Composites Part C: Open Access 10 (2023) 100346

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composites Part C: Open Access

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/composites-part-c-open-access

Composites Structures

Flexural behavior of circular concrete filled steel tubes with partially

incorporated demolished concrete lumps
Salem Khalaf, Farid Abed *, Yazan Alhoubi
Department of Civil Engineering, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: For the past decade, researchers have been experimenting with the use of Demolished Concrete Lumps (DCLs) in
CFST structural members, as it has been proven to be a promising method to recycle concrete in different field ap­
Flexural behavior plications. Although there have been several studies on incorporating DCLs in Concrete Filled Steel Tube (CFST)
DCLs
members, there are no studies that evaluate its effect on the flexural performance of CFST beams. Therefore, this
Design codes
paper focuses on studying the flexural behavior of CFST beams with DCLs, where the DCLs are inserted at the
D/t ratio
center of the cross-section. In total, fourteen circular CFST and two circular Steel Tube (ST) specimens were
tested under bending using a four-point loading setup. The specimens are categorized into two different steel
tube sections, where two circular sections of D/t = 55 (C1) and D/t = 45 (C2) were considered. The CFST
specimens within each steel tube category differ in DCLs particle sizes and DCLs inner occupation area. CFST
beams filled completely with normal concrete were also tested as control specimens. In addition, two CFST
specimens from the steel section C2 were left partially hollow at the center to study the contribution of DCLs to
the overall flexural performance. The results were very promising as the flexural behavior of DCL CFST speci­
mens was very similar to the control CFST specimens. The DCLs’ particle sizes and the inner occupation area had
minimal effect on the ductility, stiffness, yielding capacity, and ultimate capacity of the CFST specimens. The
maximum percentage reduction in the flexural capacity between DCL CFST and control specimens were less than
2% for both sections whereas the percentage gain was up to 7%. Furthermore, the obtained flexural capacities
were compared with nominal predictions from different design codes and models. All codes underestimated the
capacities of all CFST specimens, with Han’s model being the most conservative, followed by EC4, BS-5400–5,
and AISC-LRFD, respectively.

1. Introduction recycled aggregates, the harmful pores increased in the concrete

One of the largest producers of solid waste is the construction in­
dustry. Most of these solid wastes are generated during the demolition of
old buildings at the end of their life span. The huge amount of con­
struction waste motivated the researchers to find sustainable ways for
recycling. One of the most important byproducts of the demolition of old
buildings are the Demolished Concrete Lumps (DCLs), which can go
through a recycling procedure to produce recycled aggregates. Howev­
er, the use of recycled aggregates or DCLs in structural members was
very limited due to their inferior properties compared to natural ag­
gregates [1,2]. For instance, Jian and Wu [3] tested concrete cylinders
that incorporate both recycled aggregates and DCLs in different
replacement ratios. Although the compressive strength of the concrete
cylinders did not change with the increase of replacement ratios of the
significantly. In addition, when the replacement ratio of DCLs increased
from 0 to 35%, the compressive strength decreased by around 33%.
The use of Concrete Filled Steel Tubes (CFSTs) has become a prom­
ising alternative to the conventional reinforced concrete members due to
the different structural and economic advantages. For the past 20 years,
many authors conducted experiments on CFST members under bending
[4–6], axial [7–9], and seismic applications [10,11]. However, the use of
recycled aggregates and DCLs in CFST members was assessed by a few
researchers. Abed et al. [12] tested the addition of recycled aggregates in
the concrete infill mix of CFST beams to investigate the effects of steel
tubes’ shape and dimension, concrete’s compressive strength, and the
replacement ratio of recycled aggregates. Results showed insignificant
changes in the flexural behavior of CFST beams even at high replace­
ment ratios (50% and 100%) when compared to the control specimens.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: fabed@aus.edu (F. Abed).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcomc.2023.100346
Received 15 October 2022; Received in revised form 7 January 2023; Accepted 12 January 2023
Available online 14 January 2023
2666-6820/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
S. Khalaf et al. Composites Part C: Open Access 10 (2023) 100346

