strength. Fig. 18a depicts
increasing trend for peak strain in conjunction with the increase in how the addition of steel fibers changed the brittle behavior of
peak strength for all three groups of UHPC is obvious. However, the unconfined UHPC with no fibers to a relatively more ductile behav-
figure shows that adding 2% steel fibers makes it possible to fully ior. Fig. 18b shows that for the more typical range of transverse
benefit from the spirals confinement while this benefit is not fully reinforcement (2%), using the common steel fibers ratio of 2%
exercised when 4% fibers is used. This could be another reason not improves the strength of UHPC specimens whereas no further
to consider 4% fibers where the added mechanical benefits are not enhancement is observed when higher steel fiber ratios (4%) is
worth it for the significant increase in material cost. used. This can be attributed to poor dispersion of high ratios of

7400 51.0 36 248 0.0075

0.0% SF 0.0% SF
Modulus of Elasticity, E (GPa)
Modulus of Elasticity, E (ksi)

34 234 0.0070
Peak Strength, f' c (MPa)

7200 2.0% SF 49.6 2.0% SF

Peak Strength, f' c (ksi)

Peak Stain, ɛ p (in/in)

4.0% SF 32 221 0.0065 4.0% SF

7000 48.3 30 207 0.0060
6800 46.9 28 193 0.0055
26 179 0.0050
6600 45.5
24 0.0% SF 165 0.0045
6400 44.1 2.0% SF
(a) 22 (b) 4.0% SF
152 0.0040 (c)
6200 42.7 20 138 0.0035
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0
Steel Spiral Ratio (% ) Steel Spiral Ratio (% ) Steel Spiral Ratio (% )

Fig. 15. Effect of ratio of steel spiral on (a) modulus of elasticity, (b) peak strength and (c) peak strain.

14
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844

36 248 which is negligible change. The peak strain values show first
0.0% SF an increasing trend then start to decrease by the increase of
34 234

Peak Strength, f' c (MPa)

Peak Strength, f' c (ksi)

2.0% SF steel fiber ratio for unconfined and confined specimens with
32 221 moderate ratios of steel spirals (2% and 4%). However, this trend
4.0% SF
30 207 is continuously decreasing for highly confined specimens. There-
fore, both steel fibers and steel spirals have contributory roles in
28 193
confining effects, but the effect of steel spirals is more com-
26 179 pelling based on all the test results.
24 165
22 152 4.7. Summary and conclusions

20 138 This paper presented the results of uniaxial compression tests

0.0035 0.0045 0.0055 0.0065
Peak S train, ɛp
Fig. 17. Relationship between the average peak strength and its corresponding
peak strain for three cases of UHPC with 0%, 2%, and 4% steel fibers.
steel fibers when steel spirals exist, but more importantly, this
observation confirms that there is no need to consider 4% steel
fibers for future UHPC column designs. When UHPC specimens
are confined with high ratios of steel spirals (8%), the effect of steel
fibers on the compressive behavior is negligible even when no
fibers are used at all.
To conclude the discussion, Fig. 19 shows the effect of steel
fiber ratio on modulus of elasticity, peak strength, and strain.
The overall trend of modulus of elasticity shows increase of
specimens’ stiffness by the increase of steel fiber ratio except
for confined 2% fiber UHPC specimens with 4% steel spirals.
For that latter case, the average modulus of elasticity for con-
fined 0% and 2% fiber UHPC with 4% steel spirals is found to
be 45.2 GPa (6,552 ksi) and 45.1 GPa (6,542 ksi), respectively,
0.0075 on 133 unconfined and confined UHPC cylinders, which were cast
from UHPC with three different ratios of steel fibers, i.e. 0%, 2%, and
4%. The UHPC cylinders confinement was achieved using three dif-
ferent ratios of steel spirals transverse reinforcement, i.e. 0%, 2%,
4%, and 8%. Two sizes of cylinders were used 50  100 mm
(2  4 in) and 75  150 mm (3  6 in). The results from all the tests
were presented in term of the full stress–strain curves and sum-
mary of average values of modulus of elasticity, peak strength
and strain, and ultimate strain for different groups of specimens.
Based on to the presented results and discussion, concluding
remarks are as follows:

