Solution for bond distribution in asymmetric R.C. structural members

Russo, Gianpiero; Pauletta, Margherita; Mitri, Denis

doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2008.11.003

Cited by 18 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Russo and Romano (1992) developed a cracking model for members in uniaxial tension that was based on a non-linear bond slip relationship. Russo et al (2009) further extended this work by developing a bond model that considered asymmetry in terms of both geometry (different depths of concrete above and below the bar) and mechanics (changes in shear stress along the length of the bar).…”

Section: Tension Stiffeningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distributed Sensing for Shrinkage and Tension Stiffening Measurement

Davis¹,

Hoult²,

Bajaj³

et al. 2017

ACI Structural Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A series of reinforcement bar and reinforced concrete specimens were instrumented with fiber optic cables to measure distributed strain profiles along the specimens. The strain due to shrinkage was measured at 3, 7, 21, and 28 days in three specimens to determine the shrinkage strain profile. Reinforcement and reinforced concrete specimens were tested in axial tension and the distributed strain measurements enabled the tension stiffening effect in the reinforced concrete members to be quantified. Due to variations in the development of cracks, measurements on both sides of the reinforcement bar were required to obtain the average strain behavior. The shrinkage strain measurements were also critical in terms of calculating the effect of tension stiffening. The average distributed strain measurements were compared to a proposed tension stiffening model and overall good agreement was seen, although the cracking load was often overestimated by the model.

show abstract

Section: Tension Stiffeningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distributed Sensing for Shrinkage and Tension Stiffening Measurement

Davis¹,

Hoult²,

Bajaj³

et al. 2017

ACI Structural Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A bond stress-slip relationship for stainless steel bars was established based on the analogous formulation proposed by fib Model Code 2010 [17] for carbon steel bars. Such a relationship is useful for analytical solution of the equations governing the bond problem [18][19][20].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bond-Slip Behavior between Stainless Steel Rebars and Concrete

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Maintenance of reinforced concrete structures is a prevailing topic, especially with regard to lifeline structures and bridges, many of which are now designed with a service life beyond 100 years. Reinforcement made of ordinary (carbon) steel may corrode in aggressive environments. Stainless steel, being much more resistant to corrosion, is a valid solution to facilitate the protection of the works, increasing the service life and reducing the need for repair and maintenance. Despite the potential for stainless steel to reduce maintenance costs, studies investigating the influence of stainless steel on the behavior of reinforced concrete structures are limited. This study investigated the bond behavior of stainless steel rebars by means of experimental tests on reinforced concrete specimens with different concrete cover thicknesses, concrete strengths, and bar diameters. In each case, identical specimens with carbon steel reinforcement were tested for comparison. The failure modes of the specimens were examined, and a bond stress–slip relationship for stainless steel bars was established. This research shows that the bond behavior of stainless steel rebars is comparable to that of carbon steel bars.

show abstract

“…Since the variable bond stress distribution is unknown and would be too burdensome to handle, it is possible, referring to expressions available in the literature [24][25][26], to assume an approximate uniform value of bond stress, ¯, along the joint portion l h , both at the top and at the bottom of the beam, that is…”

Section: Shear Strength Contribution V Hc St 2mentioning

confidence: 99%