Furthermore, the failure mode of the tested specimens that included Table 1
recycled aggregates was the same compared to normal concrete speci­ Test matrix for the experimental program.
mens. Wu et al. [13] investigated the use of DCLs in CFST specimens Steel Beam ID Tube Tube DCLs Diameter of
under axial compression. The DCLs were mixed with fresh concrete, in tube diameter Thickness particle inner DCLs
which they were isolated at the center of the cross-section as precast section (mm) (mm) size range region
(mm) (mm)
segments and surrounded by normal concrete. The effect of the
compressive strength of the normal concrete, the number of precast C1 (D/t ST-C1 219.1 4 N/A N/A
segments, and the cross-sectional area of precast segments on the = 55) CFST-C1- 219.1 4 N/A N/A
Control
compressive behavior of CFST columns were investigated. It was CFST-C1- 219.1 4 19–25 70
concluded that a higher axial capacity and ductility can be achieved by D70–25
using a higher normal concrete strength, where the precast segments did CFST-C1- 219.1 4 12.5–19 70
not have any significant effect on the axial behavior of CFST columns. D70–19
CFST-C1- 219.1 4 9.5–12.5 70
Similarly, Peng and Wu [14] investigated the axial performance of
D70–12.5
eccentrically loaded CFST columns incorporated with DCLs. The speci­ CFST-C1- 219.1 4 19–25 110
mens were prepared in the same process as in [13], where the only D110–25
added parameter was the eccentricity (60 and 120 mm). Test results CFST-C1- 219.1 4 12.5–19 110
showed that the only parameter that significantly affects the axial ca­ D110–19
CFST-C1- 219.1 4 9.5–12.5 110
pacity and stiffness of the CFST column is the fresh concrete strength, D110–12.5
where an average of 33.6% and 18.2% increase in axial capacity and C2 (D/t ST-C2 219.1 5 N/A N/A
stiffness were reported when the fresh concrete strength used increased = 45) CFST-C2- 219.1 5 N/A N/A
by 68%. As for the DCLs influence, it was observed that increasing the Control
CFST-C2- 219.1 5 N/A 70
number of precast segments along the length of the column can slightly
D70-H (unfilled)
increase the axial capacity of the CFST column. Further studies that CFST-C2- 219.1 5 12.5–19 70
incorporated DCLs in CFST members were done in different applications D70–19
including shear, creep, seismic, and fire performance, where all of them CFST-C2- 219.1 5 9.5–12.5 70
reported little to insignificant change in their structural behavior D70–12.5
CFST-C2- 219.1 5 N/A 110
compared to the conventional CFSTs filled with normal concrete only
D110-H (unfilled)
[15–19]. CFST-C2- 219.1 5 12.5–19 110
As of now, the flexural response of CFST beams with incorporated D110–19
DCLs remains poorly understood as there are no studies performed on CFST-C2- 219.1 5 9.5–12.5 110
D110–12.5
this topic. Therefore, the main objective of this paper is to investigate
the feasibility of using DCLs in CFST beams without compromising the
flexural strength, ductility, and stiffness. Therefore, the DCLs were avoid bond loss between the concrete and the steel tube as a result of the
surrounded by normal concrete and inserted at the center of the cross- drying shrinkage of DCLs which is expected to be significantly more than
section around the neutral axis, where the stresses and corresponding normal concrete.
strains are minimal. CFSTs of two different tube thicknesses (i.e., D/t Furthermore, two C2 specimens in this study were left partially
ratios) and two different diameters of inner areas where the DCLs will hollow at the center of the section (DCLs region) after casting the sur­
occupy were considered with DCL particle sizes ranging from 9.5 to 25 rounding normal concrete, in order to study the contribution of DCLs to
mm. In addition, some samples were left hollow in the inner area to the flexural strength, ductility, and stiffness of CFST specimens. These
investigate the contribution of DCLs to the flexural strength and ductility samples were denoted as H, and they differed in the partial hollow area
of the CFST beams. at the center of the section. For the specimen labeling system shown in
Table 1, the first term identifies the specimen whether it is a steel tube
2. Experimental program (ST) or filled (CFST), the second term refers to the steel tube thickness or
D/t ratio (C1 vs C2), the third term represents the circular hollow core
The test matrix of this study is detailed in Table 1. In total, fourteen area by diameter, and the fourth term refers to the DCLs maximum
circular CFST specimens were tested using the four-point bending setup particle size used. For instance, specimen CFST-C2-D70–12.5 refers toa
to obtain the flexural response. All steel tubes had a length of 1500 mm concrete filled steel tube with a D/t = 45, an inner DCLs circular occu­
and were classified as compact sections according to AISC [20]. The pation area where the diameter is 70 mm, and DCLs particle sizes
parameters considered in this study are the different D/t ratios of cir­ ranging from 9.5 to 12.5 mm. For more clarification, the section details
cular steel tubes, the DCLs inner occupation area, and the particle size of of specimens with different cases can be shown in Fig. 1.
the DCLs used. The specimens were divided into two groups based on the The DCLs in this study were obtained from a local demolition site of
steel tube thickness, in which the first group C1 represents specimens an old commercial building, as shown in Fig. 2. They were then split into
having a diameter of 219 mm and a thickness of 4 mm (D/t = 55) and C2 three different groups according to their particle sizes (9.5–12.5,
represents samples with a diameter of 219 mm and tube thickness of 5 12.5–19, and 19-25 mm). Finally, the DCLs were poured into the inner
mm (D/t = 45). Within each group, one control CFST specimen (filled occupation area together with mortar to fill the voids.
entirely with normal concrete) and one hollow steel tube (ST) were
tested for further comparison in the flexural behavior, while the other
specimens incorporated DCLs. The specimens that incorporated DCLs 2.1. Material properties
had a circular hollow core that was filled later with DCLs. For each group
(cross-section), two different areas of the DCL core were considered. One Table 2 lists the proportions for the normal concrete mix which was
represents 11% of the total concrete area, where the circular DCL core used for all specimens. More than three cylinders and three cubes were
has a diameter of 70 mm, and the other area represents 28% where the cast and tested under compression after 28 days of curing. The average
DCL core diameter is 110 mm. The main reasons for inserting the DCLs at compressive strength of the cylinders and cubes were 28 and 36 MPa,
the center of the section are (1) to take advantage of the lower stresses respectively. As for the DCLs mixed with mortar, 3 cylinders of each
and corresponding strains at this region of the section, since DCLs have DCLs size range were also cast and cured for 28 days before testing. The
inferior mechanical properties compared to normal concrete and (2) to average compressive strength for the different DCL sizes was around 16

