Strength of Materials

, Volume 48, Issue 4, pp 592–602 | Cite as

Effect of Platen Restraint on Stress–Strain Behavior of Concrete Under Uniaxial Compression: a Comparative Study

  • S. Kumar
  • T. MukhopadhyayEmail author
  • S. A. Waseem
  • B. Singh
  • M. A. Iqbal

The stress-strain model of concrete depends on the degree of frictional resistance across the loading surfaces of a test specimen depending on the antifriction medium used during testing. This article presents a comparative study of platen restraint on the behavior of concrete under uniaxial compression based on an experimental investigation. The effect of four commercially available antifriction media (neoprene, polyvinyl chloride, teflon, and grease) with different layer thicknesses on platen restraint have been studied for a normal strength concrete and a relatively high-strength concrete. Subsequently, the effect of platen restraint has been quantified using the analogy of toughness. The experimental results indicate that post-ultimate response of concrete is significantly affected by platen restraint. It is shown that the stress–strain curve obtained from a conventional uniaxial compression test not only describes specimen/material behavior but also represents interaction between specimen and loading platen. Among the four antifriction media used in this investigation, grease is the most effective in reducing frictional resistance. Failure patterns of the concrete specimens for different antifriction media are also subsequently analyzed.


uniaxial compression test platen resistant antifriction medium stress–strain behavior of concrete failure pattern 



The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support received from MHRD, India during the period of this research work.


  1. 1.
    Plain and Reinforced Concrete – Code of Practice IS 456:2000, Bureau of Indian Standards (2000).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Park and T. Paulay, Reinforced Concrete Structures, Wiley Interscience Publication (1974).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    B. Bresler and K. S. Pister, “Strength of concrete under combined stresses,” ACI J. Proc., 55, No. 9, 321–345 (1958).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    K. T. S. R. Iyengar, K. Chandrashekhara, and K. T. Krishnaswamy, “Strength of concrete under biaxial compression,” ACI J. Proc., 62, No. 2, 239–249 (1965).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    B. P. Hughes and B. Bahramian, “Cube tests and the uniaxial compressive strength of concrete,” Mag. Concrete Res., 17, Issue 53, 177–181 (1965).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    H. Kupfer, H. K. Hilsdorf, and H. Rusch, “Behavior of concrete under biaxial stresses,” ACI J. Proc., 66, No. 8, 656–665 (1969).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    O. Buyukozturk, A. H. Nilson, and F. O. Slate, “Stress-strain response and fracture of a concrete model in biaxial loading,” ACI J. Proc., 68, No. 8, 590–598 (1971).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Y. Atan and F. O. Slate, “Structural lightweight concrete under biaxial compression,” ACI J. Proc., 70, No. 3, 182–185 (1973).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. E. Tasuji, F. Slate, and A. H. Nilson, “Stress-strain response and fracture of concrete in biaxial loading,” ACI J. Proc., 75, No. 7, 306–311 (1978).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. K. Dhir and C. M. Sangha, “Strength and complete stress-strain relationships for concrete tested in uniaxial compression under different test condition,” Mag. Concrete Res., 5, Issue 30, 361–370 (1972).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J.-Y. Lee, K.-H. Kim, S.-W. Kim, and H. Choi, “Bond strength deterioration of reinforced and prestressed concrete members at reversed cyclic loads,” Strength Mater., 47, No. 1, 177–185 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    L. Dahmani, “Mechanical stresses and crack analysis of concrete under the hygrothermic effect,” Strength Mater., 43, No. 6, 654–661 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    G. Vasudevan and S. Kothandaraman, “Finite element analysis of bearing capacity of RC beams retrofitted with external bars,” Strength Mater., 46, No. 6, 831–842 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. Buyukkaragoz, I. Kalkan, and J. H. Lee, “A numerical study of the flexural behavior of concrete beams reinforced with AFRP bars,” Strength Mater., 45, No. 6, 716–729 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    U. S. Yilmaz and H. Turken, “The effects of various curing materials on the compressive strength of concretes produced with/without admixture,” Periodica Polytechnica – Civil Engineering, 55, No. 2, 107–116 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    K. H. Gerstle, D. L. Linse, P. Bertacchi, et al., “Strength of concrete under multiaxial stress states,” in: Proc. of the Douglas McHenry Int. Symp. on Concrete and Concrete Structures, SP55, American Concrete Institute, Detroit (1978), pp. 103–131.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. D. Kotsovos, “Effect of Testing techniques on the post-ultimate behaviour of concrete in compression,” Mater. Struct., 16, No. 1, 3–12 (1983).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    E. K. Tschegg, M. Elser, S. E. Stanzl-Tschegg, “Biaxial fracture tests on concrete – development and experience,” Cement Concrete Comp., 17, No. 1, 67– 85 (1994).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    S. Lee, Y. Song, and S. Han, “Biaxial behavior of plain concrete of nuclear containment building,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 227, No. 2, 143–152 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    ACI 211.1-91. Standard Practice for Selecting Proportions for Normal, Heavyweight, and Mass Concrete. Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    IS 8112:1989. 43 Grade Ordinary Portland Cement – Specification. Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    ASTM C33/C33M-13. Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregates. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Kumar
    • 1
  • T. Mukhopadhyay
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • S. A. Waseem
    • 1
  • B. Singh
    • 1
  • M. A. Iqbal
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology RoorkeeRoorkeeIndia
  2. 2.College of EngineeringSwansee UniversitySwanseeUK

Personalised recommendations