Jerome F. Hajjar - Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Table of Experimental Studies on Beam, Beam Column, and Shear Tests

General Information

Reference	Experiment Synopsis	Number of Tests	Loading Method	Results Reported	Main Parameters	Comments
Cai 1988	7 test phases: 2 col (short, long) 5 bmcol (pure bending, applied ecc.-- single & double curvature, restrained cantilever)	Phases 1-2: 93 CFTs (col) Phases 3-7: 80 CFTs (bmcol)	No details of end conds. Phase 3: pure bending; Phases 4,5: single-curv; Phase 6: double-curv, ratio of eccs = -1/3, -1/2, -1; Phase 7: comb axial & latl.	Deflection curves (along length of col) for phase 6 P vs ε (exp, theor.) Global strength reduction vs. L/D, e/concr. radius P-M interaction diagrams	L/D e/(concr. radius)	Limited data --refers to previous Chinese articles Primarily theoretical
Du, Chen, Liew and Xiong 2017	Rectangular CFT beam columns with high-strength steel	23 (bmcol)	Axial Load and bending moment	P vs. Δ P vs. ε	In-fill concrete eccentricity D/t Slenderness
El-Remaily et al. 1997	Cyclic loading of circular CFTs w/ high strength concrete	4 CFTs (cyclic)	Horizontally placed specimens Constant axial load and cyclically applied lateral load at the mid-height Displacement controlled loading	H vs. δ (lat. defl.) H vs. δ_axial M_u	D/t Axial load ratio P/Po f'_c
Elchalakani, Zhao, and Grzebieta 2001	Uniaxial flexural loading (pure bending) of circular CFT beams	12 CFTs	Pure bending through applied rotation at both ends Bending was applied through coupling forces acting on the pinned points at each end	M_u, R_max, R_cm, θ_pc M vs. φ	D/t L/D
Elchalakani, Zhao, and Grzebieta 2004	Constant amplitude cyclic flexural loading (pure bending) of circular CFT beams	23	Constant amplitude cyclic pure bending Applied rotation at both ends Bending was applied through coupling forces acting on the pinned points at each end	M vs. θ M_max,i/M_max,1 vs. #cycles M_u/M_ptH vs. slenderness	Amplitude of cyclic load D/t
Elremaily and Azizinamini 2002	Non-proportional cyclic loading of circular CFT beam-columns	6	Axial load of 0.2 to 0.4 of the squash load applied Lateral load applied to middle portion which was confined by a rigid stub	H vs. Δ Displacement Amplitude vs. Shortening EI vs. Ductility	t P/P_o f′_c
Fujimoto et al. 2004	Monotonic loading of short circular and square CFT beam columns	65	Three types: Two types with constant axial, increasing moment One type with constant eccentricity	M vs. φ M_u vs. D/t	D t P/P_o Section shape f′_c F_y
Furlong 1967	Ultimate strength of CFT bm-cols. (experimental vs. theoretical)	52 CFTs (13 col, 39 bmcol)	Axial load applied incrementally Eccentric load applied via hydraulic ram and yokes attached to each end of col. Single curvature	P vs. ε, P vs. ε_concr (cols) P_o, P_u (cols) P_u/P_o vs. M_u/M_o (other test plotted also) (bm-cols)	Tube shape D/t f_y f'_c A_s	Variety of results Detailed graphs
Furlong 1968	Design of CFT bmcols; previous exps. examined	28 CFTs (col) (tests by others tabulated); also includes 52 CFTs from Furlong, '67	N.A.	σ vs. ε, exp vs. calc stiffness P vs. ε M vs. φ (bonded, unb.) P_o, P_u Analytical interaction diags.	Based on tests by other authors Bond Residual stress	Analytical formulas presented and discussed
