IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 187
NUMERICAL MODELING OF CONCRETE COMPOSITE STEEL TUBES

Rahel H. Khizer
1
, B.R.Narayana
2
, N.S.Kumar
3

1
Master of Technology (Structural Engineering) Student, Civil Department, Ghousia College of Engineering,
Ramanagaram, Karnataka, India
2
Assistant Professor & M.Sc., Engineering (By Research) Scholar, Civil Department, Ghousia College of Engineering,
Ramanagaram, Karnataka, India
3
Professor & Director (R&D) Civil Department, Ghousia College of Engineering, Ramanagaram, Karnataka, India

Abstract
In modern days, building design emphasizes on enhancing flexibility of the floor space by reducing the cross section of column size.
Enhancing compressive strength of concrete on a smaller column gives more strength and more usable floor space. The use of high
strength concrete in smaller column, endeavor to brittle failure. This would be prevented by reducing space of stirrup for higher
ductility. However, this causes the stirrup to form a natural plane of separation between the confined concrete core and the
unconfined concrete cover, the risk of a premature spalling of the concrete cover increases. This is one important reason why it is
advantageous to use Composite Columns consisting of Concrete-Filled Steel Tubes (CFST) instead of traditional Reinforced Concrete
Columns. This study aims at developing a suitable constitutive model addressing the behavior of Concrete Filled Steel Tubular
column on the compressive response under axial loads. Ultimate load carrying capacities obtained by the Authors using experiments
have been compared with the Numerical model values. Three-dimensional nonlinear finite element models developed to study the
force transfer between steel tube and concrete core. The nonlinear finite element program ABAQUS 6.12-1 is used. The interaction
between steel tube and concrete core is the discussing issue for understanding the behavior of Concrete-Filled Steel Tube Columns
(CFST). The numerical results validated with experimental data extracted from previous researchers (International & National) in the
field including few experiments by the Authors in terms of Ultimate loads and deformation modes. Modeling related problems such as
the definition of boundary conditions, imperfections, concrete-steel interaction, material representation and others are investigated
using a comprehensive parametric study. The numerical results are validated through comparison with experimental data in terms of
ultimate loading and deformation modes.

A comparison of ultimate failure loads from nonlinear finite element program ABAQUS 6.12-1 with the predicted failure load from
Eurocode Part-4 (EC4) (British Standards Institutions), ACI-318 (2005) (American Concrete Institute), for axially loaded columns
will be carried out in this research study

From the study it is concluded that, developed Numerical model fits nearer to perfection and depicts the behavior well with 5-10%
error. Also, behavior when only Steel tube is loaded has been depicted with loading only Concrete-infill and loading on both infill and
Steel tube simultaneously and the combination gave higher ultimate loads. The numerical results validated well with the previous
researchers too.

Keywords: Composite, Confinement, Capacity, Stiffness, Ductility
-----------------------------------------------------------------------***-----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. INTRODUCTION
At present in Civil Engineering, structures have been
redesigned using emerging technology with concrete-filled
steel tubular (CFST) structure. A composite steel-concrete
structure consists of steel tube and concrete core inside it. The
steel tube acts as a permanent formwork and has regular cross-
sections: circular, rectangle and square.

Steel sections with concrete infill are being increasingly used
as structural members, as filling the steel section with concrete
increases both its strength and ductility without increasing the
section size. Since steel confines the concrete, the use of
formwork can be discarded. However, concrete confinement
depends on many factors such as column diameter, the
thickness of steel tube, the concrete strength and the yield
stress of the steel tube.

It is observed that in long columns, general buckling and in
short columns, crushing of concrete. The performance of
CFST under sustained loads is different from ordinary
reinforced concrete columns. In RCC columns, concrete
experiences contraction as it sets during its early age.

