} RESTA Title no. 89-M65 TECHNICAL PAPI Bond of Reinforcement Under Controlled Confinement by L. Javier Malvar Twelve specimens were tested to determine the local bond stressslip char: acteristics of a #6 reinforcing bar embedded in 3-in. diameter concrete cinder Radial confining stress around the concrete specimen and radial deformation, rogether with bond siress and slip, were assumed 10 be funda ‘mental variables needed to describe the interface behovior propery. Con Figuration-independent bond stresssip relationships for a short five-ug ‘embedded length were obtained for various degrees of confining pressure ‘Maximum bond stresses could be increased almost threefold by increasing the confinement sress from $00 to 4500 psi atthe bar level. Two types of 46 bars with diferent deformations were investigated. Keywords: bond (concrete fo reinforcement; bund stress; coined conc; e Formed enforcement: pllout tests; defred rence Twelve specimens were tested to determine the local bond stress-slip characteristics of a #6 reinforcing bar embedded in concrete. Radial confining stress around the concrete speci- ‘men and radial deformation, together with bond stress and slip, are assumed to be fundamental variables needed to describe the interface behavior properly. The research objectives were (I) to establish the necessity for considering radial stress and radial deformation in study- ing bond phenomena, (2) to show that observed bond char- acteristics are sensitive to test specimen configuration, and (3)to determine configuration-independent local bond stress- slip relationships for two types of #6 bars with different deformations. RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE Considering actual bond-slip properties in the interface between steel reinforcement and concrete allows for a real- istic prediction of cracking. The width, spacing, and extent of cracks in reinforced concrete all are dependent on the assumed bond-slip characteristics.’ For example, assuming perfect bond in the finite element analysis of a beam in four-point bending will homogenize the strain field and dif- fuse the numerically predicted crack pattern In turn, the crack pattern will affect the internal distribution of forces, the effective stiffness of the member, its ultimate strength, and mode of failure." Shear failures often originate by propa- gation of existing bending cracks. Extant studies on bond-slip offen ignore the effects of radial stress and deformation. The strong dependency of ‘ACI Materials Journal / November-December 1992 bbond-slip on those two radial variables implies a dependency of previous test results on the particular specimen configu- ration used. The present test setup aims at providing general local relationships that would be applicable for any configu- ration BOND MECHANISM ‘The mechanism of bond is comprised of three main com- ponents: chemical adhesion, friction, and mechanical inter- lock between bar ribs and concrete. Initially, for very small values of bond stress of up to 200 psi,"® chemical adhesion is the main resisting mechanism. If the bond stress is in- creased, chemical adhesion is destroyed and replaced by the ‘wedging action of the ribs. This wedging action originates crushing in front of the ribs, secondary internal transverse (or radial) cracks (Fig. 1),’* and eventually longitudinal cracks. If inadequate confinement is provided, bond failure would ‘occur as soon as the cracks spread through the concrete cover of the bar. With proper confinement, the bond stress reaches a maximum (around :/3 according to Reference 6) before decreasing as the concrete between ribs fails and a frictional type of behavior ensues. ANALYTICAL REPRESENTATION OF BOND Infinite element analysis of reinforced concrete, bond-slip between reinforcement and concrete has been modeled using, interface elements. These elements use empirical nonlinear bond stress-slip relationships. ‘The simplest interface element isthe bond-link element,"° a dimensionless element that connects two nodes with iden- tical coordinates with two orthogonal springs. More complex, models combine the reinforcement and adjacent concrete into a finite bond-zone element" or represent the interface with a dimensionless contact element,!2"* which gives a ‘continuous connection between two adjacent elements. Mod- cls of the embedded type also have been considered.!