Gajalakshmi and Helena 2012	8 CFTs 8 SCFTs	Cyclic lateral load Constant axial load	Load vs. Displacement Load vs. Drift Ratio	D/t CFT and SCFT Variable amplitude loading Constant amplitude loading histories
Han and Yang 2005	Non-proportional cyclic loading of circular CFT beam columns	8 CFTs 2 HTs	Constant axial load Cyclic load applied at midheight through rigid stub	H vs. Δ	Axial load level D/t f′_c
Hardika and Gardner 2004	Non-proportional cyclic loading of square CFT beam-columns	24	Axial load applied Lateral load applied to member top Member in either square or diagonal orientation	H vs. Δ P/P_o vs. M/M_o Strength capacity, ductility, flexural stiffness	t P f′_c Orientation
Hsu and Yu 2003	Non-proportional cyclic loading of square CFT beam-columns with tie-rods	18	Axial load of 0.1 to 0.3 of the squash load applied Lateral load applied to member top	H vs. Δ H vs. drift ratio Strength deterioration vs. # tie layers EI vs. drift ratio H vs. cumulative energy Energy dissipation vs. b/t	t P/Po tie layers rod diameter
Huang, Huang, and Zhong 1991	Cyclic, lateral loading of CFTs	46 CFTs (bmcol)	Lateral load applied via a frame fixed to top of beam	H vs. δ Hysteretic loops (H vs. δ) Ductility ratio (2 spcms.) Absorbed energy (2 spcms.)	λ A_s/A_c P/P_o
Ichinohe et al. 1991	Monotonic & cyclic loading of CFTs w/ high-strength steel & concrete	20 CFTs (bmcol) 11 moment-curvature tests (M-φ plotted) 9 shear bending tests (M-R plotted)	Both tests axially loaded M-φ test: loaded at 35.4 in. from each end, s-s beam Shear bending test: loaded at midpt; bmcol at load pt. considered fixed	σ vs. ε (exp. & calc.) Biaxial stresses in tubes M vs. φ, M vs. R (monotonic, cyclic, exp. vs. theoretical)	P/P_o for given cyclical loading D/t
Inai et al. 2004	Cyclic load-deformation and ultimate strength of CFT beam-columns with variable axial load	13 Circular CFT 20 Square CFT	Both constant and variable axial load on columns Lateral load applied on top CFT stub by hydraulic jack	M vs. R (per conc. type) R vs. ε (per conc. type) Interaction diagrams (per conc. type) All graphs for both variable and constant axial load	Tube shape f_u f'_c D/t P/P_o loading angle (biaxial bending)
Inai, Mukai, Kai, Tokinya, Fukumoto and Mori 2004	Circular and square CFT beam columns with varying dimensions were tested under constant axial load and varying lateral load to determine the effects on the ductility of CFT beam columns.	34 (bmcol)	Constant axial load Cyclically varying lateral load	Moment-curvature Axial strain-curvature	f_y f'c D/t
Kawaguchi et al. 1993	Cyclic loading of cantilever CFT beam-columns	14 CFTs (bmcol) 12 HTs (bmcol)	N.A.	σ vs. ε (stub col.'s) P vs. ε (HTs, conc., CFTs) M vs. φ (exp. vs. theory) M vs. slip N.A. movement vs. M	D/t L/d a/D	Slip measured and reported Discussion of slip Pure bending behavior and discussion of rigidity
Konno, Kai, and Nagashima 1990	Cyclic loading of square CFT bmcols	19 CFTs (bmcol)	Transverse load applied at midpt. of bmcol Const. axial load applied at member ends	M_u V vs. R	D/t f'_c f_y P/P_o	Compared w/ proposed design equations.
