Abstract:
The main goal of this research is set out to study the flexural behaviour of concrete filled
steel tubes (CFST) giving insight to two different concrete infills and their behaviour in different
parametric combinations. A numerical study is done on high strength concrete filled CFST and
geopolymer filled CFSTs. Separate models were used for both high strength concrete and
geopolymer concrete.
The numerical investigation is done using ANSYS software. The Drucker Prager (DP)
model is used for modelling the concrete. An extensive parametric study was performed to
investigate the influences of depth-to-thickness ratio (28.57−200), effect of D/B ratio (24-42.8)
and steel yield strengths (235–420 MPa) on the fundamental behavior of CFST beams under
flexure load. When the D/B ratio increased from 0.54 to 2, the ultimate capacity of members is
increased by more than 50%. In the analysis, the geopolymer filled CFST was able to take more
load as compared with the high strength concrete. It can be seen that by increasing D/t ratio from
28.57 to 200 (7 times), the ultimate bending moment capacity reduced from 207.8 to 21 kNm
(almost 8 times) for square CFST beams. The ultimate flexure strength of square CFST beams was
found to increase significantly with an increase in the yield strength of steel. By increasing the
yield strength of steel from 235 MPa to 420 MPa, the ultimate flexure load of the square CFST
beam was found to increase. The developed models were also analyzed under cyclic loading
condition.
An artificial neural network prediction model was developed to predict the flexural
strength of the CFST models. This study aims to establish a comparison between Multilayer Feed
forward - a Multilayer Perceptron network (MLP) with feed forward learning - and a Radial Basis
Function Network (RBF). From the results, it was observed that the two types of networks
(Multilayer Perceptron and Radial Basis Function) were able to predict the results satisfactorily.
However, the Multilayer Perceptron network showed higher accuracy than the radial basis
function. The R² value of MLP analysis was found to be better than RBF