2
S. Khalaf et al. Composites Part C: Open Access 10 (2023) 100346

Fig. 1. CFST sample section details.

Fig. 2. Demolition site from which the DCLs were obtained.

method was adopted to determine the yield strength. The average yield
Table 2
strength and ultimate strength for section C1 are 277 and 355 MPa and
Normal concrete mix details.
for section C2 are 257 and 307 MPa, respectively.
Mix Proportions (divided by the weight of cement)
Concrete Type Cement Coarse Aggregates Fine Aggregates Water
2.2. Specimen preparation and test setup
Normal Strength 1 2.6 2.6 0.44

MPa.
The steel tube sections C1 and C2 were obtained from a local sup­
plier. two coupons from each tube section were tested under tension to
obtain the mechanical properties of the steel material. Fig. 3 shows the
stress-strain curves for the two steel tube sections. The 0.2% offset
The process used to isolate the DCL occupation area from the sur­
rounding normal concrete can be shown in Fig. 4. Circular-shaped foams
were placed and fixed at the center of the steel tube section using
spacers. Initially, normal concrete was cast surrounding the foam and
manually compacted to achieve homogenous distribution. The normal
concrete was then cured for 7 days before removing the foams. The
foams were removed using a liquid thinner that was capable of melting it

3
S. Khalaf et al. Composites Part C: Open Access 10 (2023) 100346

Fig. 3. Stress vs. strain curves for both circular steel tube sections.

Fig. 4. DCL isolation setup.

without harming the concrete. Finally, DCLs were poured alternately
with mortar into the hollow inner area and compacted properly, as
proposed by [21,22].
The four-point bending setup was used to assess the flexural response
of all CFST and ST samples. A schematic sketch of the test setup is shown
in Fig. 5. All CFST and ST specimens were tested over a 1350 mm clear
span and the load was applied symmetrically on the beam, resulting in a
pure moment region of 450 mm. To capture the vertical deflection of the
beam at specific points, three Linear Variable Displacement Transducers
(LVDTs) were placed at the midspan and at 225 mm from each support.
Furthermore, three strain gauges were installed along the midspan of all
specimens at the top, center, and bottom of the section. A Universal
Testing Machine (UTM) with a capacity of 1800 kN was utilized as
shown in Fig. 6. The load from the UTM was applied at a constant rate of
2 mm/min and was transferred to the specimens using a rigid plate
spreader and a circular base as shown in Fig.6.
3. Results and discussions
In this section, the experimental results obtained from the four-point
bending test for all tested specimens are presented. Detailed discussions
between different specimens are also provided to study the flexural
behavior of CFST specimens with DCLs compared to the normal CFST
reference samples.

Fig. 5. Four-point bending setup (dimensions in mm).

4
S. Khalaf et al. Composites Part C: Open Access 10 (2023) 100346

Fig. 7. Moment vs. deflection comparison between C1 and C2 steel sections.