Lu and Kennedy 1994	Monotonic uniaxial loading (pure bending, simple supports) of rectangular CFTs	12 CFTs (bm) 5 HTs (bm) 5 HT stub col. 5 CFT stub col.	Constant axial load, monotically increasing end moments	M vs. φ M_u vs. P_u (interaction diagrams) P/P_o, M_u M_u/M_pc vs. D/t	D/t f_y axial load ratio P/P_o f’_c
Matsui and Tsuda 1987	Axial load & bending (cyclic & monotonic)	14 CFT (8 monotonic, 6 cyclic) 12 HT (mono.)	Non-proportional Axial load applied, then lateral load at column top	H vs. Δ (monotonic and cyclic) M/M_pc vs. θ/θ_pc	D/t CFT vs. HT	Excellent load-defl. curves
Nakahara and Sakino 1998	Monotonic loading of square hollow tubes and square CFTs w/ high strength concrete and steel	4 HT stub col. 4 CFT stub col. 10 CFTs (bmcol)	Cols: Concentric loading Bmcols: Constant axial load, monotonically increasing end moments, curvature controlled loading	P vs. ε_axial M vs. φ M_u vs. P_u (interaction diagrams) P_u, M_u	D/t f_y axial load ratio P/P_o
Nakahara and Sakino 2000a	Monotonic and cyclic loading of square CFT bmcols	6 CFTs (bmcol) (monotonic) 5 CFTs (bmcol) (cyclic)	Bmcols(m): Constant axial load, displacement controlled bending moment applied at the ends Bmcols(c): Constant axial load, curvature controlled bending moment applied at the ends	σ-ε relations for steel & concr. (analytical) M vs. φ (experimental & analytical) φ vs. ε_axial	D/t axial load ratio P/Po deformation histories(m, c)
Nakahara and Sakino 2000b	Monotonic and cyclic loading of square CFT bmcols	6 CFTs (bmcol) (monotonic) 5 CFTs (bmcol) (cyclic)	Bmcols(m): Constant axial load, displacement controlled bending moment applied at the ends Bmcols(c): Constant axial load, curvature controlled bending moment applied at the ends	σ-ε relations for steel & concr. (analytical) M vs. φ (experimental & analytical) φ vs. ε_axial	D/t axial load ratio P/Po deformation histories(m, c)
Perea et al. 2013	Full Scale Slender CFT Beam-Columns	18 CFT (10 circular and 8 rectangular)	Concentric axial compression Axial compression plus uniaxial cyclic bending Axial compression plus biaxial cyclic bending	Load Displacement Curvatures	Section shape and size Concrete strength Slenderness Axial load
Prion and Boehme 1989	Axial, pure bending, & combination (cyclic & monotonic) Thin-walled CFTs w/ high-strength concr.	10 CFT (col) 5 CFT (bm)(1 cyclic) 11 CFT (bmcol)(9 monotonic, 2 cyclic)	Cols: load conc(6), both(4) Bms: load applied at 2 pts. Bmcols: load at 2 pts (6 mono, 2 cycl), apply eccen. (3) through spherical bearings	P_u/P_o vs. avg. ε M vs. φ, M_u/M_o vs. φ P_u/P_o vs. M_u/M_o Load ratios (exp., theor.)	L Loading type	Emphasis on level of ductility achieved Compared w/ design codes
Zhang and Shahrooz 1997	Monotonic loading of square CFT beam-columns at a horizontal position	2 CFTs (bmcol)	Constant axial load, monotically increasing point loads applied at two points along the specimen length	σ-ε relation for steel M vs. φ P vs. δ (vert. defl.at midspan) M vs. θ Strain distribution over depth	Axial load ratio P/Po
