ORNL/TM-6Q86

Bond Between Concrete and Steel Reinforcement

at Temperatures to 149°C (300° F)

C. B. Oland
J. P. Callahan

OAK RIQ0E NATIONAL LABORATORY

^OPERATED BY UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION • FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
1
Y " '
 ORNL/TM-6086

Contract No. W-7405-eng-26

Engineering Technology Division

BOND BETWEEN CONCRETE AND STEEL REINFORCEMENT

AT TEMPERATURES TO 149°C (300°F)

C. B. Oland J. P. Callahan

Manuscript Completed — March 30, 1978

Date Published — A p r i l 1 9 7 8

NOTICE: This document contains information of a preliminary

nature. It is subject to revision or correction and there-
fore does not represent a final report.

This report w i t prepared as an v c c o u m of work

sponsored by the United States G o v e r n m e n t . Neither the
Prepared by the United Statea nor the United States Depaitment o f
Energy, nor any of their employees, nor a n y of their
OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY contractor!, subcontract o n , or thetr employees, m i k e s
any warranty, express or implied, o r assume* any legal
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 liability oi iwpotmbUity the accuracy,completeness
or usefulness of »ny information, apparatus, product or
operated by process disclosed, or represents that its u k would not

UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION infringe p nrttely owned aghtt.

for the
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
 iii

CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT x

1. INTRODUCTION x

2. TEST PROCEDURE 3
3. DESCRIPTION OF SPECIMENS 3
4. RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6

REFERENCE on
 BOND BETWEEN CONCRETE AND STEEL REINFORCEMENT
AT TEMPERATURES TO 149°C (,300°F)

C. B. Oland J. P. Callahan

ABSTRACT

Oak Ridge National Laboratory conducted a series of bond

pull-out tests to determine the effect of elevated tempera-
tures [ranging from 24 to 149°C (75 to 300°F)] on the bond
strength between concrete and deformed steel reinforcement.
This report summarizes the findings of the study, describes
the tests and results, and offers recommendations for in-
corporating these results into the design of structures
that must operate within the prescribed range of elevated
temperatures.

I. INTRODUCTION

A series of bond pull-out tests was conducted at Oak Ridge National

Laboratory to provide a measure of the possible detrimental effects of
elevated temperatures on reinforced concrete structures, particularly
with respect to the loss of bond strength and slip resistance of em-
bedded steel reinforcing bars. For the tests, three sets of ASTM-
standard bond pull-out specimens [15.2-cm (6-in.) concrete cubes with a
No. 6 deformed reinforcing bar extending through the cubes] were cast
using a 27.6-MPa (4000-psi) limestone aggregate concrete and moist cured
for 90 days prior to heating. Two sets of three specimens each were
then heated at the rate of 17°C (30°F) per hour to temperatures of 66
and 149°C (150 and 300°F), respectively. They were permitted to soak at
the specified temperature for 14 days and then transferred while sti.ll
hot to a universal testing machine and tested according to ASTM desig-
nation C 234-71. Two sets of three 10.2-cm (4-in.) by 20.3-cm (8-in.)
unconfined compression cylinders were also tested to determine concrete
strength at 149 and 24°C (300 and 75°F). Results of the compression and
bond pull-out tests (Fig. 1) indicated littlf: difference in bond strength
between 24 and 149°C (75 and 300°F); however, the bond strengths at 66°C
(150°F) were consistently below the comparable 24°C (75°F) value. In
Fig. 1, the highest, lowest, and mean values are shown for the sets of
 2

ORNL DWG 78 1788

Fig. 1. Results of bond slip and unconfined compression tests (1

mil = 0.001 in. = 0.0254 mm; 300°F = 149°C; 150°F = 66°C; 75°F = 24°C).

three specimens by cross-hatching. The bond stresses are shown for the
five slip values recommended by ASTM C 234-71.
For purposes of design, the lower limit to the bond strength for
149 and 24°C (300 and 75°F) appears to agree to within 3%; however, the
value for 66°C (150°F) was approximately 10% below ".no comparable 24°C
(75°F) value. Thus for design purposes, a conservative value for bond
strength would be 85% of the equivalent 24°C (75°F) value for tempera-
tures up to a maximum of 149°C (300°F). This value also agrees with the
89% decrease in lower-bound compressive strength of concrete at 149°C
 3

(300°F). The basis for this recommendation is strength at 105 days,

while design is normally based on a significantly lower 28-day strength
value. The modulus of elasticity of concrete heated to 1^9°C (300°F)
was found to be only 63% of the room-temperature value.
The following sections provide a more detailed description of the
testing procedures and the results.

