Study Report On Implications of Unbondedness
Study Report On Implications of Unbondedness
Study Report On Implications of Unbondedness
IMPLICATION OF
UNBONDEDNESS
TABLE OF CONTENT
Contents
TABLE OF CONTENT ........................................................................................................................................ 2
LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................................................. 3
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................................ 3
PREFACE ............................................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
OBJECTIVE ....................................................................................................................................................... 4
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 4
REINFORCED CONCRETE - A STRUTURAL MATERIAL .................................................................................. 4
WHAT IS BOND STRESS? ............................................................................................................................. 4
ANCHORAGE OR DEVELOPMENT LENGTH .................................................................................................. 4
FLEXURAL BOND ......................................................................................................................................... 5
NATURE OF THE BOND RESISTANCE ........................................................................................................... 5
BOND STRENGTH ........................................................................................................................................ 6
STATE OF STRESS IN THE SURROUNDING CONCRETE ................................................................................ 6
PULL OUT TEST ............................................................................................................................................ 7
UNBONDEDNESS IN RC STRUCTURES ............................................................................................................. 9
Effect of High Strength Web Reinforcement: ............................................................................................. 9
Corrosion on the surface of steel reinforcement: .................................................................................... 10
Exposure of reinforced concrete section in elevated temperature: ........................................................ 12
Reinforcement polluted in oil: .................................................................................................................. 13
Flexure Behavior of Beam: ........................................................................................................................ 14
CONCLUSION.....................................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
BIBLOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................................... 19
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Comparison of Moment Capacity of Beams .................................................................................... 16
Table 2 Stiffness and Ductility....................................................................................................................... 17
OBJECTIVE
To present reader the fundamental concept and understanding of bond stresses and the
behavior of rebar when unbonded in reinforced concrete.
INTRODUCTION
FLEXURAL BOND
Bond force ∆𝑇 is developed along the flexural reinforcement in the shear span of any beam (Fig.
1). If it is assumed that the bond stresses 𝑢 are uniformly distributed between any two sections,
close to each other, the equilibrium of a short length of bar (Fig.1) requires that ∆𝑇 = 𝑢 ∑ 𝑜 ∆𝑥.
However ideal beam action require that the internal tension force 𝑇 must vary at the same rate
as the external bending moment, 𝑀. Therefore,
∆𝑀 𝑉 𝑉 𝑽
∆𝑇 = = ∆𝑥 then 𝑢 ∑ 𝑜 ∆𝑥 = 𝑗𝑑 ∆𝑥 and 𝒖 = 𝒋𝒅 ∑ 𝒐 (9.3)
𝑗𝑑 𝑗𝑑
The above equation indicates that when the rate of change of external bending moment (i.e., the
shear force) is high, the flexural bond stress can also exhibit high intensity.
As the load is being increased, the adhesion along the bar surface inevitably breaks down. The
remaining frictional shear strength is very small in comparison with the bearing strength
developed around the ribs; therefore 𝑣𝑎 can be ignored for the practical purpose.
One of the most important aspects of bond performance is its effect on crack development. This
is closely related to the bond slip characteristics of a particular type of bar in various situations.
Generally speaking, the smaller the slip associated with a usable bond force, the better the
quality of the bond.
BOND STRENGTH
Bond strength was a more serious problem when only plain reinforcing bars were used. Bars
with a deformed surface provide an extra element of bond strength and safety. On the other
hand, the behavior of deformed bars, in particular the introduction of high-strength steels and
large diameter bars, presented some new problems.
Figure 4 Section through reinforcing bar and concrete, showing separation that occurs
Conduct of Test: The specimen were partially immer4sed in water in a glass fiber tank in such
a manner that the reinforcement was totally above the water resulting in the formation of
products due to reinforcement corrosion(Fig.7).Tests were conducted using a specially
designed loading frame, fixed to the base (Fig.8). After conduct of the bond test, the
specimens were broken and the weight loss due to corrosion of the un-sleeved portion of the
bar was determined by cleaning it with the Clark’s solution (ASTM G1-76). In this way the
degradation in the rib profile was determined by measuring the rib weight.
Conclusion:
a. The ultimate bond strength increases by about 17% and rebar slip decreases in the
early stages of reinforcement corrosion.
b. At corrosion level of 12% the failure mode changes from splitting to continuous
slippage of the bar. It is at this corrosion level that the interactive effect of loss of rib
profile and the loss of confinement causes a sharp change in the mode of failure.
c. A sharp reduction in bond strength is observed at critical values of crack width of 0.3
mm and the rib profile loss of 25%.
𝐒𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐛𝐢 𝐞𝐭 𝐚𝐥3 made investigation in to the deterioration of the bond between concrete and
reinforcement using a series of beam-type pullout specimens. The specimens were designed
to allow investigation into cover depths of 20 mm and 50 mm and bar diameter of 12 mm
and 20 mm. 24 specimens of concrete with reinforcing steel bar were cast with differing
cover level and different bar diameters.
Experimental Setup: Fig.9 shows the scheme of experimental set up for this research. The
corrosion in the sample was accelerated by setting up a potential difference between the
reinforcing bars and a nearby cathode. All mixes were made of Ordinary Portland Cement.
Fine aggregate was natural siliceous sand, crushed Basalt was also used. The NaCl solution
was also mixed at 10% of the cement content.
Corrosion in the samples was accelerated by setting up a potential difference between the
reinforcing steel bar and a nearby cathode. The bond properties were studied by conduction
direct pull out test of horizontal reinforcing bars embedded in the specimens, protruding
from the vertical surface on the side of the specimens. After casting, the specimens were
sealed with wet burlap and stored in a temperature controlled environment. All specimens
were de-molded after 24 hours and transferred to the laboratory for testing.
Figure 9 Circuit setup for accelerated corrosion
Conclusions:
a. Increase of level of corrosion led to a reduction in the bond strength of steel
reinforcing bars.
b. The bond strength of top bars was 25% lower than bottom bars for specimens
without any corrosion, and 30% for bars with severe corrosion; however no
significant difference in case of moderate corrosion.
c. Increase of the cover from 20 mm to 50mm resulted in an improvement of the bond
strength.
d. Increase of the diameter of the bar led to the reduction to the bond strength.
Before pouring concrete in the mould of pull out test, the internal surfaces of these moulds
were oiled and the bottom of the concrete was isolated from the mould by a cylindrical sheet
made from cork with a hole at centre of concrete specimen base to fix the reinforcing bars
vertically. Fresh concrete was poured into the mould in five layers of the specimen height.
Pull out Test was performed by a hollow Hydraulic Machine.
Conclusions: Based upon the test results of experimental work the conclusions are,
a. Pollution of steel bar with oil does not affect the bond strength if the embedded
length of steel bar is increased and the bar diameter id decreased.
b. Embedded length is inversely affect the deterioration of the bond strength due to the
bar pollution.
c. “Splitting” is the predominant mode of failure for all tested specimens.
d. For specimens of large embedded bar length, no general trend is observed for the
relation between the deterioration of bond strength and the bar diameter of the
polluted bars.
e. In general, the loss in the bond strength increases when the degree of the bar
pollution increases.
f. No slip failures occur in testing all the polluted and non-polluted steel bars
throughout bond test.
g. For the polluted and non-polluted steel bars, it can be stated that small bar sizes has
greater bond strength than the large bar sizes if the embedded length is small.