Varma et al. 2000, 2001, 2002, 2004	Monotonic and cyclic loading of square CFTs w/ high-strength steel & concrete	4 CFTs stub col. 8 CFTs (bmcol) (monotonic) 8 CFTs (bmcol) (cyclic)	Cols: Concentric loading, force controlled until failure, displacement controlled after failure Bmcols (m): Constant axial load, monotically increasing end rotations Bmcols (c): Constant axial load, cyclically applied lateral load at the top	σ-ε relations for stl. & conc. P vs. δ_axial P_u, M_u M vs. φ & M vs. θ H vs. δ (lat. defl.) μ vs. D/t, f_y , P/ P_u W vs. D/t, f_y , P/ P_u EI / EI_s vs δ_axial / δ_y δ_axial vs. δ ( lat. defl. ) M_u vs. P_u (interaction diagrams)	Axial load ratio P/Po D/t Type of steel
Sakino 1995	Monotonic loading of circular CFT beam-columns	28 CFTs (bmcol)	Rigid rectangular frame Reversed cyclic loading applied to rigid stub welded to column at mid-height from frame	σ vs. ε for varying ecc. dist. P vs. δ Eccentric distance (as calc. in paper) vs. δ V vs. R, P vs. R	P/P_o for given cyclic loading
Sakino and Ishibashi 1985	Monotonic and hysteretic behavior of beam-columns failing in shear	21 CFTs (bmcol) (12 monotonic, 9 cyclic)	Axial load Transverse shear force applied at ends (cyclic: 3 cycles at increments of R=0.5%)	V vs. R (P/P_o, a/D, D/t varied) V vs. R hysteresis loops (P/P_o, a/D, D/t varied) V/V_max vs. R (P/P_o varied) P/P_o vs. V/V_max (exp & calc)	P/P_o D/t a/D f_y f'_c	Very detailed V-R curves and hysteresis loops Expansive cement
Sakino and Tomii 1981	Hysteretic behavior of beam-columns failing in flexure	15 CFTs (bmcol)	Axial load Transverse cyclic shear force applied at ends (3 cycles at increments of R=0.5%)	V vs. R hysteresis loops (P/P_{o/sub>, a/D, D/t varied)} V/V_max vs. R (P/P_o varied) P vs. M_u	P/P_o D/t a/D f_y f'_c	Very detailed V-R hysteresis loops Expansive cement used
Sato, Saito, and Suzuki 1991	Reversed cyclic shear loading of circular CFTs	3 CFTs	Axial load applied concentrically Lateral load applied transversely at bmcol midpt.	R (max) vs. P/P_o Hysteresis loops: V vs. R (1 circular and 1 square test) P_u vs. M_u	P/P_o D/t f_y f'_c	Very detailed plots, but only for selected sections
Sugano, Nagashima, and Kei 1992	Cyclic loading of square and circular beam-columns	19 circular CFTs 20 square CFTs	L-shaped load frame Lateral load applied to column top from frame	σ vs. ε, -H vs. ε Hysteresis loops (H vs. δ) (deflection at column top) Pu deterioration (P_u vs. cyc.) Energy dissipation (hysteresis loop area vs. loading cycle	Hollow vs. filled P	Alternately repeated lateral load w/ constant axial load Failure: local buckling at base
Wheeler and Bridge 2004	Monotonic four point bending of circular CFT beams	4 CFTs 2 HTs	Four point bending 51 in. between support and loading point on either end	M vs. Δ_midspan M vs. concrete slip	D/t f′_c
Tomii and Sakino 1979 c	Shear behavior of square CFTs	40 CFTs (bmcol)	Axial load Transverse shear force applied at ends	V vs. R (P/P_o, a/D, D/t varied) P_o, M_u, V_max P/P_o vs. M_u/M_o φ, γ along length	P/P_o D/t a/D f_y f'_c	Very detailed V-R curves Expansive cement used