2. TEST PROCEDURE

The tests were conducted to determine nominal bond stress at five

specified amounts of slip between a concrete cube and an embedded rein-
forcing bar in order to identify the effects of temperatures up to 149°C
(300°F) on the bond betwet-n concrete and deformed reinforcement. These
data were developed to establish a reasonable bond strength for use in
the design of reinforced concrete structures.

3. DESCRIPTION OF SPECIMENS

The basic test specimen consisted of a 15.2-cm (6-in.) cube with a

single No. 6 reinforcing bar embedded through the center of two parallel
faces. The nine specimens listed in Table 1, together with six 10.2-cm

Table 1. Test specimens

Soaking temperature
Cube Cylinder

75-1 75-1 24 (75)

75-2 75-2 24 (75)
75-3 75-3 24 (75)
150-1 66 (150)
150-2 66 (150)
150-3 66 (150)
300-1 300-1 149 ( 500)
300-2 300-2 149 (300)
300-3 300-3 149 (300)
 4

(4-in.) by 20.3-cm (8-in.) unconfined compression test cylinders, were

cast from a single concrete batch that used a crushed 1.9—cm (3/4—in.)
maximum size Tennessee limestone aggregate and had a 28-day design
strength of 27.6 MPa (4000 psi). The mixture [as weight per 0.76-m3
(1-yd 3 ) batch, water/cement ratio = 0.75] was proportioned as follows:

Weight
Component
[kg (lb)]

Water 153 (337)

Cement 213 (470)
Sand 693 (1528)
Gravel 696 (1534)

The specimens were cured by submerging them in water for 90 days.

At the end of this curing period, they were heated at the rate of 17°C
(30°F) per hr until they reached the temperatures specified in Table 1;
they were then maintained at the prescribed temperatures for 14 days.
At the end of this heat-soaking period, they were removed one at a time
from the oven, placed in position in the universal testing machine, and
tested as quickly as possible to prevent excessive cooling. One of the
300-series specimens was permitted to cool prior to testing, but no sig-
nificant difference in behavior was apparent as a result of this cooling.
The basic procedure used in this study conformed to ASTM designa-
tion C 234-71, "Standard Method of Test for Comparing Concretes on the
Basis of the Bond Developed with Reinforcing Steel."
The bond-test setup is shown in Fig. 2. The 15.2-cm (6-in.) con-
crete cubes were supported above the upper crossarm of a universal
testing machine on spherically seated steel bearing blocks and a steel
disk which was slotted to permit free movement of a crosspiece. This
crosspiece was attached to the reinforcing bar, which passed through
holes in the disks and the upper crossarm of the testing machine and
was gripped by the lower crossarm of the testing machine. Relative move-
ment of the reinforcing bar and concrete cube was recorded by three dial
gages, two of which are shown in Fig. 2. Another dial gage identical to
Fig. 2. Setup for bond test.
 6

the one shown bearing on the crosspiece was located on the opposite side

of the cube. These two gages measured the slip of the rebar relative to

the loaded face of the cube, and the top dial gage measured the relative
slip of the unloaded end of the rebar.

The 10.2-cm (4-in.) by 20.4-cm (8-in.) concrete cylinders w e r e

tested according to ASTM C 469-65 using a compressometer to obtain con-
crete strains. The 75-series specimens were also instrumented with
5.1-cm (2-in.) electrical resistance strain gages to provide verifica-
tion of strains obtained using the compressometer.

Three No. 6 reinforcing bars were instrumented with 2.54—cm (1—in.)

strain gages and tested to determine the modulus of elasticity, yield
stress, and tensile strength of the rebar. The reinforcing steel con-
formed to ASTM A615 grade 60 requirements for "Deformed Billet-Steel
Bars for Concrete Reinforcement."

During the bond test, the dial gages ware read and recorded at 2.2-
kN (500-lb) load increments until failure occurred. The concrete com-
pression cylinders w e r e loaded in 11.1-kN (2500-lb) increments, and
after each increment, compressometer and strain gage readings were re-
corded until the ultimate strength w a s reached.