Little success has been achieved so far in developing an
accurate model due to the complexity in modeling the concrete
confinement. The ABAQUS 6.12-1 program was used for the
IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 188
modeling. The unconfined uniaxial stressstrain curve for
concrete provided in the ABAQUS [1] material library is used.
Hu et al. [6] developed a nonlinear finite element model using
the ABAQUS [1] program to simulate the behavior of
concrete-filled steel tube columns. The concrete confinement
was achieved by matching the numerical results by trial and
error via parametric study.

The main objective of this study is to develop an accurate
finite element model to simulate the behavior of concrete
filled steel tube columns. The finite element program
ABAQUS 6.12-1 is used in the analysis.

2. FINITE ELEMENT MODELING
In order to accurately simulate the actual behavior of concrete
filled steel tube columns, the main components of these
columns have to be modeled properly.

2.1. Modeling and Meshing
The element library of finite element software ABAQUS 6.12-
1 is used to select the type of element. Solid elements were
found to be more efficient in modeling the steel tube and the
concrete Fig.2, as well as it clearly defined boundaries of their
elements. Three-dimensional eight-node solid element (C3D8)
illustrated in Fig.1 is used in this study.



Fig.1 Eight-node solid elements (C3D8)



Fig.2 Finite element mesh of concrete filled steel tube column
2.2. Material Model of Concrete
To define the concrete behavior in the FE model, a stress-
strain diagram for the confined concrete should be established
first. The equivalent stressstrain diagram for confined
concrete under compressive loading, as shown in Fig. 3 is
used in the proposed FE model. This approach is similar to the
one adopted by Ellobody et al [3]

The material properties shown in Fig. 3, is used in defining the
nonlinear compressive behavior of the concrete infill are
defined as follows:
f
c
= Unconfined concrete cylinder compressive strength.

cc
= 0.003, as recommended by the ACI Specification [2].
f
cc
= Confined concrete compressive strength.
=

+
1

Proposed by Mander et al. [9]

cc
= corresponding confined strain to f
cc

=

1 +
2

Proposed by Mander et al. [9]

f
l
= lateral confining pressure from the steel tube section.
=
2

= 0.1

Equations proposed by Mander, et al. [9].

The factors (k
1
) and (k
2
) are taken as 4.1 and 20.5,
respectively, as given by Richart et al. [10]



Fig.3 Equivalent stressstrain curves of unconfined and
confined concrete

The first part is the initially assumed elastic range to the
proportional limit stress. The value of the proportional limit
stress is taken as 0.5(f
cc
) as given by Hu et al. [6]. The
Youngs modulus of confined concrete (E
cc
) is calculated
using the ACI code [2]:

= 4700

MPa

The Poissons ratio (
cc
) of confined concrete is assumed as
0.2.

The second part of the curve is the nonlinear portion starting
from the proportional limit stress 0.5(f
cc
) and going to the
confined concrete strength (f
cc
). This part of the curve can be
determined from following equations, proposed by Saenz [11].
Concrete
Steel tube
Top surface
Bottom surface
Interface
IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 189
=

1 + +

2 1

2
+

1
2

The constants R

and R

are equal to 4 as recommended by Hu

and Schnobrich [7].

The third part of the confined concrete stressstrain curve is
the descending part from the confined concrete strength (f
cc
) to
a value lower than or equal to rk
3
f
cc
with the corresponding
strain of 11
cc
. Equations proposed by Hu et al. [6].

3
=

1 21.7 / 40
0.00003391

2
0.010085

+1.3491
40 / 150



The approximate value of r can be calculated from empirical
equations given by Ellobody et al. [3]

=
1

30

300.5+1
(10030)
30

100
0.5 100

(10)

There are several material definition algorithms provided by
ABAQUS 6.12-1 for the nonlinear behavior of concrete
materials. The concrete is modeled by DruckerPrager yield
criteria model available in the ABAQUS [1] material library.
Two parameters (Drucker Prager and Drucker Prager
Hardening) are used to define the yield stage of confined
concrete. The linear DruckerPrager model is used with
associated flow and the isotropic rule. The material angle of
friction () and the ratio of flow stress in triaxial tension to
that in compression (K) are taken as 20 and 0.8, respectively,
as recommended by Hu et al. [6].