™* ‘ACT Maes Journal V. 89, No.6, November Deer: 1992. Received Sept 23,199, and reviewed under nt pdbatons pais, Copy sight © 192, American Conte Insite. Alighs seve, nln he making ‘pcs, less pemiston icine fro he copys proton, Penent sss {ion willbepaished nthe Septem Ortober 198 4C1Sracura owral reve ‘yon 1193. 593[KC member. Javer Mara an asstan escarch engineer Deparment of Cl Enginecring atthe Univers of Califor, Davis He as conduc extensive rsarch ‘on acta mechani, ft element movling and experimental ana of once land eiforced concrete src. The radial (normal) stiffness of the interface is an impor- tant variable in all these models and was included in their development. However, in the absence of experimental data," large arbitrary values of the radial stiffness have been prescribed in practical examples. Alternatively, bond mod- eling has simply been avoided." ‘With respect to the sensitivity of the finite element model to the bond stress-versus-slip relationship employed, Refer- ence 13 shows variations in reinforcement stresses of up to 20 ksi (in a Grade 60, bar) depending on which of four different empirical relationships was prescribed. EXPERIMENTAL BACKGROUND In pite ofits importance, only limited amount of research has included radial stress or deformation as a parameter.®* ‘Typically, a specimen configuration is chosen and no attempt is made to evaluate the normal stiffness of the reinforced or unreinforced concrete surrounding the bar. As a result, dis- parate relationships for bond stress-versus-slip have been obtained," with variations in bond stress over 100 percent. ‘The main studies that have addressed transverse confine- ‘ment provide an insight into its effects on bond. ‘Untrauer and Henry” pulled #6 and #9 Grade 60 bars from 6-in, cube specimens subjected to lateral pressure on wo opposite faces. Normal pressure on the specimens was in- creased up to 2370 psi. Bond strength was observed to in- crease proportionally to the square root of the normal pressure. Doerr subjected 16 mm (0.63 i.) deformed bars embed- in, diameter cylindrical concrete specimens to ten nn, Specimens were subjected to confining pressures of up to 15 MN/mm (2175 psi). It was found that bond stresses could be incremented up to 50 percent, Doerr also attributed the large scatter in bond stress results reported inthe literature to the various dimensions of test specimens used. de TR CONCRETE \ DEFORMED BAR RUSHED CONCRETE TRANSVERSE (RADIAL? SECONDARY CRACKS Fig. 1—Bond stress transfer by wedging action 594 Robins and Standish pulled 8- and 12-mm (0.31- and 0.47-in.) bars from 100-mm (4-in.) cubes laterally loaded on two opposite faces. The pull-out load for the deformed bars increased more than 100 percent for lateral pressures of about 10 Nimm (1450 psi). Additional application of lateral pres- sure up to 28 N/mm (4060 psi) did not increase the failure loads. Eligehausen, Popov, and Bertero tested 125 pull-out specimens consisting of a Grade 60 bar with a short length bar diameters) embedded in a 12-in. by Tdy by 15d, reinforced concrete specimen (ds being the bar diameter). A ‘unidirectional confining pressure was applied perpendicular to the longitudinal splitting plane. An increase in the con- finement from 0 to 1900 psi yielded a 25-percent increase in maximum bond resistance. Confinement provided by the transverse steel across the crack plane was not evaluated. ‘Navaratnarajah and Speare™ reported an increase in bond performance with increasing lateral pressure up to a limiting value of the pressure. ‘Gambarova, Rosati, and Zasso* pulled 18-mm (0.70-in.) bars embedded in a cracked concrete specimen, External confinement perpendicular to the longitudinal cracking plane allowed control ofthe longitudinal crack opening, which was kept constant during each test. Bond was observed to increase with increasing confinement, i.e., with decreasing crack opening, by up to 40 percent. Giuriani, Plizzari, and Schumm considered confinement exerted not only by lateral external loads but also by trans- verse reinforcement and by residual tensile stresses across the concrete cracks. Hungspreug™ conducted an extensive review of confine ment effects on bond. He found that increasing cover and transverse reinforcement, both of which would increase the confinement on the bar, were generally accepted as increasing bond strength. He also points to an increase of bond with concrete tensile strength (or with the square root of the compressive strength). Empirical relationships have been derived showing the inerease