Tsuda, Matsui, and Mino 1996	Series II - Slender Cantilever CFT’s subjected to cyclic horizontal load while under constant axial load	10 Circular CFT’s 10 Square CFT’s	Axial load: Applied by a testing machine and kept constant throughout Horiz. Load: A hydraulic jack kept the top of the col. fixed while the frame on which it was mounted moved side-to-side	V vs. δ M_u vs. P_u (interaction diagrams)	Axial load ratio P/Po Buckling length section depth ratio (Lk/D)
Elchalakani and Zhao 2008	Variable amplitude cyclic flexural loading (pure bending) of circular CFT beams	10 CFTs	Variable amplitude cyclic pure bending Applied rotation at both ends Bending was applied through coupling forces acting on the pinned points at each end	M vs. θ (also envelope compared to monotonic test) M_max,i/M_ptH vs. #cycles	D/t of repeat cycles
Hernandez-Figueirido, Romero, Bonet, Montalvá	Rectangular & Square CFT under axial compressive loading	49 CFTs	Axial compression, Bending Moment	N(kN) vs mm, N(kN) vs. M(kN m)	L, Aspect ratio, t	Design loads from Eurocode 4 and AISC 360-10 are applicable to HSC

Specimen Information

Reference	Length (L)(in)	L/D	Eccentricity(in)	Residual Stresses(ksi)	End Conditions
Cai 1988	see L/D	1) <= 4.0 2) 3-50 3) ? 4) 4-22 5) 5-13 6) 9-19 7) 4-8	e / (concrete radius) = 0-1.28	N.A.	Phases 1-6: pinned-pinned Phase 7: fixed cantilever
Du, Chen, Liew and Xiong 2017	N.A.	N.A.	.41-2.96	N.A.	Pinned-pinned
El-Remaily et al. 1997	110.83	7.16	N.A.	N.A.	Pinned ends, rigid stub at the midheight
Elchalakani, Zhao, and Grzebieta 2001	23.62, 31.49	5.41-23.68	N.A.	N.A.	Attached to rotational fixtures at each end
Elchalakani, Zhao, and Grzebieta 2004	31.5 (length of pure bending)	7.3-13.1	Pure bending	N.A.	Attached to rotational fixtures at each end
Elremaily and Azizinamini 2002	86	6.7	N.A.	N.A.	Pinned-Pinned Both ends capped with rigid steel caps
Fujimoto et al. 2004	12.75-53.1	3.0	N.A.: all circular, some square 1.77-11.8: some square	N.A.	Either pinned-pinned or fixed-free
Furlong 1967	Approx. 36.0	5.5-12.0	Constant for all tests	N.A.	Pinned-pinned Spherical bearings
Furlong 1968	33.9-102	8.7-40.0	N.A.	Extensive stresses noted in plain tube tests	N.A.
Gajalakshmi and Helena 2012	39.37	8.77	N.A.	N.A.	Column fixed at base
Han and Yang 2005	59	13.9 13.1	N.A.	N.A.	Pinned-pinned, cylindrical bearings
Hardika and Gardner 2004	75	9.4	0.5 in between horizontal load and section centroid	N.A.	Fixed-free
Hsu and Yu 2003	118 (72.4 effective length)	10.7	N.A.	N.A.	Fixed-free Bottom was rigidly clamped a stiffened base
Huang, Huang, and Zhong 1991	35.4-65.4	5.45-17.5 (λ = 22-75)	N.A.	N.A.	Base fixed, top fixed to movable frame Details sketchy
Ichinohe et al. 1991	35.4, 90.6	2.0 (M-φ) 3.0 (M-R)	N.A.	Annealed specimens noted	Both pinned-pinned
Inai et al. 2004	37.8-56.7	6	N.A.	N.A.	Fixed CFT columns attached to CFT stubs at ends to guarantee sufficient stiffness
Inai, Mukai, Kai, Tokinya, Fukumoto and Mori 2004	37.56-56.93	6	N.A.	N.A.	Pinned-pinned
Kawaguchi et al. 1993	39.3 (1 m)	10	N.A.	N.A.	Fixed base, pinned top (roller)
Konno, Kai, and Nagashima 1990	66.9	6.8	N.A.	N.A.	Pinned-pinned
Lu and Kennedy 1994	77.75-167.72	8.78-20	Pure bending	N.A.	Simply supported beam with load applied symmetrically at two points. Stiffeners under loads
Matsui and Tsuda 1987	29.5	5.0	N.A.	N.A.	Vertical cantilever: fixed base, free end
Nakahara and Sakino 1998	23.62	3	N.A.		N.A.