2.3. Material Model of Steel Tube
An elastic-plastic model with the von Mises yield criterion is
used to describe the constitutive behavior of steel tube. The
complete stress-strain relation obtained from uniaxial tension
tests has been used in steel material model. Material properties
of steel, such as the Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio are
taken as E
s
=210000 MPa and =0.3, respectively.

2.4. Concrete Steel Tube Interface
The contact between the steel tube and the concrete is
modeled by interface elements. The interface elements consist
of two matching contact faces of inner steel tube and outer
concrete elements. The friction between the two faces is
maintained as long as the surfaces remain in contact. The
coefficient of friction between the two faces is taken as 0.20 in
the analysis. However, the two contact elements are not
allowed to penetrate each other.

2.5. Load Application
The uniform compressive loading was applied to top of
column to the steel section (Fig.4), concrete section (Fig.5)
and to the entire section (Fig.6). The behavior of column when
only Steel tube is loaded has been depicted with loading only
Concrete section and loading on both concrete and steel tube
section simultaneously and the combination gave higher
ultimate loads.


Fig.4 Loading
steel section

Fig.5 Loading
concrete section

Fig.6 Loading
entire Section

2.6. Boundary Conditions
Boundary conditions were enforce with displacement
x
=
y
=

z
= 0 on the bottom surface. The top surface of the column is
fixed with
x
=
y
= 0 allowing displacement to take place in z
direction.

2.7. Solution Procedure
The calculation involves one step of a static buckling analysis.
Due to high nonlinearities at local and global levels,
accompanying the traced inelastic, unstable and collapse
behavior, Riks analysis was chosen as the solution [1]. The
Riks method is based on the concept of arc length as a
measure of the solution progress in load-displacement
configuration space. The increments are established
automatically by the program. The user specifies only initial,
minimum and maximum increments. The magnitude of an
increment depends on the number of iterations and attempts,
needed in the previous increment.

For nonlinear problems, as the one described here, the
solutions are depended on the magnitude of increments.
Although usually they follow initially the same equilibrium
path, very often the solution near the critical point experiences
problems with convergence and premature termination. For all
cases considered here the fast and proper solution was
obtained for the default set of analysis parameters and a
IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 190
limited number of points defining inelastic material response.
Smaller initial increments or more detailed stress-strain curves
led to long calculations and premature termination.

3. VERIFICATION OF FINITE ELEMENT
MODEL
3.1. Experimental Results
To verify the finite element model, a comparison between the
experimental results and finite element results is carried out.
The ultimate loads obtained from the tests (P
Test
) and finite
element analyses (P
FE
) have been investigated. Table: 1 shows
a comparison of the ultimate loads of the concrete filled steel
tube (CFST) columns obtained experimentally and
numerically using the finite element model. It can be seen that
good agreement has been achieved between the two sets of
results for most of the columns. A maximum difference of 5-
10% was observed between experimental and numerical
results for column specimens.





4. ANALYTICAL STUDY
4.1. American Concrete Institute: Building code
requirements for Structural Concrete
The ACI [2] use the formula for calculating the squash load.
Code doesnt consider the effect due to concrete confinement.
The squash load for circular columns is determined by

= 0.95

A modification for ACI equations is proposed by Giakoumelis
and Lam [5]. A coefficient is proposed for the ACI equation to
take into account the effect of concrete confinement on the
axial load capacity of concrete filled circular steel tube, a
revised equation was proposed as follows:

= 1.3

The capacities given by the ACI code are too conservative
whereas those calculated by using new equations are more
realistic, especially for circular columns.