in maximum bond stress with increasing strength, increasing bar cover, and increasing stit- rup area.” Hungspreug* also carried out pullout tests. on ZANSVERSE (RADIAL PRIMARY CRACK / PROCESS ZONE ‘ACI Materials Journal / November-December 1992cylindrical specimens with constant radial confining pres- sure. He found a linear increase in maximum bond force (and corresponding slip) with confining pressure up t0 a confinement of 400 psi (2.8 MPa) at the bar surface. higher confinements, increases in maximum bond force ap- eared to have been inhibited by severe radial cracking Modena, Coltro, and Rossaro” studied the effects of a constant confining pressure perpendicular to the longitudinal cracking plane in a specimen similar to Gambarova’s. The longitudinal cracking plane was preformed and a 16-mm (© -in.) diameter bar with lugs at 45 deg was used. During testing, the slip was increased up to 5 mm (0.2 in.) which isabout one-half ofthe lug spacing. They reported an increase in bond strength from about 3 t0 8.5 MPa (0.4 to 1.2 ksi) for a confining pressure varying from 1.8 to 8.6 MPa (0.26 to 1.25 ksi). They also reported an inerease in the crack opening up to a limit value that decreases withthe confining stress. BOND SLIP VARIABLES It is hypothesized that, together with bond stress and slip, radial confinement stress and radial deformation are the main variables defining bond behavior. This is consistent with previous assumptions” and is apparent in the following ob- servations from experimental bond tests: 1. If confinement is not provided, bond stresses vanish as soon as the longitudinal crack develops through the cover. 2. The concrete cover itself provides confinement through tensile hoop stresses prior to cracking. 3. The ultimate resistance at large slips appears to be of the Coulomb friction type. 4, Bond stress is higher when bars are pushed instead of pulled (due to Poisson's effect) ‘5. The discrepancy in bond stress-slip relationships ap- pearing in the literature would be explained by the variations in the test specimens, which provide varying degrees of ‘confinement. 6. Effects of concrete cover, bar spacing, bar postion, end distance, and transverse reinforcement could be predicted via the confinement each provides. ‘These observations motivated the design of a new testing device and specimen that allow for the control and measure- ‘ment of the four variables identified. STEEL-CONCRETE INTERFACE Although most analytical representations of bond tend to model the steel-to-concrete interface as a two-dimensional surface, the bond-transfer mechanism, including crushing and cracking, actually occurs in a finite zone surrounding the reinforcement.*"" From an experimental point of view, this means a process zone surrounding the reinforcement has to be defined, and the slip measured will actually include the deformation of this zone. In the present study, the process zone was arbitrarily assumed to be cylindrical with an outer diameter of 3 in, Ifthe analytical model of the interface is, a two-dimensional surface (i.., the process zone is assumed to have zero thickness), its characteristics will have to be derived indirectly, so that the deformations due to the inter- face together with the deformations due to the conerete cyl- inder equate the measured slip. ‘TEST SPECIMEN ‘The process zone chosen for this investigation is shown in Fig. 2. It consists of a 3-in, diameter, 4-in, long concrete cylinder surrounding a steel reinforcing bar. The cylinder diameter was the smallest practical size for use with pea gravel (Table 1). In an attempt to obtain local characteristics, only five lugs were in contact with the concrete, contact, being prevented in the rest of the specimen by inserting silicone-rubber spacers around the bars. The spacers allowed inclined radial cracks forming at each rib to propagate to the ‘outer concrete surface ‘The outer concrete surface was surrounded by a threaded steel pipe, which carried the load via shear stresses. Most of the steel pipe was split longitudinally into eight strips to prevent any confinement from the pipe itself. This was veri- Nornal stress applied ‘through confinng ring Radiat eisplacenent #6 bor Phdddddad a Shear stress resisted “TTT by split pipe —j— Concrete put-out force | 8 Silicone rubber spacers —~ Fig. 2—Test specimen ACI Materials Journal / November-December 1992 595| ~~ \ nievariad Voce j \ CONFINING RING PLAN VIEW | Fig, 3—Testing apparatus and confining