In terms of the effect of specimens geometry, small size cylin-
ders (2  4 in) demonstrated approximately 10% higher com-
pressive strength than 3  6 in cylinders. The effect of degree
of non-planeness below 1 degree on the compressive strength
was negligible whereas higher values could significantly dimin-
ish the strength and stiffness. Cylinder diameter-to-height ratio
larger than 0.5 (even up to values of 0.63) due to specimen’s
preparation and surface grinding does not seem to have any
adverse effects on the compressive strength.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 18. Comparison of average stress–strain curves of UHPC with three different steel fibers ratio for four groups of confinement: (a) unconfined, and confined with (b) 2%, (c)
4% and (d) 8% steel spirals.

15
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844

7400 51.0 36 248 0.0075

0.0% SS
Modulus of Elasticity, E (ksi)

Modulus of Elasticity, E (GPa)

0.0% SS
34 234

Peak Strength, f' c (ksi)

0.0070 2.0% SS
7200 49.6

Peak Strength, f' c (MPa)

2.0% SS
4.0% SS

Peak Strain, ɛ p (in/in)

4.0% SS 32 221 0.0065
7000 8.0% SS 48.3 8.0% SS
30 207 0.0060
6800 46.9 28 193 0.0055

6600 45.5 26 0.0% SS 179 0.0050

24 2.0% SS 165 0.0045
6400 44.1 4.0% SS
(a) 22 (b) 8.0% SS 152 0.0040 (c)
6200 42.7 20 138 0.0035
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Fiber Ratio (% ) Fiber Ratio (% ) Fiber Ratio (% )

Fig. 19. Effect of steel fiber % on: (a) modulus of elasticity, (b) peak strength, and (c) strain.

Steel spirals improved the overall behavior of UHPC cylinders in Declaration of Competing Interest
term of strength and ductility. However, the ductility enhance-
ment was more significant. The confinement effect of steel spi- The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
rals is rendered in the stress–strain curves in terms of cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
increasing stress and strain capacities, higher plastic deforma- to influence the work reported in this paper.
tions, and much enhanced energy absorption and dissipation.

The observed stress–strain curves for confined UHPC could be Acknowledgments
categorized into three different zones: linear-elastic, nonlinear
hardening, and post-peak softening. On the contrary, uncon- This project was supported in part by US Department of Trans-
fined UHPC specimens demonstrated only an almost linear portation through the Accelerated Bridge Construction University
behavior up to the peak strength followed by a sudden drop. Transportation Center (ABC-UTC) at Florida International Univer-
The failure mode of confined cylinders was a combination of sity, as lead institution. The authors would like to acknowledge
small vertical cracks and spalling or crushing of UHPC in the UHPC donation provided by LafargeHolcim and thank the lab
between the spirals. staff at UNR for facilitating cylinders testing.

Peak strength and ductility of confined specimens, compared to
the unconfined ones, were quantitatively investigated by two
parameters: confinement effectiveness ratio and ultimate References
strain. For example, the confinement effectiveness ratio and
[1] H.G. Russell, B.A. Graybeal, Ultra-High Performance Concrete: A State-of-the-
ultimate strain were determined for confined 2% fiber UHPC Art Report for the Bridge Community, No. FHWA-HRT-13-060, 2013.
cylinders with 8% steel spirals to be 1.26 and 1.16%, [2] K. Wille, S. El-Tawil, A.E. Naaman, Properties of strain hardening ultra high
respectively. performance fiber reinforced concrete (UHP-FRC) under direct tensile loading,
Cem. Concr. Compos. 48 (2014) 53–66, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