Table-1: Comparison between tests, finite element, EC4, ACI

Grade of
Concrete
D (mm) t (mm) L/D D/t P
Test
(KN)
P
FE
(KN) P
Test
/
P
FE

P
EC4
(KN)
P
ACI
(KN) P
Lam
(KN)
M20 33.40 1.65 5.988 20.24 72.30 71.58 1.010 74.48 64.54 69.52
42.20 1.65 4.739 25.58 93.20 98.62 0.945 105.62 87.74 96.06
48.30 1.65 4.141 29.27 110.4 117.29 0.941 128.73 105.18 116.31
M25 33.40 1.65 5.988 20.24 78.30 73.71 1.062 77.07 67.92 74.15
42.20 1.65 4.739 25.58 99.20 102.87 0.964 110.07 93.39 103.79
48.30 1.65 4.141 29.27 118.3 124.50 0.950 134.65 112.74 126.65
M30 33.40 1.65 5.988 20.24 84.30 75.42 1.178 79.65 71.30 78.77
42.20 1.65 4.739 25.58 102.0 103.96 0.981 114.39 99.03 111.51
48.30 1.65 4.141 29.27 128.3 131.77 0.974 140.58 120.29 136.99




Chart-1: Grade of Concrete M20



Chart-2: Grade of Concrete M25

0
50
100
150
33.4 42.2 48.3
U
l
t
i
m
a
t
e

l
o
a
d

(
K
N
)
M20
PTest (KN)
PFE(KN)
PEC4 (KN)
PACI (KN)
0
50
100
150
33.4 42.2 48.3
U
l
t
i
m
a
t
e

l
o
a
d

(
K
N
)
M25
PTest (KN)
PFE(KN)
PEC4 (KN)
PACI (KN)
IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 191


Chart-3: Grade of Concrete M30

4.2. Eurocode 4
EC4 [4] is the most recently completed international standard
in composite construction. EC4 covers concrete filled steel
section sections with or without reinforcement. EC4 considers
confinement effects for circular sections when relative
slenderness () has value less than 0.5. It is the only code that
treats the effects of long-term loading separately. The ultimate
axial force of a square column is

Where: A
s
and A
c

are the area of steel and concrete
respectively, and f
s

and f
c
are the strength of steel and concrete
respectively.

For circular columns, confinement effects have to be
incorporated if the relative slenderness is less than 0.5,
where is defined as

=

+ 0.85

1
= 4.9 18.5 + 17
2
+ 1

2
= 0.25 (3 +2 )

2
+

1 +
1

5. COMPARATIVE STUDY
5.1. General
The ultimate section capacity of different CFST sections based
on their D/t ratio and L/D ratio were found according to
Eurocode 4 [4], ACI [2] & Giakoumelis and Lam [5]. The
theoretical and numerical capacity of CFST sections
developed using the above codes denote that increase in D/t
ratio enhances the capacity which is due to increased
confinement pressure and decrease in L/D ratio also enhances
the capacity of the section which is due to the slenderness
effect.

5.2. Slenderness Ratio of the Column
The length to diameter ratio (L/D) represents the slenderness
of the column. The failure modes of concrete-filled columns
are characterized by yielding of steel followed by crushing of
concrete. The strength increase will occur only for columns of
smaller slenderness ratio (or L/D ratio). Columns with greater
slenderness ratio fail by overall buckling. Hence it can be
observed from the analytical results that the decrease in L/D
ratio increases the section capacity of the CFST column.

5.3. Diameter to Thickness Ratio
The increase in D/t ratio may be either due to the increase in
diameter or due to the decrease in thickness of the section.
Hence it is analyzed by keeping the thickness constant and
varying the diameter. The increase in D/t ratio with increased
diameter for a constant thickness represents the improvement
in cross section of the steel tube and hence produces greater
section capacity.

5.4. Grade of Concrete
The strength of concrete core decides stiffness of CFST
columns. Stiffness increases with increase in concrete strength
but columns fail due to crushing of concrete exhibiting brittle
behavior when filled with high strength concrete. But it is a
fact that increase in concrete core strength increases the
strength of filled columns to a larger extent, no matter of
either D/t ratio or L/D ratio.