ring Table 1—Concrete mix Ingredient Quanity, Ibiyd? “cones ss - Water 361 Sand _| 1760 Gravel ein, a0 iy = 05953 kp Table 2—Conerete properties Test Compressive strength, psi | Tensile stength pi Po- PI 6410 ns 7 5830 15 3370 [6x0 fied experimentally by pulling laterally on the strip’s end and measuring force and displacement. The equivalent con- fining pressure due to the strips was less than 0.12 psi. Fig, 3 shows the assembled arrangement. An advantage of the split pipe is its two-dimensional confining action, which allows for much higher confinement stresses than reported previously. Another advantage is the load transfer via shear stresses, which prevents unknown confinements that take place when bearing stresses are present (e.g., asin a standard pullout test, TEST SETUP ‘The specimen was installed ina servo-controlled hydraulic testing machine used in displacement control. On one end. of the specimen, the bar was threaded and bolted to the testing machine cross-head. On the other end, the inside of the split pipe was threaded and bolted to the piston. Confining pressure was applied through a thin (0.062-in.) ring surrounding the pipe (Fig. 3). A hydraulic jack with an 596 adjustable relief valve closed the ring with a constant force during the test ‘One LVDT measured the slip between the reinforcement (Mein, away from the concrete face, due to the thickness of the coupling device) and the outer concrete surface (i.c., the split pipe). Another LVDT measured the opening of the confining ring. This was later translated into a radial defor- ‘mation. The load cell provided pullout load measurements from which bond stresses were calculated. A pressure gage was used to set the confining pressure, which remained constant for each test. TEST SERIES ‘Three test series were carried out. The first series (pre- liminary Tests PO and P1) were carried out to verify the setup. No confining pressure was applied for Test PO. For the first and second test series (Tests 1 through 5), bars with inclined ribs that formed a 68-deg angle with the longitudinal axis were used. For a #6 bar, the maximum rib spacing is, 13.3 mm (0.525 in.). The measured rib spacing was 12.2 mm (0.481 in.) and the clear distance between ribs was 9.2 mm (0.36 in.). The related rib area® was 0.064. For the third test series (Tests 6 through 10), bars with ‘normal ribs at an angle of 90 deg with the bar axis were used. The measured rib spacing was 12.8 mm (0.504 in.), and the clear distance between them was 10.2 mm (0.40 in). The related rib area was 0.066. Inall cases, Grade 60, #6 bars satisfying ASTM A 615-89 were used, The same concrete mix was used in all cases (Table 1). Concrete properties for each series are indicated in Table 2. Compressive strength and tensile splitting strength at 28 days were obtained from three cylinders each. The concrete cylinders were 3 in. in diameter and 6 in. tall. PROCEDURE In the preliminary tests (PO, PI), the specimens were loaded monotonically to failure under 0 and 1000 psi (at the bar surface) constant external radial pressure, respectively For Tests 1 through 10, the loading was applied in two stages. First, the specimen was loaded until the longitudinal crack formed, then unloaded. During this stage, referred herein as the precracking stage, some confinement is pro- vided by the concrete cylinder itself. Second, the load was monotonically applied until the slip reached about 0.5 in. (12 mm). During this second (postcracking) stage, the con- crete cylinder does not provide any confinement, and the applied radial pressure on the outer surface of the split pipe transfers directly to the bar surface. For Tests 1 through 5, the confining pressure was set at '500, 1500, 2500, 3500, and 4500 psi at the surface of the bar for both pre- and postcracking stages. The equivalent pressures on the outer surface of the 3-in. diameter conerete cylinder are 125, 375, 625, 875, and 1125 psi over a five-lug length (or 82, 246, 410, $74, and 738 over the 4-in. length). For Tests 6-10, only a 500-psi bar-level confining pressure was used on the precracking stage, but the same pressures of 500 to 4500 psi were applied in the posteracking stage. All tests were carried out in displacement control to obtain the unloading branches of the responses. The displacement ‘ACI Materials Journal / November-December 1992 _rate was approximately 0.015 in./mn for the first loading cycle, after which it was increased to 0.075 in/mn. EXTERNALLY