Title:
Low-Cycle Fatigue Performance of High-Strength Steel Reinforcing Bars
Author(s):
Wassim M. Ghannoum and Chase M. Slavin
Publication:
Materials Journal
Volume:
113
Issue:
6
Appears on pages(s):
803-814
Keywords:
fatigue; high-strength; low-cycle; reinforcement; steel
DOI:
10.14359/51689116
Date:
11/1/2016
Abstract:
New high-strength reinforcing steel bars (HSRB) are under development in the United States, driven by constructibility and economic and environmental incentives. An experimental study was undertaken to compare the low-cycle fatigue behavior of the HSRB with that of benchmark Grade 60 (420 MPa) bars. HSRB obtained from two mills using the main two production methods in the United States were tested. Other variables treated in this study were bar strength, bar size, loading protocol, and bar unsupported length. The study indicated significant departures between the fatigue life of high-strength and regular-strength bars and uncovered correlations between the fatigue life of bars and various bar parameters, including deformation geometry and chemical composition. The correlations suggest that simple adjustments to manufacturing processes may lead to significant improvements in fatigue life of HSRB. The study results also provide important data for developing material specifications for a seismic grade of HSRB.
Related References:
1. ASTM A706/A706M-13, “Standard Specification for Low-Alloy Steel Deformed and Plain Bars for Concrete Reinforcement,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2013, 7 pp.
2. El-Bahy, A.; Kunnath, S. K.; Stone, W.; and Taylor, A., “Cumulative Seismic Damage of Circular Bridge Columns: Benchmark and Low-Cycle Fatigue Tests,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 96, No. 4, July-Aug. 1999, pp. 633-641.
3. El-Bahy, A.; Kunnath, S. K.; Stone, W.; and Taylor, A., “Cumulative Seismic Damage of Circular Bridge Columns: Variable Amplitude Tests,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 96, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1999, pp. 711-719.
4. Slavin C. M., Ghannoum W. M., “Defining Structurally Acceptable Properties of High-Strength Steel Bars through Material and Column Testing, Part I: Material Testing Report,” Charles Pankow Foundation, (05-14), 2015, 135 pp.
5. Reardon, A. C., Metallurgy for the Non-metallurgist, ASM International, second edition, Materials Park, OH, 2011, 450 pp.
6. CRSI Material Properties and Bar Producers Committee, “CRSI Mill Database,” Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute, Schaumburg, IL, 2015.
7. Deeley, P.; Kundig, K. J. A.; and Spendelow Jr., H. R., “Ferroalloys & Alloying Additives Online Handbook,” 2000, http://www.metallurgvanadium.com/contents.html.
8. NEHRP Consultants Joint Venture, “Use of High-Strength Reinforcement in Earthquake-Resistant Concrete Structures,” NIST GCR 14-917-30, Washington, DC, 2014, 231 pp.
9. Nikolaou, J., and Papadimitriou, G. D., “Impact Toughness of Reinforcing Steels Produced by (i) the Tempcore Process and (ii) Microalloying with Vanadium,” International Journal of Impact Engineering, V. 31, No. 8, 2005, pp. 1065-1080. doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2004.05.005
10. Helgason, T.; Hanson, J. M.; Somes, N. F.; Corley, G.; and Hognestad, E., “Fatigue Strength of High-Yield Reinforcing Bars,” NCHRP Report 164, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 1976, 90 pp.
11. Mander, J. B.; Panthaki, F. D.; and Kasalanati, A., “Low-Cycle Fatigue Behavior of Reinforcing Steel,” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, ASCE, V. 6, No. 4, 1994, pp. 453-468. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(1994)6:4(453)
12. Brown, J., and Kunnath, S. K., “Low-Cycle Fatigue Failure of Reinforcing Steel Bars,” ACI Materials Journal, V. 101, No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 2004, pp. 457-466.
13. ASTM A615/A615M-16, “Standard Specification for Deformed and Plain Carbon-Steel Bars for Concrete Reinforcement,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2016, 8 pp.
14. Koh, S. K., and Stephens, R. I., “Mean Stress Effects on Low Cycle Fatigue for a High Strength Steel,” Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures, V. 14, No. 4, 1991, pp. 413-428. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2695.1991.tb00672.x
15. Hawileh, R.; Rahman, A.; and Tabatabai, H., “Evaluation of the Low-Cycle Fatigue Life in ASTM A706 and A615 Grade 60 Steel Reinforcing Bars,” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, ASCE, V. 22, No. 1, 2010, pp. 65-76. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2010)22:1(65)
16. Sokoli, D., “Seismic Performance of Concrete Columns Reinforced with High Strength Steel,” master’s thesis, the University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, 2014, 166 pp.
17. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (318-14) and Commentary (ACI 318R-14),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2014, 519 pp.
18. ASTM A370-14, “Standard Test Methods and Definitions for Mechanical Testing of Steel Products,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2014, 50 pp.
19. ASTM E8/E8M-13a, “Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials,” ASTM International,West Conshohocken, PA, 2013, 28 pp.
20. Sokoli, D.; Shekarchi, W.; Buenrostro, E.; and Ghannoum, W. M., “Advancing Behavioral Understanding and Damage Evaluation of Concrete Members Using High-Resolution Digital Image Correlation Data,” Earthquakes and Structures, V. 7, No. 5, 2014, pp. 609-626. doi: 10.12989/eas.2014.7.5.609
21. Belsley, D. A.; Kuh, E.; and Welsch, R. E., Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2005, 300 pp.
22. Aoyama, H., Design of Modern Highrise Reinforced Concrete Structures, Imperial College Press, London, UK, 2001, 442 pp.
23. Macchi, G.; Pinto, P. E.; and Sanpaolesi, L., “Ductility Requirements for Reinforcement under Eurocodes,” Structural Engineering International, V. 6, No. 4, 1996, pp. 249-254. doi: 10.2749/101686696780496148