Nakahara and Sakino 2000a	23.62	3	Annealed		Two loading plates welded to the ends
Nakahara and Sakino 2000b	23.62	3	Annealed		Two loading plates welded to the ends
Perea et al. 2013	216-312	10.8-56.1	N.A.	Not Measured	Column fixed at base
Prion and Boehme 1989	Cols: 19.7-35.4 Bms: 43.3,83.5 Bmcols: 83.5	Cols: 3.3-6 Bms: 7.25, 14 Bmcols: 14	3 bmcol tests: 0.43-0.59	N.A.	Cols: fixed-fixed Bms, bmcols: pinned-pinned
Zhang and Shahrooz 1997	143.98	14.4	N.A.	N.A.	Pinned ends through cylindrical bearings
Varma et al. 2000, 2001, 2002, 2004	48.03, 58.50, 60.00	4.00, 5.00, 4.87	N.A.	N.A.	Col: Fixed Bmcol (m): Pinned ends through cylindrical bearings Bmcol (c): Fixed at base, not specified at top
Sakino 1995	12.75-53.15	3	N.A.	N.A.	Two loading plates welded to the ends
Sakino and Ishibashi 1985	7.9-11.8	2.0-3.0 (a/D = 1.0-1.5)	N.A.	Tubes annealed	Fixed-fixed (embedded in cross-beams) Load applied through spherical seats
Sakino and Tomii 1981	15.7-23.6	4.0-6.0 (a/D = 2.0-3.0)	N.A.	Tubes annealed	Fixed-fixed (embedded in cross-beams) Load applied through spherical seats
Sato, Saito, and Suzuki 1991	43.3	7.33	N.A.	Annealed	Pinned-pinned (pin & roller) Axial load applied thruplates welded to ends of specimen
Sugano, Nagashima, and Kei 1992	78.7 (circular) 66.9 (square)	6.67 (circular) 6.8 (square)	N.A.	N.A.	Pinned transverse supports
Wheeler and Bridge 2004	149.6	9.4, 8.3	N.A.	N.A.	Pinned-pinned
Tomii and Sakino 1979 c	6.5-23.6	1.66-6.0 (a/D = 0.83-3.0)	N.A.	Tubes annealed	Fixed-fixed (embed-ded in cross-beams) Load applied through spherical seats
Tsuda, Matsui, and Mino 1996	All noted are kL; 39.10-156.28 35.6-142.3	6, 9, 12, 18, 24 6, 9, 12, 18, 24	N.A.	N.A.	Col: Fixed base, unspecified connection at top (poss. free or pin)
Elchalakani and Zhao 2008	31.5	7.3-13.1	Pure bending	N.A.	Attached to rotational fixtures at each end
Hernandez-Figueirido, Romero, Bonet, Montalvá	84-162.8	21.5-27.6	0, 0.5, 1, -0.5	N/A	Welded for both square and rectangular specimens.

Cross Section Information

Reference	Tube Dimensions	Steel Properties	Concrete Properties
Cai 1988	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: see L/D Wall Thickness (t) (in): N.A. Diameter/thickness (D/t): N.A.	N.A.	N.A.
Du, Chen, Liew and Xiong 2017	*◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 4.72x3.94, 7.09x4.72, 9.57x5.31 Wall Thickness (t) (in): .224 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 21.05, 31.58, 42.63	High Strength Steel F_y = 74.62 ksi	C40 and C50 grade f'_c = 8.02, 6.27 ksi
El-Remaily et al. 1997	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 12.01 (circular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.252, 0.374 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 32, 48	F_y= 54	f'_c= 10, 15 ksi
Elchalakani, Zhao, and Grzebieta 2001	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 1.33-4.37 (circular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.039- 0.132 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 12.8-109.9	Cold-formed F_y= 52.9-66.7 ksi	f'_c= 3.39 ksi
Elchalakani, Zhao, and Grzebieta 2004	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 2.4 – 4.3 (circular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.027-0.123 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 20-162	Cold formed, electric resistance welded F_y= 60.6 ksi	f'_c= 3.35 ksi
Elremaily and Azizinamini 2002	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 12.75 Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.25, 0.375 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 34, 51	F_y= 54 ksi	f'_c= 5.8-15.1 ksi
Fujimoto et al. 2004	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 4.25 – 14.2 (circular) 4.76 × 4.76 – 12.7 × 17.7 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.116-0.255 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 16.7-152	Cold formed plate Circular: cold form and seam weld Square: welding two channels F_y= 38-121 ksi	f'_c= 3.7-12.3 ksi
Furlong 1967	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 4.5, 5.0, 6.0 (circular) 4 × 4, 5 × 5 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.061-0.189 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 26.3-98.4	Seam-weld cold-rolled F_y= 42.0-60.0 ksi (circular) 48.0-70.3 ksi (rect.)	f'_c= 3.05-5.10 ksi (circular) 3.40-6.50 ksi (rect.)