insignificant effects on the flexural performance in both C1 and C2

Fig. 6. Test setup of CFST specimens. sections. In other words, the flexural capacity and ductility for CFST
specimens filled with DCLs in the inner core and surrounded by normal
concrete were comparable to the CFST specimens filled entirely with
3.1. Experimental results
normal concrete. For instance, when comparing specimen CFST-C1-
D70–19 with specimen CFST-C1-Control, the maximum difference in
The flexural performance of all CFST specimens is presented in four
yielding and ultimate moments between these two systems were 4.4%
graphs: moment vs. deflection, moment vs. strain, deflected shape, and
and 1.41%, respectively. Similarly, the differences in deflections at
strain diagram for both yielding and ultimate moments. Table 3 shows
yielding and ultimate between the above-mentioned specimens were
the main flexural results of all specimens, which include the yielding
also insignificant.
moment (My), the ultimate moment (Mu), and the CFST midspan
Fig. 9 shows the moment vs. micro-strain at the tension and
deflection corresponding to the yield and ultimate moments. The
compression sides of all CFST specimens. Within each steel tube section,
yielding moment is determined based on the yielding strain of the steel
similar trends of strain development were observed at both top and
coupons (refer to Fig. 3), while the moment at ultimate is taken to
bottom sides of the CFST beams. Furthermore, it was also noticed that at
correspond to a strain of 0.01, which is recommended by many studies
a microstrain of 10,000, the moment starts to stabilize as no significant
as it gives practical results close to the design codes [23].
increase or decrease occurs. This observation is valid for both circular
As a first step, a comparison is made between CFST specimens filled
sections of two different thicknesses (D/t ratios equal to 45 and 55). The
completely with normal concrete and their corresponding hollow tubes
deflected shapes along the length of each specimen are presented in
for both C1 and C2 sections as shown in Fig. 7. The initial stiffness of C1
Fig. 10 at both yielding and ultimate stages. As observed, CFST speci­
and C2 sections for both filled and hollow specimens were approxi­
mens within each steel section had similar deflected shapes. When
mately the same. However, the yielding and ultimate moment for the
comparing the deflected shape between the two circular sections, the
higher thickness section C2 is significantly more than C1. This is ex­
maximum deflection (at midspan) is approximately the same at 11 mm.
pected due to the lower D/t ratio which improves the confinement effect
However, a higher difference is observed when comparing the dis­
on the concrete infill along with the higher cross-sectional area of steel
placements at failure between the two circular sections in Fig. 8. Around
tube. Furthermore, both sections exhibited ductile behavior; however,
7% increase in ductility is attained by section C2 when compared to
the ductility of C2 sections was more than C1 sections as a result of a
section C1. The cross-section strain diagrams for each specimen are
higher confinement effect, which is clearer when comparing the two
illustrated in Fig. 12. The neutral axis for CFST specimens was clearly
CFST control specimens.
above the centerline of the cross-section at both yielding and ultimate
The moment vs. deflection curves of the CFST specimens are pre­
stages. This indicates that the flexural capacity of DCL CFST specimens
sented in Fig. 8. All CFST specimens failed in a ductile manner. As
was mainly attributed to the surrounding normal concrete and steel
observed, the incorporation of DCLs of any size and inner area had

Table 3
Flexural test results of all CFST specimens.
Specimen Label Yield Moment, My (kN.m) Deflection at My (mm) Ultimate Moment, Mu (kN.m) Deflection at Mu (mm)

ST-C1 39.89 2.81 48.02 6.72

CFST-C1-Control 68.92 6.01 80.78 10.82
CFST-C1-D70–12.5 68.41 5.44 79.52 10.61
CFST-C1-D70–19 70.23 5.21 82.62 10.32
CFST-C1-D70–25 67.89 5.83 79.86 11.35
CFST-C1-D110–12.5 72.95 6.05 83.71 12.53
CFST-C1-D110–19 65.91 4.8 81.92 10.63
CFST-C1-D110–25 68.94 5.92 80.21 10.54
ST-C2 50.31 5.92 63.12 7.62
CFST-C2-Control 74.83 4.84 94.52 10.03
CFST-C2-D70–12.5 75.97 6.34 96.6 12.49
CFST-C2-D70–19 77.44 4.61 102.1 9.97
CFST-C2-D70-H 70.85 5.09 94.21 9.87
CFST-C2-D110–12.5 79.63 5.53 100.96 10.89
CFST-C2-D110–19 76.19 5.22 96.12 10.58
CFST-C2-D110-H 69.46 5.34 96.14 10.21

5
S. Khalaf et al. Composites Part C: Open Access 10 (2023) 100346

Fig. 8. Moment vs. deflection curves for CFST specimens (a) C1 sections and (b) C2 sections.

Fig. 9. Moment vs. microstrain for CFST specimens (a) C1 sections and (b) C2 sections.

Fig. 10. Deflected Shape for CFST specimens (a) C1 sections and (b) C2 sections.

tubes and not to the inner DCL regions.
3.2. Discussion
In this section, the experimental results are discussed in four
different subsections. The first subsection focuses on the effect of
inserting DCLs with different particle sizes and inner areas on the flex­
ural performance of the CFST beam. The second part of this section will
discuss the CFST specimens that were left partially hollow at the center
and compare the flexural response to their CFST specimens’ counter­
parts. The third part will consider the effect of confinement between the
C1 and C2 sections on the flexural behavior of CFST specimens. Finally,