5.5. Performance Index (PI)
In the LRFD code [8], a column is classified as composite if it
has a structural steel area to the cross sectional area ratio of
more than 0.04 otherwise it is treated as a concrete column. In
Eurocode 4 [4], the steel contribution ratio in a composite
column section, which is defined as the ratio of the steel
section strength to the composite section strength, must be
greater than 0.2. To evaluate the section performance of
composite columns, a performance index is proposed here as

=

The performance indexes (PI) so determined are listed in
Table 2. The performance indexes decreases with increase in
D/t (ref. Chart-6). The reasons are very similar to the causes of
the strength index changing with increase of D/t.

0
50
100
150
33.4 42.2 48.3
U
l
t
i
m
a
t
e

l
o
a
d

(
K
N
)
M30
PTest (KN)
PFE(KN)
PEC4 (KN)
PACI (KN)
IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 192
5.6. Ductility Index (DI)
One of the parameters used to quantify section ductility is the
ductility index.

=

95%

ue
is the strain at the ultimate load, and
95%
is the strain when
the load falls to 95% of the ultimate load. The ductility
indexes (DI) so determined are listed in Table 2. The ductility
index decreases with increase in D/t (ref. Chart-5). The
reasons are very similar to the causes of the strength index
changing with increase of D/t.

5.7. Strength Index (SI)
A strength index is defined to quantify the section strength:

SI = P
Test
/ P
ACI

Where P
ACI
= A
s
f
s
+ 0.95A
c
f
c

The section capacity as per ACI [2]

The strength indexes (SI) so determined are listed in Table 2.
The strength index decreases with increase of D/t (ref. Chart-
8, 9). The reasons are that, the constraining factor for the
specimen decreases with increase of D/t, i.e. the composite
action of steel tube and core concrete becomes smaller (ref.
Chart-7).

=

6. CONCLUSIONS
1. Increase in D/t ratio enhances section capacity (Pu) of
column, as the confinement pressure increases only when
diameter increases.
2. Increase in slenderness ratio (or L/D ratio) reduces section
capacity (Pu) of the column.
3. The strength of concrete core greatly influences the
section capacity CFST columns. Sections filled with high
strength concrete exhibits higher section capacity (Pu).
4. Increase in concrete core strength increases section
capacity (Pu) of column to a large extent, no matter of
either L/D or D/t ratio.
5. Stiffness increases with increase in concrete strength but
columns fails due to crushing of concrete which shows
brittle failure behavior when filled with higher grade of
concrete.
6. Increase in grade of concrete depicts the confinement
factor i.e. the composite action of steel tube and core
concrete becomes smaller.
7. Varying the diameter & grades of concrete, increase in
confinement factor will not affect ductility of column.
8. Comparison with Finite Element model results obtained
from ABAQUS 6.12-1 and experimental results for
columns with different grades of concrete with different
geometric dimensions (length, diameter, and thickness)
results in predicting the column behavior.
9. Results from parametric study showed that column design
rules specified in EC4 [4], ACI [2] & Giakoumelis and
Lam [5] are in well agreement with experimental results
but EC4 is closer to obtained results.
10. Strength increase will occur in CFST columns only in the
smaller slenderness ratio (L/D).

Table-2: Stiffness index, performance index, ductility index, confinement factor, strength index

Grade of
Concrete
D
(mm)
t
(mm)
L/D D/t Stiffness
Index
(N/mm)
Ductility
Index
Performance
Index
Confinement
Factor
Strength
Index
(EC4)
Strength
Index
(Abaqus)
M20 33.40 1.65 5.988 20.24 73.909 6.1527 10.5522 2.891 0.971 1.010
42.20 1.65 4.739 25.58 56.524 5.2930 9.9483 2.211 0.882 0.945
48.30 1.65 4.141 29.27 43.797 3.1068 5.2683 1.901 0.858 0.941
M25 33.40 1.65 5.988 20.24 85.717 6.7669 12.8798 2.313 1.051 1.062
42.20 1.65 4.739 25.58 80.434 5.2790 11.3537 1.769 0.902 0.964
48.30 1.65 4.141 29.27 65.147 3.2404 9.1260 1.520 0.806 0.950
M30 33.40 1.65 5.988 20.24 103.795 6.1079 9.3610 1.927 1.088 1.118
42.20 1.65 4.739 25.58 99.900 5.3329 8.5613 1.474 0.892 0.981
48.30 1.65 4.141 29.27 89.424 3.9065 7.7178 1.267 0.756 0.974

IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 193


Chart-4: Variation of Stiffness index. Chart-5: Variation of Ductility index.



