Title:
Bond Strength between High-Performance Concrete and 7 mm Non-Pretensioned Plain Steel Wire
Author(s):
Andrzej Seruga and Marcin Dyba
Publication:
Structural Journal
Volume:
122
Issue:
1
Appears on pages(s):
169-181
Keywords:
bond behavior; bond stress-slip relationship; high-performance concrete (HPC); plain steel wire; pullout test.
DOI:
10.14359/51742145
Date:
1/1/2025
Abstract:
This paper examines the bond behavior between non-pretensioned
plain steel wire and high-performance concrete (HPC). It investigates the effects of embedment length and concrete compressive strength on bond performance for the production of railway sleepers. To determine the performance, pullout concrete specimens reinforced with 7 mm diameter plain steel wire were cast
and tested under a uniaxial load. The main test parameters include
the embedment length: 40, 80, 120, 240, 330, and 460 mm; and
concrete compressive strength: 40, 60, 72, and 88 MPa. The modified pullout test method developed at Cracow University of Technology was used in the experimental investigation.
The study unequivocally demonstrates that the maximum bond
stress between HPC and a non-pretensioned plain steel wire with
a diameter of 7 mm decreases as the embedment length increases,
irrespective of the concrete’s compressive strength. Furthermore,
it was observed that the average bond stress increases with an
increase in the concrete’s compressive strength with time. After
conducting tests on HPC specimens with compressive strengths
ranging from 60 to 88 MPa and embedment lengths ranging from
40 to 120 mm, it was determined that the resulting maximum
adhesion bond stress was 2.22 MPa. This was 52% higher than
the bond stress found in test pieces made of concrete with fcm =
40 MPa. Additionally, the average residual bond stress was found
to be twice that of concrete with a compressive strength of 40 MPa.
These findings demonstrate a clear advantage of using HPC in
terms of bond stress.
Related References:
1. Arnold, M. L., “Un-Tensioned Pullout Tests to Predict the Bond Quality of Different Prestressing Reinforcements Used in Concrete Railroad Ties,” master’s thesis, Kansas State University, Manhattan KS, 2013, 415 pp.
2. Abrams, D. A., “Tests of Bond between Concrete and Steel,” Bulletin No. 71, Engineering Experiment Station, University of Illinois Urbana-
Champaign, Urbana, IL, Dec. 1913, 246 pp.
3. fib, “Bond of Reinforcement in Concrete. State-of-Art Report,” fib Bulletin No. 10, International Federation for Structural Concrete, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2000, 434 pp.
4. den Uijl, J. A., “Comparative Study of Bond Properties of Different Types of Indented Wire,” Stevin Report 5.85-10, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands, June 1985.
5. Dyba, M., and Derkowski, W., “Bond Stresses between Concrete and Prestressing in Pre-Tensioned Elements – State of the Art,” Cement Wapno Beton, V. 23, No. 5, 2018, pp. 358-368.
6. ACI Committee 318, “Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete (ACI 318-63),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1963, 144 pp.
7. Roš, M. R., “Vorgespannter Beton,” Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology (EMPA) Report. No 155, 1946, Dübendorf, Zürich, Switzerland.
8. Olszak, W.; Kaufman, S.; Eimer, C.; and Bychawski, Z., “Teoria Konstrukcji Spreżonych (Theory of Prestressed Structures),” V. 1 and 2, PWN, Warsaw, Poland, 1961, 1258 pp. (in Polish)
9. Marshall, G., “End Anchorage and Bond Stress in Prestressed Concrete,” Magazine of Concrete Research, V. 1, No. 3, Dec. 1949, pp. 123-127. doi: 10.1680/macr.1949.1.3.123
10. Momeni, A. F., “Effect of Concrete Properties and Prestressing Steel Indentation Type on the Development Length and Flexural Capacity of Pretensioned Concrete Members,” PhD thesis, Kansas State University, Manhattan KS, 2016, 443 pp.
11. ASTM A881/A881M-10, “Standard Specification for Steel Wire, Indented, Low-Relaxation for Prestressed Concrete Railroad Ties,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2010, 4 pp.
12. ASTM A1081/A1081M-12, “Standard Test Method for Evaluating Bond of Seven-Wire Steel Prestressing Strand,” ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2012, 5 pp.
13. Gamble, W. L., “Discussion of ‘Prediction Model for Development Length of Indented Prestressing Wires’ by A. F. Momeni, R. J. Peterman, and B. T. Beck,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 116, No. 1, Jan. 2019, pp. 278-279.
14. Geßner, S., and Henne, M., “Bond Behavior of Indented Wires in Pretensioning,” Proceedings, 2016 PCI Convention and National Bridge Conference, Nashville, TN, Mar. 2016, 21 pp.
15. Savic, A.; Beck, B. T.; Shafiei Dastgerdi, A.; Peterman, R. J.; Riding, K.; and Robertson, A. A., “The Effect of Wire Type on Cracking Propensity in Prestressed Concrete Prisms,” Proceedings, ASME/IEEE Joint Rail Conference, Snowbird, UT, Apr. 2019, 9 pp.
16. fib, “CEB-FIP Model Code 1990,” International Federation for Structural Concrete, Lausanne, Switzerland, 1993, 460 pp.
17. fib, “fib Model Code 2010 – Final Draft: Volume 1,” fib Bulletin No. 65, International Federation for Structural Concrete, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2012, pp. 247-256.
18. EN 13230-1:2016, “Railway Applications - Track - Concrete Sleepers and Bearers - Part 1: General Requirements,” European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, 2016, 42 pp.
19. Dyba, M., “Influence of Technological Parameters on Concrete-Steel Bond Between High Performance Concrete and Prestressing Strands,” PhD thesis, Cracow University of Technology, Kraków, Poland, 2014, 340 pp.
20. Dyba, M., and Seruga, A., “Bond-Slip Relationships in High-
Performance Concrete with Plain Steel Bars,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 121, No. 1, Jan. 2024, pp. 159-170.
21. Melo, J.; Rossetto, T.; and Varum, H., “Experimental Study of Bond–Slip in RC Structural Elements with Plain Bars,” Materials and Structures, V. 48, No. 8, Aug. 2015, pp. 2367-2381. doi: 10.1617/s11527-014-0320-9