6
S. Khalaf et al. Composites Part C: Open Access 10 (2023) 100346

the failure modes of DCL CFSTs are discussed and compared with control Table 4
CFST specimens. Confinement factor of all CFST specimens.
Specimen Normal Concrete DCL Steel Confinement
3.2.1. DCL effect Label Force (kN) Force Force Factor
In this section, the specimens with incorporated DCLs of different (kN) (kN)
sizes and inner areas are compared with normal concrete CFST speci­ CFST-C1- 980 0 748 0.763
mens. Generally, it was observed that the overall flexural behavior was Control
similar for the DCL and normal CFST specimens for both circular sec­ CFST-C1- 872 62 748 0.801
D70–12.5
tions. For the case of DCL inner occupation area diameter of 70 mm CFST-C1- 872 62 748 0.801
(11% of the total concrete area), the CFST specimens with DCL particle D70–19
sizes between 12.5 and 19 mm (e.g., CFST-C1-D70–19) gave the highest CFST-C1- 872 62 748 0.801
yield and ultimate moments for both C1 and C2 sections. When D70–25
CFST-C1- 714 152 748 0.864
compared to the specimens of the same inner area that gave the lowest
D110–12.5
capacities (CFST-C1-D70–12.5 and CFST-C1-D70–25), there is an CFST-C1- 714 152 748 0.864
average increase of 4% in the yield and ultimate moments. However, the D110–19
corresponding deflections at yielding and ultimate moments were the CFST-C1- 714 152 748 0.864
lowest, where an average decrease of 14 and 5% is observed in the D110–25
CFST-C2- 962 0 865 0.900
yielding and ultimate deflections, respectively. As for the larger inner Control
occupation area (28% of the total concrete area), the CFST specimens CFST-C2- 854 62 865 0.945
with DCL particle sizes between 9.5 and 12.5 gave the highest capacities D70–12.5
(e.g., CFST-C1-D110–12.5). When comparing specimen CFST-C1- CFST-C2- 854 62 865 0.945
D70–19
D110–12.5 with the DCL specimens of the same inner area, there is an
CFST-C2-D70- 854 0 865 1.014
average increase of 8 and 4% in the yielding and ultimate moments, H
respectively. Unlike the DCL CFST specimens with 11% DCL area, CFST-C2- 695 152 865 1.021
specimen CFST-C1-D110–12.5 also had the highest corresponding de­ D110–12.5
flections, where an average increase of 12 and 18% is observed in the CFST-C2- 695 152 865 1.021
D110–19
yield and ultimate deflections. This indicates that the stiffness of the
CFST-C2- 695 0 865 1.244
specimen CFST-C1-D110–12.5 is lower than specimens CFST-C1- D110-H
D110–19 and CFST-C1-D110–25. For both circular sections, increasing
the inner occupation area seemed to have a positive effect on the flexural
capacities, but not on the stiffness for most specimens. This can be indicates an increase in the flexural capacities (yielding and ultimate)
attributed to the better compaction and spreading of the DCLs in the and the initial stiffness due to the lower D/t ratio of C2. When comparing
inner area, where fewer voids are expected to be present. the moment capacities of both specimens, the increase is around 11%
and 22% for the yielding and ultimate moments, respectively. Further­
3.2.2. CFST specimens with an unfilled DCL areas more, the ductility of the specimens with a lower confinement ratio is
In this section, the flexural response of the two CFST specimens in the higher, as observed in Fig. 8 when comparing C1 and C2 specimens.
C2 groups that were left partially hollow at the center after pouring the Furthermore, although the control CFST specimens have a lower
normal concrete are discussed. For CFST-C2-D70-H specimen that had confinement factor, it does not indicate an inferior flexural performance.
an inner hollow area of 11% of the total concrete area (), the overall The confinement factor effect is best compared when two specimens
flexural behavior was similar to the other DCL CFST specimens of the differ only in the steel tube thickness. For instance, while the specimen
same group and inner area as shown in Figs. 8(b) − 11 (b). However, CFST-C2-D110-H has the largest confinement factor among C2 CFST
percentage decreases of 8 and 5% in the yield and ultimate capacities specimens, it has the poorest flexural performance as discussed earlier.
were recorded for CFST-C2-D70-H when compared to specimens CFST-
C2-D70–12.5 and CFST-C2-D70–19. However, when the hollow area 3.2.4. Failure modes
ratio is increased from 11% to 27%, which is the case for specimen CFST- The failure modes of selected DCL CFST specimens are presented in
C2-D110-H, the flexural performance was significantly affected in which Fig. 12 The failure modes of the control, DCL, and inner-free CFST
a significant reduction in ductility was be observed as shown in Fig. 8(b). specimens were very comparable. The flexural failure of CFST didn’t
Furthermore, the yielding and ultimate moments reported decreased by indicate any outward local buckling in the compression zone of the steel
around 2% when compared to specimens CFST-C2-D110–12.5 and tube, and all CFST specimens failed in a ductile manner. A similar
CFST-C2-D110–19. observation was reported by previous studies [4,12]. This can be
attributed to the low D/t ratio of the steel sections used, where the
3.2.3. Confinement effect thickness is considered to be high. In addition, the outer steel layer of
In this section, the confinement of DCL CFST specimens of both C1 selected CFST specimens in the pure moment region was cut and
and C2 sections and its effect on the flexural response of CFST specimens removed in order to examine the failure model of the infill concrete as
is compared and discussed. To analytically discuss the confinement ef­ shown in Fig. 13. For CFST specimens with different DCL sizes and inner
fect, the ratio between the steel force and the concrete force (Asfy/Acf’c) occupation areas exhibited typical flexural failure in which concrete
is used as an indication of the flexural strength of CFST specimens. This crushed in the compression zone and flexural cracks developed in the
ratio is known as the confinement factor and it is introduced by Han [23] tension zone. Similarly, the specimens that were left partially hollow
to define the composite interaction between the concrete and the sur­ also experienced the same failure mode.
rounding steel. Since the DCL concrete strength is different than the
normal concrete strength used, the concrete force will be the sum of DCL 4. Analytical predictions and comparisons
and normal concrete forces. Table 4 shows the confinement factor for all
circular CFST specimens. When comparing two specimens that differ The flexural test results obtained for all CFST specimens are
only in the steel tube group, for instance, CFST-C1-D70–12.5 and compared with the theoretical predictions by selected design codes and
CFST-C2-D70–12.5, the confinement factor increases from 0.801 to equations. These comparisons are utilized to assess the different design
0.945, which is an 18% increase. This increase in the confinement factor codes in predicting the flexural capacity of DCL CFST specimens. These