The nonlinear pre-peak behavior is more pronounced for the cemconcomp.2013.12.015.
specimens with lower steel fiber ratios where using 4% steel [3] B.A. Graybeal, F. Baby, Development of Direct Tension Test Method for Ultra-
fibers linearize the behavior to almost 80% of the strength value. High- Performance Fiber-Reinforced Concrete, ACI Mater. J. 110 (2013) 177–
186, https://doi.org/10.14359/51685532.
After the peak strength is reached, unconfined specimens with [4] V. Savino, L. Lanzoni, A.M. Tarantino, M. Viviani, Tensile constitutive behavior
no fiber demonstrated a completely brittle behavior with sharp of high and ultra-high performance fibre-reinforced-concretes, Constr. Build.
drop of specimen strength whereas this slope was less for Mater. 186 (2018) 525–536, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2018.07.099.
higher ratios of steel fibers. [5] E. Cadoni, D. Forni, E. Bonnet, S. Dobrusky, Experimental study on direct tensile

Overall, both steel fibers and steel spirals have contributory behaviour of UHPFRC under high strain-rates, Constr. Build. Mater. 218 (2019)
roles in confining effects, but the effect of steel spirals is more 667–680, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.05.152.
[6] E. Shoushtari, M.S. Saiidi, A. Itani, M.A. Moustafa, Design, Construction, and
compelling based on all the tests conducted in this study. More- Shake Table Testing of a Steel Girder Bridge System with ABC Connections, J.
over, this study shows that there is no need to consider 4% steel Bridge Eng. 24 (9) (2019) 04019088, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-
fibers for future UHPC column designs since the added mechan- 5592.0001464.
[7] A. Valikhani, A.J. Jahromi, I.M. Mantawy, A. Azizinamini, Experimental
ical and confinement benefits are not worth it for the significant
evaluation of concrete-to-UHPC bond strength with correlation to surface
increase in material cost. roughness for repair application, Constr. Build. Mater. 238 (2020) 117753,

The results summary and average stress–strain curves provided https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117753.
[8] M. Farzad, A. Sadeghnejad, S. Rastkar, A. Moshkforoush, A. Azizinamini, A
in this study can be readily used to develop more accurate con-
theoretical analysis of mechanical and durability enhancement of circular
stitutive models for unconfined and confined UHPC. Moreover, reinforced concrete columns repaired with UHPC, Eng. Struct. 209 (2020)
implementing such stress–strain curves for UHPC material 109928, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.109928.
input in finite element models can help inform future analysis [9] A. Sadeghnejad, S. Rehmat, A. Azizinamini, Development of Innovative Short-
Span Bridge System Using UHPC Formworks, in: Int. Interact. Symp. Ultra-High
and design of UHPC columns. Perform. Concr., Iowa State University Digital Press, 2019.
[10] N. Naeimi, M.A. Moustafa, Numerical modeling and design sensitivity of
structural and seismic behavior of UHPC bridge piers, Eng. Struct. 219 (2020)
110792, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2020.110792.
[11] N. Naeimi, M. Moustafa, Pushover Analysis and Seismic Response of UHPC
Two-Column Bridge Bent, International Interactive Symposium on Ultra-High
CRediT authorship contribution statement Performance Concrcrete, Vol. 2, No. 1, Iowa State University Digital Press
(2019).
Negar Naeimi: Methodology, Formal analysis, Data curation, [12] N. Naeimi, M. Moustafa, Uniaxial Compression Behavior of Ultra-High
Performance Concrete Confined by Steel Spirals, Interactive Symposium on
Writing - original draft. Mohamed A. Moustafa: Conceptualiza- Ultra-High Performance Concrcrete, Vol. 2, No. 1, Iowa State University Digital
tion, Supervision, Project administration. Press (2019).