Furlong 1968	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 1.0-4.74 (circular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.064-0.465 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 5.6-74.4	Seam-welded cold-rolled F_y= 39.6-76.0 ksi	f'_c= 2-5 ksi
Gajalakshmi and Helena 2012	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 4.49 (circular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.079, 0.118 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 38, 57	F_y= 42.5 ksi	f'_c= 4.70 (CFT), 8.38 (SCFT) ksi
Han and Yang 2005	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 4.25, 4.49 Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.157, 0.118 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 27, 38	F_y= 51.6, 44.7 ksi	f'_c= 3.2, 5.6 ksi
Hardika and Gardner 2004	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 8 × 8 Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.1875, 0.375 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 21.3, 42.6	ASTM A 500 Grade C F_y= 56-59 ksi	f'_c= 5.8-14.9 ksi
Hsu and Yu 2003	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 11 × 11 Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.236, 0.177, 0.126 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 46.7, 62.2, 87.5	Cold bent JIS SS-400 plates F_y= 46.5 ksi	f'_c= 4.93 ksi
Huang, Huang, and Zhong 1991	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 3.75-6.50 (circular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.079-0.197 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 25.2-54.0 (As/Ac =0.074- 0.134)	F_y= 34.2-44.1 ksi	f'_c= 3.96-5.32 ksi
Ichinohe et al. 1991	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 6.5, 11.8 (circular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.167-0.461 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 25.6-70.6	Some specimens annealed F_y= 50.8-85.3 ksi	f'_c= 9.0-9.6 ksi
Inai et al. 2004	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 9.45, 6.3 (circular) 8.27 × 8.27, 7.09 × 7.09 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.177, 0.235, 0.354 Diameter/thickness (D/t): Circular 17.8-53.3 Square 20.0-53.3	Cold-formed F_y= 58.0, 85.6, 113.1 ksi	f'_c= 5.80, 13.05 ksi
Inai, Mukai, Kai, Tokinya, Fukumoto and Mori 2004	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 6.30, 9.45 (Circle), 7.09x7.09, 8.27x8.27 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.178-.354 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 17.80-53.09	F_y= 58.02-113.13 ksi	f'_c= 5.08, 13.05 ksi
Kawaguchi et al. 1993	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 3.94 × 3.94 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.118, 0.177 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 22.2, 33.3	Cold-formed F_y= 49.2 ksi	f'_c= 3.1-3.6 ksi
Konno, Kai, and Nagashima 1990	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 9.84 × 9.84 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.178- 0.469 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 21.0-55.0	F_y= 45.9-69.3	f'_c= 4.38- 12.31 ksi
Lu and Kennedy 1994	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 6.0 × 6.0 (square) 10.0 × 6.0 (rectangular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.189, 0.252, 0.347 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 16, 23.8, 26.7, 31.6, 39.6	Cold-formed F_y= 50 ksi	f'_c= 5.87-6.83 ksi
Matsui and Tsuda 1987	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 5.9 × 5.9 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.063-0.125 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 47-94	Mild-steel plates F_y= 51.4-71.5 ksi	f'_c= 4.6-6.0 ksi
Nakahara and Sakino 1998	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 7.87 × 7.87 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.122-0.252 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 30, 60	Cold-formed channel sections F_y= 45.0, 113.3 ksi	f'_c= 17.26 ksi
Nakahara and Sakino 2000a	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 7.87 × 7.87 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.080, 0.167, 0.233 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 33.7, 47.1, 98.0	F_y= 30.6, 36.7, 46.4 ksi	f'_c= 6.90 ksi