7
S. Khalaf et al. Composites Part C: Open Access 10 (2023) 100346

design codes and equations included the AISC-LRFD code [20], the Table 6
British standard for composite sections (BS-5400–5) code [24] and EC4 Nominal codes predictions comparison with experimental results.
code [25] in addition to Han’s analytical model [23]. All equations and Specimen Mn (kN. Mexp (kN. Mn/Mexp
required parameters are listed and defined in Table 5. It is important to m) m)
note that the different infill strengths (normal concrete and DCLs) are AISC EC4 BS- Han
5400
considered with their respective areas of occupation within the CFST
section. CFST-C1-Control 68.92 80.78 0.89 0.76 0.80 0.74
Table 6 shows the nominal moment predictions (Mn) from the four CFST-C1- 68.41 79.52 0.90 0.76 0.79 0.73
D70–12.5
different equations in comparison with the experimental flexural ca­ CFST-C1-D70–19 70.23 82.62 0.87 0.73 0.76 0.70
pacities (Mexp). The three codes as well as Han’s model underestimated CFST-C1-D70–25 67.89 79.86 0.90 0.76 0.79 0.72
the flexural capacities of all CFST specimens with the Mn/Mexp ratios CFST-C1- 72.95 83.71 0.85 0.70 0.72 0.64
were less than 1 for all specimens. Han’s analytical model was the most D110–12.5
CFST-C1- 65.91 81.92 0.86 0.71 0.74 0.66
conservative out of all the four methods, where the average Mn/Mexp
D110–19
ratio of all specimens was 0.68. on the other hand, the moment pre­ CFST-C1- 68.94 80.21 0.88 0.73 0.76 0.67
dictions by the AISC code were closer to their experimental counterparts D110–25
with an average Mn/Mexp ratio of 0.84. This is in spite of the fact that the CFST-C2-Control 74.83 94.52 0.84 0.74 0.78 0.72
AISC code equation does not directly consider concrete confinement CFST-C2- 75.97 96.6 0.82 0.71 0.75 0.68
D70–12.5
unlike the case for Han’s analytical model. The EC4 and BS-5400–5 CFST-C2-D70–19 77.44 102.1 0.77 0.67 0.71 0.64
codes also predicted conservative results with Mn/Mexp average ratios of CFST-C2-D70-H 70.85 94.21 0.83 0.73 0.77 0.70
0.72 and 0.75, respectively. CFST-C2- 79.63 100.96 0.77 0.66 0.71 0.60
D110–12.5
CFST-C2- 76.19 96.12 0.81 0.69 0.74 0.64
5. Summary and conclusions
D110–19
CFST-C2-D110-H 69.46 96.14 0.79 0.69 0.74 0.64
This paper evaluated the overall flexural performance of CFST
specimens filled partially with DCLs using a four-point bending test
setup. Control CFST specimens filled completely with normal concrete • The specimens with a DCL inner area of 28% exhibited better flexural
(i.e., without DCLs) were also tested for comparisons. Steel tubes of two capacities when compared to those with a DCL inner area of 11%, but
different thicknesses or D/t ratios of 45 and 55 were utilized to cast the had lower stiffness.
CFST specimens. In total, ten DCL CFST, two control CFST, two inner- • For both C1 and C2 sections of 11% inner areas, the DCL CFST
free CFST, and two hollow ST specimens were tested, and their flex­ specimens with a DCL particle size range between 12.5 and 19 mm (i.
ural responses were discussed. In addition, the reported experimental e., CFST-C1-D70–19 and CFST-C1-D70–19) demonstrated the best
flexural capacities of all CFST specimens were compared with the flexural performance, as compared to DCL CFST specimens filled
analytical predictions of theoretical equations including the AISC-LRFD with the other two DCL particle size ranges. Yield and ultimate
code, BS-5400–5 code, EC4 code, and Han’s analytical model. The fol­ moments increased by ~ 4% and the stiffness also increased,
lowings are the main conclusions from this study:(Fig. 11) whereby the deflection at yielding and ultimate moments decreased
by 14 and 5%, respectively.
• DCL CFST specimens exhibited approximately similar flexural re­ • When the inner area is increased to 28%, the DCL CFST specimens
sponses to the normal CFST specimens. Generally, the different DCL with DCL maximum size of 12.5 mm showed an average 4% increase
sizes and inner occupation areas had minimal effect on the flexural in the flexural capacities. However, the stiffness was affected where
performance for both D/t ratios. There were no significant changes in the average increase in the yielding and ultimate deflections were 12
ductility, yield and ultimate capacities, and initial stiffness. and 18%, respectively.
• The maximum percentage gain in the flexural capacity observed • The confinement factor of C2 (D/t = 45) specimens was around 18%
between the control and the DCL CFST specimens were 3.6 and 6.9% higher than C1 (D/t = 55) specimens due to the decrease in the D/t
for C1 and C2 sections, respectively. On the other hand, only 1.6% ratio. This led to an average increase of 11% and 22% in the yielding
reduction in the flexural moments was recorded. and ultimate moments, respectively. In addition, there was a 7%
increase in the overall ductility of C2 specimens compared to C1
specimens.
• Although the DCLs had minimal effect on the flexural performance of
CFST compared with the control specimen, there absence signifi­
Table 5
cantly affected the ductility of the DCL-unfilled specimens.
Design codes equations and symbols.
• The failure modes between the control, DCL filled, and inner-free
Code Equations and symbols CFST specimens were very comparable. The specimens failed in a
AISC-LRFD [20] 1 ductile manner, but no outward local buckling of the steel occurred.
Mn = Fy Zs + 0.95fc Zc
′