16
N. Naeimi and M.A. Moustafa
[13] M. Aboukifa, M.A. Moustafa, A.M. Itani, N. Naeimi, Durable UHPC Columns
with High-Strength Steel, Accelerated Bridge Construction University
Transportation Center (ABC-UTC), 2019.
[14] B.A. Graybeal, Compressive Behavior of Ultra-High-Performance Fiber-
Reinforced Concrete, Mater. J. 104 (2007), https://doi.org/10.14359/18577.
[15] B.A. Graybeal, D. Marshall, Cylinder or Cube: Strength Testing of 80 to 200 MPa
(11.6 to 29 ksi) Ultra-High-Performance Fiber-Reinforced Concrete, Mater. J.
105 (2008) 603–609, https://doi.org/10.14359/20202.
[16] A.M.T. Hassan, S.W. Jones, G.H. Mahmud, Experimental test methods to
determine the uniaxial tensile and compressive behaviour of ultra high
performance fibre reinforced concrete (UHPFRC), Constr. Build. Mater. 37
(2012) 874–882, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2012.04.030.
[17] P. Aghdasi, A.E. Heid, S.-H. Chao, Developing Ultra-High-Performance Fiber-
Reinforced Concrete for Large-Scale Structural Applications, ACI Mater. J. 113
(2016) 559–570, https://doi.org/10.14359/51689103.
[18] M. Shafieifar, M. Farzad, A. Azizinamini, Experimental and numerical study on
mechanical properties of Ultra High Performance Concrete (UHPC), Constr.
Build. Mater. 156 (2017) 402–411, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2017.08.170.
[19] R.G. El Helou, Multiscale Computational Framework for Analysis and Design of
Ultra-High Performance Concrete Structural Components and Systems,
Doctoral Dissertation, Virgina Tech (2016).
[20] E. Cadoni, M. Dotta, D. Forni, Behaviour of UHPFRCs in compression under high
stress-rates, EPJ Web Conf. 183 (2018), https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/
201818302005.
[21] X. Yang, P. Zohrevand, A. Mirmiran, Behavior of Ultrahigh-Performance
Concrete Confined by Steel, J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 28 (2016), https://doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001623.
[22] J.B. Mander, M.J.N. Priestley, R. Park, Theoretical Stress-Strain Model for
Confined Concrete, J. Struct. Eng. 114 (1988) 1804–1826, https://doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1804).
[23] J.B. Mander, M.J.N. Priestley, R. Park, Observed Stress-Strain Behavior of
Confined Concrete, J. Struct. Eng. 114 (1988) 1827–1849, https://doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1988)114:8(1827).
17
Construction and Building Materials 272 (2021) 121844
[24] R. Salim, S. Murat, Confinement Model for High-Strength Concrete, J. Struct.
Eng. 125 (1999) 281–289, https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1999)
125:3(281).
[25] W. Chang, M. Hao, W. Zheng, Compressive behavior of UHPC confined by both
spiral stirrups and carbon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP), Constr. Build.
Mater. 230 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.117007
117007.
[26] H.-O. Shin, K.-H. Min, D. Mitchell, Confinement of ultra-high-performance fiber
reinforced concrete columns, Compos. Struct. 176 (2017) 124–142, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.05.022.
[27] M.M. Hosinieh, H. Aoude, W.D. Cook, D. Mitchell, Behavior of ultra-high
performance fiber reinforced concrete columns under pure axial loading, Eng.
Struct. 99 (2015) 388–401.
[28] M. Pourbaba, E. Asefi, H. Sadaghian, A. Mirmiran, Effect of age on the
compressive strength of ultra-high-performance fiber-reinforced concrete,
Constr. Build. Mater. 175 (2018) 402–410, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2018.04.203.
[29] B.A. Graybeal, Material Property Characterization of Ultra-High Performance
Concrete, NO. FHWA-HRT-06-103, United States, 2006.
[30] S. Kazemi, A.S. Lubell, Influence of Specimen Size and Fiber Content on
Mechanical Properties of Ultra-High-Performance Fiber-Reinforced Concrete,
ACI Mater. J. 109 (2012).
[31] H.-O. Shin, K.-H. Min, D. Mitchell, Uniaxial behavior of circular ultra-high-
performance fiber-reinforced concrete columns confined by spiral
reinforcement, Constr. Build. Mater. 168 (2018) 379–393, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.02.073.
[32] K. Hannawi, H. Bian, W. Prince-Agbodjan, B. Raghavan, Effect of different types
of fibers on the microstructure and the mechanical behavior of Ultra-High
Performance Fiber-Reinforced Concretes, Compos. Part B Eng. 86 (2016) 214–
220, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.09.059.
[33] P.A. Krahl, G. de Miranda Saleme, R.C. Gidrão, Compressive behavior of
UHPFRC under quasi-static and seismic strain rates considering the effect of
fiber content, Constr. Build. Mater. 188 (2018) 633–644, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2018.08.121.