Nakahara and Sakino 2000b	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 7.87 × 7.87 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.080, 0.167, 0.233 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 33.7, 47.1, 98.0	F_y= 30.6, 36.7, 46.4 ksi	f'_c= 6.90 ksi
Perea et al. 2013	HSS5.563X0.134 HSS12.750X0.250 HSS20.000X0.250 HSS20X12X5/16	F_y = 42 ksi-55 ksi	f'_c = 5.5 ksi-13.3 ksi
Prion and Boehme 1989	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 6.0 (circular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.065 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 92.0	Electrically welded long. seam F_y= 36-48 ksi	f'_c= 10.6-13.3 ksi
Zhang and Shahrooz 1997	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 10 × 10 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.313 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 32.0	Cold- formed F_y= 53.7 ksi	f'_c= 6.05 ksi
Varma et al. 2000, 2001, 2002, 2004	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 12.01 × 12.01 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.230- 0.350 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 34.3-52.2	A500 A500 F_y= Grade B: 37.6, 68.3 ksi, Grade 80: 81.2, 95.7 ksi	f'_c= 4.33 ksi
Sakino 1995	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 4.25-17.72 (circular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.117, 0.179, 0.255 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 26.9-152.0	F_y= 59.2, 93.7, 127.5 ksi	f'_c=
Sakino and Ishibashi 1985	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 3.94 × 3.94 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.087, 0.117, 0.167 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 24, 34, 45	Mild, cold-worked, welded, annealed F_y= 41.8-45.8 ksi	f'_c= 2.4-3.7 ksi
Sakino and Tomii 1981	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 3.94 × 3.94 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.085, 0.088, 0.117, 0.166 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 24, 34, 45, 46	Mild, cold-worked, welded, annealed F_y= 42.1-44.9 ksi	f'_c= 2.9-3.7 ksi
Sato, Saito, and Suzuki 1991	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 5.91 (circular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.315 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 18.75	Annealed F_y= 55.8 ksi	f'_c= 5.15 ksi
Sugano, Nagashima, and Kei 1992	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 11.8 (circular) 9.84 × 9.84 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.157-0.472 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 25-75 (circular) 20.8-62.5 (square)	F_y= 47.9-72.1 ksi	f'_c= 4.5-12.8 ksi
Wheeler and Bridge 2004	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 15.98, 17.95 Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.25 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 63.4, 71.3	Cold rolled with continuous seamless welds F_y= 50.9 ksi	f'_c= 5.8-8.1 ksi
Tomii and Sakino 1979 c	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 3.94 × 3.94 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.164, 0.119, 0.089 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 24, 33, 44	Mild, cold-worked, welded, annealed F_y= 28.2-44.9 ksi	f'_c= 3.3-6.6 ksi
Tsuda, Matsui, and Mino 1996	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 6.51 (circular) 5.93 × 5.93 (square) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.165 (circular) 0.172 (square) Diameter/thickness (D/t): 39.6 (circular) 34.5 (square)	Mild steel; F_y= STK 400: 51.5 ksi, STKR 400: 57.5 ksi	f'_c= 5.04 ksi
Elchalakani and Zhao 2008	◌: diam. (D) □: depth (D) x width: 2.4 – 4.3 (circular) Wall Thickness (t) (in): 0.035 – 0.121 Diameter/thickness (D/t): 20-120	Cold formed (in some cases machined to achieve D/t) F_y= 61.4 ksi	f'_c= 3.35 ksi
Hernandez-Figueirido, Romero, Bonet, Montalvá	D; 3.9x3.9 (square), 5.9x3.9 (rectangle), t: 0.15,	Welded Plates, Fy: 47.86 ksi	f'c: 10.7-13.5 ksi