2 Furthermore, the concrete failure mode was the same for the selected
BS-5400–5 [24] Mn = 0.91Sfy(1 + 0.01m) CFST specimens, with concrete crushing in the compression zone and
the occurrence of flexural cracks in the tension zone.
EC4 [25] Mn = wps fy + 0.5wpc fc − wpsn fy − 0.5wpcn fc
′ ′
• Design codes and Han’s equation underestimated the flexural ca­
Ac fc pacity of the CFST specimens. Han’s analytical model was the most
′

hn =
2Dfc′ + 4t(2fy − fc′ )
conservative, where the average Mn/Mexp ratio was 0.68. On the
wpcn = h2n (D − 2t)
other hand, AISC-LRFD was the least conservative code, where the
wpsn = Dh2n − wpcn
average Mn/Mexp ratio was 0.84.
Han’s [23] Mn = γmWscmfscy
fscy = fck(1.14 + 1.02ξ)
Declaration of Competing Interest
γm = 1.1 + 0.48ln(ξ + 0.1)
As f y
ξ =
Ac fck The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence

8
S. Khalaf et al. Composites Part C: Open Access 10 (2023) 100346

Fig. 11. Strain diagrams along the cross-section for CFST specimens (a) C1 sections and (b) C2 sections.

Fig. 12. Steel failure mode of CFST specimens.