4. RESULTS A N D RECOMMENDATIONS

Relative results of the tests are summarized in Fig. 1 based on the

equivalent 24°C (75°F) value. Crossed-hatched sections represent the

spread of results between lowest, average, and highest values for each

set of three specimens. These results consistently show that the 150-

series specimens have the lowest values in every case, although there is

some question as to the statistical significance of these data. Four of

the series-300 data points had a single relatively high value (specimen

300-2) and tended to bring up the averages for this series. W h e n the

results for this one high specimen are taken into consideration, the

general trend shows little, if any, difference between bond strengths

of 75- and 300-series specimens, while the 150-series specimens are con-

sistently lower. There is no obvious explanation for this observation,

and considerably more testing would b e required to determine whether

 7

there is a basic difference in behavior between the 150- and 300-series

specimens.

However, a realistic and conservative design value can be derived

from this limited amount of data. It would appear that a bond strength
equal to 85% of the room-temperature value should be used in designing

a foundation which would operate under temperatures ranging from 24°C to

149°C (75 to 300°F). The recommended design procedure, which is con-
sistent with development length determinations for deformed bars 1 and
which will satisfactorily account for elevated concrete temperatures of
149°C (300°F), ip to increase the development length of deformed

bars by 15%. This recommendation is also consistent with the ultimate

strength of the concrete at 149°C (300°F), which w a s 89% of the 24°C
(75°F) value. The effect of heating on the modulus of elasticity proved
much more significant; the 149°C (300°F) value wa.<= 63% cf the value at
24°C (75°F).

Series 75-, 150-, and 300-specimens are shown after testing in

Figs. 3, 4, and 5, respectively. Little, if any, difference can be seen
in the appearance of specimens exposed to the three temperatures.

Bond stresses were calculated using a nominal bond area of 90 cm

(14.14 i n . 2 ) for the reinforcing bars. The slip of the rebars was ob-
tained by averaging the readings of the two side gages and subtracting
the calculated elongation of the portion of the bar extending between
the gage crosspiece and the loaded face of the concrete cube. Indi-
vidual curves of bond stress vs slip for each specimen are shown in
Figs. 6 to 14; the stress vs strain curves for the concrete compression
cylinders are shown in Figs. 15 to 20, and the stress vs strain curves
for the rebar specimens are shown in Figs. 21 to 23.
Fig. 3. Series-75 specimens after pull-out testing.
 PHOTO 6337 77

Fig. 4. Series-150 specimens after pull-out testing.

 PHOTO 6335 77

Fig. 5. Series-300 specimens after pull-out testing.

 11

3LI' (ii

SL I P (mm)

Fig. 6. Bond stress vs slip for 75-1.

O R N L - DWG 7 7-21136
SLIP (in.)
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04

SLIP (mm)

Fig. 7. Bond stress vs slip for 75-2.

 12

ORNL-DWG 77-2*139
SLIP (.n )
0 02 o 03 o oa

1 r r 17f0

1500

11.22 MPa ULTIMATE

(1627 psi)

0.50 0.75
SLIP (mm)

Fig. 8. Bond stress vs slip for 75-3.

SLIP Cm.)

SLIP (MM)

Fig. 11. Bond stress vs slip for 150-3.

 13

ORNL-DWG 77-2*139

SLIP (in.)
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04

SLIP [MM)

Fig. 10. Bond stress vs slip for 150-2.

0CNL-0»0 '7-JH40
SLIP (>n)

Fig. 11. Bond stress vs slip for 150-3.

 14

ORNL-DWG 77-2MQ1

SLIP (in )
o 0 01 0.02 0.03 0 00
r 1750

1500
10

(2 5 0

1000 to

J 750 a
5 — z

-j 500

11 3 6 MPa ULTIMATE
(1648 psi)
?5Q

, L _-L
0 25 0.50 0.75 4 0

SLIP (mm)

Fig. 12. Bond stress v s slip for 300-1. (Tested cool.)

OBNl-DWG 77— 24142

Fig. 13. Bond stress vs slip for 300-2.

 15

ORNL-DWG 77-2(143

SLIP (in )

SLIP (mm)

Fig. 14. Bond stress v s slip for 300-3.

OHNL-DWG 7 7 - 2 4 1 4 4
6000
1 1

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
35.12 MPo 5000
(5093 psi)

4000
'Si
Q.
MODULUS OF ELASTICITY
30,165 MPo 3000 $
(4.375 x 106 psi) LU
cc
t-
</>

2000
• STRAIN GAGE
o COMPRESSOMETER
1000

0.0008 0.0016 0.0024

STRAIN

Fig. 15. Stress vs strain for cylinder 75-1.