APPLIED CONFINEMENT In the previous section, the confining pressures at the bar surface for a longitudinally cracked specimen were reported aas 500, 1500, 2500, 3500, and 4500 psi. For uncracked concrete, these values are actually different, since some of the externally applied confining pressure is supported via ‘concrete hoop stresses and never reaches the bar. Fora thick, uncracked concrete cylinder of unit length with a solid steel core [Fig. 4(a)], the concrete stresses (neglecting tangential bbond stresses) are given by hoop stress (ip. r2pd+ =p) 13S oO a radial stress @ Atr =n, the internal radius of the concrete cylinder increases by =H.) E 8) Ane and the steel core under pressure reduces its radius by reps (1 ~ fh) So ® and since A re=—A re Bll ae Peel tno+td-ng Ee rh Ips) (1-5 +e d-Ko(1-5)] 6 ‘This equation holds only for the linear range ofthe concrete in compression and in the absence of splitting cracks. For the special case where both materials are the same, Eq. (5) reduces to p./p, = | independently of r,/r.. This is a case of isotropic compression on a homogeneous cylinder. For the case where E, = 4000 ksi, E, = 29,000 ksi, je 03, re= 15 in, and r, = 0.375, Eq, (5) yields p, ‘These equations were derived for a specimen of unit thick- ness. For the actual tests, the embedded bar length was five lug spacings (2.625 in, if a maximum spacing of 0.525 in. is assumed), whereas the concrete cylinder length was 4 in., yielding ACI Materials Journal / November-December 1992 PRIOR TO CRACKING AFTER LONGITUDINAL SPLITTING Fig. 4—Externally applied confinement E ae ea mira, [oe a7 : a") n fs 5 \ a ee ° 25 se a) me SUP tow Fig. 5—Preliminary tests: complete bond-slip relationships . 4 a= 1.49 (zis) ‘where the subscript r refers to test values. However, if the concrete is longitudinally cracked and no stresses are transferred across the cracks (Fig. 4(b)] then for unit thickness specimen p,= p.r./r,= 4p. and for the present tests pa © Pa=6.1pe a During tests where longitudinal splitting has not occurred, Eq, (6) indicates the confining pressure at the bar level pa due to the externally applied pressure. During the reloading cycle, after cracking has occurred, Eq, (7) holds. The “nomi- nal” values of pu for cracked state (500, 1500, 2500, 3500, and 4500 psi) from Eq. (7) are shown in all figures. PRECRACKING CONCRETE CONFINEMENT Prior to cracking, the concrete specimen itself provides some confinement via tensile hoop stresses. The confining stress due to the concrete cylinder just before cracking (in the absence of external forces and for unit thickness) can be evaluated from Eq. (2) by setting r = r:, 6, =f, and pe = 0, yielding ri-r? rent ) 597SUP ow es 7 s 3 5 an E os é SUP (ow Fig, 6—Tests I through 5: bond slip prior to cracking 25: er 3 sem ox 3 5 Bis w 9 & a 30 4 a 3 5 r su on suP Fig. 8—Tests 1 through 5: complete bond-slip relationships so ous saw ous * 7 ADAL TSPLACERENT co ows eae t 2 oa 5 =e 3 rete a gee 2|é Tere se rat g¥ mime | 3 ¢ > ne trmm ls & 2 4 2 ts =o am : 4 i ° a 3 a i fs 02 SLIP com Fig, 7—Tests I through 5: initial post-cracking bond slip For Test PO (no extemal confinement) and a five-lug embedded length = 1061 psi © “The magnitude of the confining stress due to the concrete cylinder is within the range of the externally applied confin- ing stresses. ‘Therefore, total confinement prior to cracking is variable, and a combination of the concrete cylinder confinement and the externally applied one. After cracking the total confining stress is constant and only Eq, (7) is needed to obtain it. This explains the emphasis of the present study on the post-crack- ing behavior. RESULTS: Tests PO and P1 ‘The first preliminary test, PO, was cartied out with no confinement to provide a baseline bond-slip relation. Test PI was run with 1000-psi confinement stress at the bar surface level to show the effect of confinement. Both tests, are detailed in Fig. 5. For Test PO, the dashed segment shown is meant only to indicate the beginning and end of the sudden splitting crack propagation. For Test PO, the cracking load 598 BADIAL ISPLACEMENT com> Fig. 9—Tests 1 through 5: radial displacement histories is dependent upon the specimen’s diameter. For Test P1, a sudden decrease in bond stress at the formation of the lon- gitudinal splitting crack is apparent. Tests 1 through 5 Fig. 6 shows bond slip prior and up to longitudinal crack- ing. When cracking occurred, slips of 0.1 to 0.2 mm took place