References

[1] S. Ahmed, Y. Alhoubi, N. Elmesalami, S. Yehia, F. Abed, Effect of recycled

aggregates and treated wastewater on concrete subjected to different exposure
conditions, Constr. Build. Mater. (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
conbuildmat.2020.120930.
[2] W. Li, J. Xiao, C. Shi, C.S. Poon, Structural behaviour of composite members with
recycled aggregate concrete - an overview, Adv. Struct. Eng. (2015), https://doi.
org/10.1260/1369-4332.18.6.919.
[3] S.M. Jian, B. Wu, Compressive behavior of compound concrete containing
demolished concrete lumps and recycled aggregate concrete, Constr. Build. Mater.
272 (2021), 121624.
[4] F. Abed, Y. Abdelmageed, A. Kerim Ilgun, Flexural response of concrete-filled
seamless steel tubes, J. Constr. Steel Res. 149 (2018) 53–63, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.06.030. Available.
[5] R. Wang, L. Han, J. Nie, X. Zhao, Flexural performance of rectangular CFST
Fig. 13. Concrete failure modes of CFST specimens. members, Thin Walled Struct. 79 (2014) 154–165, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tws.2014.02.015. Available.
[6] C. Hou, L. Han, Q. Wang, C. Hou, Flexural behavior of circular concrete filled steel
the work reported in this paper. tubes (CFST) under sustained load and chloride corrosion, Thin Walled Struct. 107
(2016) 182–196, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2016.02.020. Available.
[7] S. Abdalla, F. Abed, M. AlHamaydeh, Behavior of CFSTs and CCFSTs under quasi-
Data Availability static axial compression, J. Constr. Steel Res. 90 (2013) 235–244, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jcsr.2013.08.007. Available.
[8] F. Abed, M. AlHamaydeh, S. Abdalla, Experimental and numerical investigations of
Data will be made available on request.
the compressive behavior of concrete filled steel tubes (CFSTs), J. Constr. Steel Res.
80 (2013) 429–439, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2012.10.005. Available.
[9] L. Han, W. Li, Seismic performance of CFST column to steel beam joint with RC
Acknowledgments slab: experiments, J. Constr. Steel Res. 66 (11) (2010) 1374–1386, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jcsr.2010.05.003. Available.
[10] F. Liao, L. Han, Z. Tao, Seismic behaviour of circular CFST columns and RC shear
The authors would like to thank the American University of Sharjah wall mixed structures: experiments, J. Constr. Steel Res. 65 (8–9) (2009)
for funding and supporting the APC fees. This paper represents the 1582–1596, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2009.04.023. Available:.
[11] H. Dong, J. Qin, W. Cao, L. Zhao, Seismic behavior of circular CFST columns with
opinions of the authors and does not mean to represent the position or different internal constructions, Eng. Struct. 260 (2022), 114262, https://doi.org/
opinions of the American University of Sharjah. 10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.114262. Available:.
[12] F. Abed, Y. Abdelmageed, Y. Alhoubi, Effect of different cross-sections and concrete
types on the flexural behavior of CFSTs, Compos. Struct. 276 (2021), 114570,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.114570. Available:.

9
S. Khalaf et al.
[13] B. Wu, C. Peng, X. Zhao, W. Zhou, Axial loading tests of thinwalled circular steel
tubes infilled with cast-in-place concrete and precast segments containing DCLs,
Thin Walled Struct. 127 (2018) 275–289, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tws.2018.02.008. Available:.
[14] C.W. Peng, B. Wu, Behavior of eccentrically loaded steel tubes infilled with precast
segments containing dcls, J. Constr. Steel Res. 173 (2020), 106261.
[15] B. Wu, L. Lin, J.X. Zhao, H. Yan, Creep behavior of thin-walled circular steel
tubular columns filled with demolished concrete lumps and fresh concrete, Constr.
Build. Mater. 187 (2018) 773–790.
[16] Wu B., Peng C.W., Shear performance of thin-walled steel tubes infilled with
precast segments containing DCLs, J. Constr. Steel Res., doi:https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jcsr.2019.105862.
[17] B. Wu, J.-.B. Zang, Effect of embedded steel stirrups on fire behavior of square steel
tubular columns filled with recycled lump concrete, Eng. Struct. 211 (2020),
110446.
[18] B. Wu, X.Y. Zhao, J.S. Zhang, Cyclic behavior of thin-walled square steel tubular
columns filled with demolished concrete lumps and fresh concrete, J. Constr. Steel
Res. 77 (2012) 69–81.
10
Composites Part C: Open Access 10 (2023) 100346
[19] B. Wu, X.Y. Zhao, J.S. Zhang, Y. Yang, Cyclic testing of thin-walled circular steel
tubular columns filled with demolished concrete lumps and fresh concrete, Thin-
Walled Struct. 66 (2013) 50–61.
[20] American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), Specification For Structural Steel
buildings. Chicago, 2010.
[21] X.Y. Zhao, B. Wu, L. Wang, Structural response of thin-walled circular steel tubular
columns filled with demolished concrete lumps and fresh concrete, Constr. Build.
Mater. 129 (2016) 216–242, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.10.099.
[22] G. Teng, J.L. Zhao, T. Yu, L.J. Li, Y.C. Guo, Behavior of FRP-confined compound
concrete containing recycled concrete lumps, J. Compos. Constr. 20 (1) (2016),
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000602.
[23] L-H Han, W. Li, R. Bjorhovde, Developments and advanced applications of
concrete-filled steel tubular (CFST) structures: members, J. Constr. Steel Res.
(2014), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.04.016.
[24] BS5400, Concrete and Composite Bridges, London Br. Stand. Institutions, 1979,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasms.2003.10.019\rS104403050300786.
[25] E.C. Eurocode, 4: Design of Composite Steel and Concrete Structures Part 1-2:
General Rules–Structural Fire Design, Br. Stand. Institution, BS EN, 1994.