 16

ORNL-DWG 77-21145

6000

5000
MODULUS OF ELASTICITY
30,165 MPa
(4.375*10® psi CL_ 4000

3000 S
tc
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH to
27.19 MPa
(3943 psi) 2000

• STRAIN GAGE
o COMPRESSOMETER 1000

0.0008 0.0016 0.0024

STRAIN

Fig. 16. Stress vs strain for cylinder 75-2.

ORNL-DWG 7 7 - 2 1 1 4 6

MODULUS OF ELASTICITY
29,303 MPa
(4.250x10® psi)

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
26.90 MPa
(3901 psi)

• STRAIN GAGE
o COMPRESSOMETER

0.0008 0.0016 0.0024

STRAIN

Fig. 17. Stress vs strr.in for cylinder 75-3.

 17

ORNL-DWG 7 7 - 2 1 1 4 7

STRAIN

Fig. 18. Stress V 3 strain for cylinder 300-1.

ORNL-DWG 7 7 - 2 1 1 4 8

STRAIN

Fig. 17. Stress vs strr.in for cylinder 75-3.

 18

ORNL-DWG 7 7 - 2 1 1 4 9
6000
40 —

5000
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
29.08 MPa
(4218 psi)
4000
in
tn
Ld

3000 CC

MODULUS OF ELASTICITY
19,822 MPa6
(2.875 X 10 psi) 2000

1000

JL J_
0 0.0008 0.0016 0.0024
STRAIN

Fig. 20. S t r e s s v s strain for cylinder 300-3.

ORNL—DWG 7 7 - 2 1 1 5 0

STRAIN

Fig. 21. No. 6 bar stress vs strain (No. 1).

 19

ORNL-DWG 77-21151
1 1 ! I I

cry = 379.2 MPa

(55.0 ksi)
cr ULT = 617.1 MPa
(89.5 ksi)

3 = 186,160 MPa
/ (27,000 x 10 6 psi)
—

/ I I 1 1 1
0.001 0.002 0.003
STRAIN

Fig. 22. No. 6 bar stress vs strain (No. 2)

ORNL-DWG 77-21152

STRAIN

Fig. 23. No. 6 bar stress vs strain (No. 3).

 20

REFERENCE

1. "Development of Reinforcement," Chap. 12 in Building Code Require-

ments for Reinforced Concrete (AC! 318-71), American Concrete Insti-
tute, 1971.
 21

ORNL/TM-6086

Internal Distribution

1. M. E. Bender 26. W. E. Manrod

2. S. E. Bolt 27. J . G. Merkle
3-7. J . P. Callahan 28. R. K. Nans tad
8. D. A. Canonico 29. D. J. Naus
9. J . A. Clinard 30. H. A. Nelms
10. J . H. Coobs 31-- 3 4 . c . B. Oland
11. w. E. Cooper 35. T. W. Pickel
12. J . M. Co rum 36. H. Postma
13. w. G. Dodge 37. G. C. Robinson
14. J . R. Dougan 38. M. R. Sheldon
15. D. N. Fanning 39. G. C. Smith
16. Uri Gat 40. J . E. Smith
17. D. W. Goodpasture 41. H. E. Tr amine 1 1
18. w. L. Greenstreet 42. D. B. Trauger
19. R. C. Gwaltney 43. W. E. Weathersby, K - 2 5
20. J . F. Harvey 44. G. D. Whitman
21. F. J . Ho man 45. G. T. Yahr
22. R. P. Kasten 46. ORNL Patent Office
23. Ii. Levensor 47-- 4 8 . Central Research Library
24. A. L. Lotrs 49. Document Reference Section
25. w. J. McAfeo 50-- 5 3 . Laboratory Records Department
54. Laboratory Records, ORNL-RC

Consultants and Subcontractors

55. E. G. Burdette, Civil Engineering Department, University of Ten-

nessee, Knoxville, TN 37916
56. R. H. Gallagher, Civil Engineering Department, Cornell University,
Ithaca, NY 14850

External Distribution

57. Director, Reactor Research and Technology Division, DOE, Washing-

ton, D.C. 20545
58. Director, Nuclear Power Development Division, DOE, Washington,
D.C. 20545
59. Director, Reactor Division, DOE, ORO
60-61. Director, Research and Technical Support Division, DOE, ORO
62. Ed Chappell, CRBRP P/0, Oak Ridge, TN 37830
63. G. W. Griswold, CRBRP P/0, Oak Ridge, TN 37830
64-90. Technical Information Center, Oak Ridge, TN 37830

tt U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1 9 7 8 - 7 4 0 - 1 9 0 / 12