本研究共完成26支斷面型式包含十字形（Cross-H）鋼骨混凝土、傳統包覆十字形鋼骨鋼筋混凝土（簡稱SRC）及新式包覆十字形深鋼骨斷面SRC等大尺寸短柱試體之軸向受壓試驗。研究結果發現：（1）十字形鋼骨斷面可以有效提供混凝土圍束作用，但是其機制與橫向鋼筋有所不同；（2）在混凝土應力達到0.80 以後，十字形鋼骨斷面才開始對混凝土產生較明顯的圍束作用；（3）十字形鋼骨斷面鋼骨所圍束之混凝土範圍，可以假設翼板端與翼板端之間為「圓弧形」；（4）十字形鋼骨翼板寬厚比在6至10之間時，受鋼骨圍束混凝土之應力-應變曲線，基本上不隨翼板寬厚比之大小而改變；（5）本文所建議受鋼骨圍束混凝土之應力-應變曲線，簡單而方便使用，可提供相關研究之參考；（6）現行規範提供強度計算公式，對本研究所採用之傳統包覆十字形SRC柱試體強度之預估偏保守；（7）本研究所建議新式包覆十字形深鋼骨斷面鋼骨鋼筋混凝土柱之強度，隨箍筋量之增加，可提高4.9~11.0 %；（8）當試體載重達到 之後，傳統包覆十字形鋼骨鋼筋混凝土柱之強度衰減，較包覆十字形深鋼骨斷面鋼骨鋼筋混凝土柱柱試體為快。

A total of 26 concrete encased steel stub columns (SRC) were tested under monotonic compression to study the effect of concrete confinement provided by the cross-H steel shape. These include concrete columns confined by Cross-H steel, conventional SRC with cross-H steel, and newly SRC with cross-H steel developed in this study. Based on the test results obtained, it is concluded that: (1) cross-H steel shapes are able to provide obvious confinement to the concrete. The compressive strength of the concrete can be raised 32~46% higher than the unconfined concrete. But the mechanism of the confinement is different from that of transverse reinforcing bars. (2) cross-H steel shape doesn’t provide obvious concrete confinement until the concrete stress reaches 80 % of the unconfined concrete compressive strength. (3) the shape of the concrete region confined by cross-H steel shape is more likely a shape that connect the tip of the flange to the tip of the neighboring flange by an arc; (4) the confined concrete stress-strain shape is basically independent of the with-to-thickness ratio of the flange within the research range; (5) a stress-strain relationship is proposed for the concrete confined by cross-H steel shape based on the test data obtained; (6) the strength of the conventional SRC with cross-H steel is underestimated by current specifications; (7) the strength of newly developed SRC with cross-H steel is increased 4.9~11.0 % with the increasing of the cross ties ; (8) after reaching the peak values, strength degradation of conventional SRC specimens is greater than the newly developed SRC specimens.

參考文獻
1. Kent, D.C., and Park, R.,“Flexural Members with Confined Concrete,” Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 97, No. ST7, pp.1969-1990(1971).
2. Park, R., Priestley, M.J.N., and Gill, W.D., “Ductility of square-confined concrete columns,” Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 108, No. ST4, pp.929-950(1982).
3. Moehle, J.P., and Cavanagh, T., ”Confinement Effectiveness of crossties in RC,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 111, No. 10, pp. 2105-2120(1985).
4. Sheikh S.A., Uzumeri S.M., “Analytical model for concrete confinement in tied columns,“ Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 108, No. 12, pp. 2703-2722(1982).
5. Mander, J.B., Priestley, M.J.N., and Park, R., “Theoretical stress-strain model for confined concrete,” Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 114, No. 8, pp. 1804-1826(1988).
6. Mander, J.B., Priestley, M.J.N., and Park, R., “Observed stress-strain behavior of confied concrete,” Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 114, No. 8, pp. 1827-1849(1988).
7. Saatcioglu, M., and Razvi, S. R., “Strength and Ductility of Confined concrete,” Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 118, No. 6, pp.1590-1607(1992).
8. Kupfer, H., Hilsdorf, H.K. and Rusch, H., “Behavior of Concrete under Biaxial Stresses,“ ACI Journal, Proceedings, Vol. 66, No. 8, pp. 656-666(1969).