Chart-6: Variation of Performance index Chart-7: Variation of Confinement factor



Chart-8: Variation of Strength index EC4 Chart-9: Variation of Strength index (Abaqus).


REFERENCES
[1] ABAQUS Documentation. Version 6.12-1
[2] American Concrete Institute (ACI), Building code
requirements for structural concrete and commentary,
ACI 318-95, Detroit, USA, 1999.
[3] Ehab Ellobody, Ben Young, Dennis Lam (2006),
Behavior of Normal and High Strength Concrete-
Filled Compact Steel Tube Circular Stub Columns,
Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62 (2006)
706715.
[4] Eurocode 4. Design of composite steel and concrete
structures. Part 1.1, General rules and rules for
buildings (with UK national application document),
DD ENV 1994-1-1. London (UK): British Standards
Institution; 1994.
[5] Giakoumelis G, Lam D. Axial capacity of circular
concrete-filled tube columns. Journal of
Constructional Steel Research 2004; 60(7):104968.
0
20
40
60
80
33.4 42.2 48.3
Stiffness Index (k v/s D)
0
2
4
6
8
33.4 42.2 48.3
Ductility Index (DI v/s D)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
33.4 42.2 48.3
Performance Index (PI v/s D)
0
1
2
3
4
33.4 42.2 48.3
Confinement Factor (CF v/s D)
0.8
0.85
0.9
0.95
1
33.4 42.2 48.3
Strength Index (EC4) (SI v/s D)
0.9
0.95
1
1.05
33.4 42.2 48.3
Strength Index (Abaqus)
(SI v/s D)
IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 194
[6] Hu HT, Huang CS, Wu MH, Wu YM. Nonlinear
analysis of axially loaded concrete-filled tube columns
with confinement effect. Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE 2003; 129(10):13229.
[7] Hu HT, Schnobrich WC. Constitutive modeling of
concrete by using nonassociated plasticity. Journal of
Materials in Civil Engineering 1989; 1(4):199216.
[8] LRFD. Load and resistance factor design specification
for steel buildings. American Institution of Steel
Construction, 1999.
[9] Mander JB, Priestley MJN, Park R. Theoretical
stressstrain model for confined concrete. Journal of
Structural Engineering, ASCE 1988; 114(8):180426.
[10] Richart FE, Brandzaeg A, Brown RL. A study of the
failure of concrete under combined compressive
stresses. Bull. 185. Champaign (IL, USA): University
of Illinois Engineering Experimental Station; 1928.
[11] Saenz LP. Discussion of Equation for the stressstrain
curve of concrete by P. Desayi, and S. Krishnan.
Journal of the American Concrete Institute 1964;
61:122935.

BIOGRAPHIES
1
Graduated in the year 2012 from VTU,
Belgaum. Presently perusing Master in
Technology in Structural Engineering at
Ghousia College of Engineering,
Ramanagaram Also working on this topic for
the dissertation under the guidance of Dr. N S
Kumar

2
Presently

working on Composite Steel Columns
for his M.Sc., Engineering (by Research) under
the guidance of Dr. N S Kumar Has more than
28 years of teaching experience at Ghousia
College of Engineering, Ramanagaram.

3
Involved in the Research field related to
behavior of Composite Steel Column since a
decade. Presently guiding four Ph.D Scholars
& one M.Sc Engineering (Research under
VTU, Belgaum). Has more than 25 years of
teaching & 6 years of Research experience at Ghousia College
of Engineering, Ramanagaram.