Push-out tests of concrete-filled stainless steel SHS tubes

Bond between Fibre-Reinforced Polymer Tubes and Sea Water Sea Sand Concrete: Mechanisms and Effective Parameters: Critical Overview and Discussion

“…Other studies used pultruded [17] or filament wound [19] FRP tubes of varying thicknesses. Multiple studies were performed with either stainless steel or carbon steel tubes, typically using cold-formed steel of Grade 350 or 450 [46,69,70]. It should be noted that multiple other studies conducting pushout tests of tubular steel concrete composites have been performed in the past (for example by Liu et al [48] using recycled aggregate concrete and by Chen et al [49] using stainless steel CHS tubes), with a similar set-up to the one used by Tao et al [70].…”

“…These are slightly less relevant to this paper, but still offer interesting insight into the bond slip behaviour of confined concrete tubes. Different concrete types were used, such as traditional concrete by [17,19,46,69,70], recycled aggregate concrete by [47] and SWSSC by [12,44].…”

“…Most studies conducted pushout tests only under monotonic loads [12,17,19,44,69,70]. Solely Aly et al [46] and Xue et al [47] investigated pushout tests under cyclic loading.…”

“…interesting insight into the bond slip behaviour of confined concrete tubes. Different concrete types were used, such as traditional concrete by [17,19,46,69,70], recycled aggregate concrete by [47] and SWSSC by [12,44]. Sample size was generally small with diameters ranging between 130 mm and 400 mm and sample height between 200 mm and 450 mm [12,17,19,44,46].…”

“…Varying parameters were chosen to investigate the difference in bond slip behaviour under those parameters when subjected to pushout loading. A common parameter chosen by [12,17,47,69,70] was the effect of varying tube geometry, such as diameter and thickness and tube material on the results. The authors of [19,46,69,70] also investigated various concrete compositions as an additional parameter.…”