9. Wight, J.K. and MacGregor, J.G., Reinforced Concrete: Mechanics and Design, Fifth Edition, Pearson Prentice Hall, New Jersey, pp. 42-43(2009).
10. Mirza, S.A., and Skrabek, B.W., “Reliability of short composite beam-column strength interaction,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 117, No. 8, pp. 2320-2339(1991).
11. Mirza, S.A., and Skrabek, B.W., “Statistical analysis of slender composite beam-column strength,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 118, No. 5, pp. 1312-1332(1992).
12. El-Tawil, S., and Deierlein, G..G.., ”Fiber element analysis of composite beam-column cross sections,” Structural Engineering, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.(1996).
13. 陳誠直、葉士青，「鋼骨鋼筋混凝土柱極限強度和耐震行為之耐震行為」，第三屆結構工程研討會，第2197-2106頁，民國85年。
14. 翁正強，顏聖益，林俊昌，「包覆型SRC柱鋼骨對混凝土圍束箍筋量的影響」，中國土木水利工程學刊，第十卷，第二期，第193-204頁，民國87年。
15. 翁正強、王暉舜、李讓、梁景裕，「鋼骨鋼筋混凝土柱圍束箍筋量之試驗與耐震設計」，結構工程，中華民國結構工程學會，第二十一卷，第三期，第55-83頁，民國95年。
16. Chen, C.C., and Lin, N.J., “Analytical model for predicting axial capacity and behavior of concrete encased steel composite stub column,” Journal of Constructional Steel Research 62, pp. 424-433(2006).
17. 內政部，鋼骨鋼筋混凝土構造(SRC)設計規範與解說，營建雜誌社，台北，第12-16頁，民國93年。
18. Mander, J.B., “Seismic Design of Bridge Piers,” PhD thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury Christchurch, New Zealand(1983).
19. 王榮進、李宏仁，「含高強度材料RC柱之軸向受力行為與強度評估」，內政部建築研究所研究報告，台北，民國96年。
20. 李台光、鄒本駒，「繫筋細部對大尺寸鋼筋混凝土柱行為影響之研究」，內政部建築研究所研究報告，台北，民國97年。
21. ACI, “Buildings Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-08) and Commentary”, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan(2008).
22. 蔡克銓，連陽，陳誠直，「鋼骨鋼筋混凝土柱軸向載重行為」，中國土木水利工程學刊，第八卷，第四期，第535-545頁，民國84年。
23. 林盛夫，「橫箍筋及角隅繫筋對SRC柱軸向行為之影響」，國立台灣科技大學，碩士論文，民國95年7月。
24. 蔣迪，「包覆型SRC柱軸向受力行為」，國立台灣科技大學，碩士論文，民國94年7月。
25. 楊雄清，「SRC柱高圍束區混凝土之應力-應變行為」，國立台灣科技大學，碩士論文，民國98年7月。
26. 翁正強、陳村林，「SRC梁柱極限設計之探討—簡單疊加強度法」，結構工程，第五卷，第四期，十二月，第51-66頁，民國79年。
27. Wakabayashi, M., “Research on Earthquake Resistant Capacity of Composite Structures Using High Strength Steel”, Proceedings, Tenth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Balkema, Rotterdam, pp.3425-3430(1992).
28. 陳皆宏，「雙H型鋼鋼骨混凝土柱之結構行為」，國立台灣科技大學營建工程系，碩士論文，台北，民國91年。
29. 翁正強、顏聖益、梁嘉洲、李讓，「SRC柱之混凝土圍束效應與箍筋用量研究」，台灣混凝土學會2007年混凝土工程研討會，paper No. A-001，民國96年。
30. 尹衍樑、翁正強、王瑞禎、梁景裕、黃俊銘，「組合式五螺箍應用於SRC矩形柱之試驗研發」，結構工程，第二十二卷，第三期，pp.3-27，中華民國結構工程學會，九月，台北，民國96年。
31. 楊雄清，「SRC柱高圍束區混凝土之應力-應變行為」，國立台灣科技大學營建工程系，碩士論文，台北，民國98年7月。