at almost constant load. ‘The specimens were then unloaded and reloaded. Fig. 7 shows the post-cracking re- loading bond-slip behavior. Fig. 8 shows the bond stress- vversus-slip reloading relationship after longitudinal cracking had taken place. Fig. 9 indicates the radial displacement at the outer surface of the 3-in, concrete cylinder. Fig. 10 shows a typical specimen failure (Test 4). Both longitudinal and inclined transverse (radial) cracks can be observed. Crushed concrete is present between the ribs. AS the confining pressure was increased, the radial cracks be- ‘came more prominent, as shown by Specimen 5 in Fig. 11 Tests 6 through 10 ‘Test 6 was successfully completed at a constant confining load during pre- and post-cracking. For Test 7 (confining pressure 1500 psi), the radial cracking became so severe that slippage began between the concrete specimen and the outer split pipe. ‘ACI Materials Journal / November-December 1992Fig, 10—Specimen 4 after failure Results from this test were discarded and the remaining specimens were precracked at the lowest confining pressure (500 psi). As a consequence, no results were obtained for the precracking bond-slip relationships as a function of con- fining stress. ‘The initial post-cracking relationships for various confine- ‘ment pressures are detailed in Fig. 12. Fig. 13 shows the complete post-cracking bond stress versus slip relationship. Fig. 14 indicates the radial displacement at the outer surface of the 3-in. concrete cylinder, DISCUSSION Preliminary tests ‘Test PO verifies that (1) without confinement bondis totally, lost very early, and (2) the 8 strips in which the pipe is split provide almost negligible confinement (Fig. 5). Precracking loading ‘The curves are very similar for Tests 3, 4, and 5 (Fig. 6) Tests 1 and 2 ate close to each other but differ from the ‘others in their initial stiffness. For Tests PO and P1, the two ccurves fall within the scatter of Tests 3, 4, and 5. With respect to the cracking load, there appears to be a trend of higher cracking loads for higher confinement, although there is considerable scatter. The scatter in the loading curves and their initial similarity for various confining pressures may be attributed to the following: (1) at the beginning of the pullout tests a major contribution to the behavior is due to adhesion, which is independent of confining pressure; (2) at the beginning of the pullout tests, confining pressures on the bars surfaces are actually smaller than the “nominal” values; 3) eccentricity or misalignment of the reinforcement could affect the slip readings by bending of the bar close to the ‘ACI Materials Journal / November-December 1992 Fig. 11—Specimen 5 after failure SUP aw cowuno ss3u1s ono Fig, 12—Tests 6 through 10: initial post-cracking bond slip concrete face; and (4) specimens for Tests 1 and 2 were slightly oversized (3.15 and 3.1 in. diameter) and did not fit perfectly in the confining ring Postcracking initial loading For Specimens 1 to 5 the post-cracking reloading curves (Fig. 7) are very similar to the pre-cracking loading ones. 599comny S515 avon SUP ow Fig. 13—Tests 6 through 10: post-cracking bond-slip rela~ tionship Similar observations are appropriate, except that in the pre- sent stage adhesion has been overcome. ‘Complete postcracking relationships Fig. 8 and 13 clearly indicate the effect of confinement ‘on bond stress versus slip. The maximum bond stress attained increases significantly with confining pressure, For Test 10, the maximum bond stress is almost three times that for Test 6. The bond stress then decreases until the slip is approxi- ‘mately equal to the clear rib spacing (9.2 or 10.2 mm for ‘Tests 1 through 5 and 6 through 10, respectively). At this point, the concrete between ribs has been crushed and a frictional type of behavior ensues, with a bond stress related to normal stress but independent of slip. Note that, although the concrete strength is lower for Tests 6 through 10 (5570 instead of 5830 psi for Tests 1 through 5), the bond stress is typically higher, indicating better bond characteristics for normal ribs. ‘Athigh confinement (Tests 5 and 10), the post-peak decay is faster than expected. This is attributed to the faster deg- radation produced by high confinement. This indicates the existence of a limiting value for the confining stress beyond which bond behavior is not improved. This is consistent with previous observations.2*2* Radial deformation Fig. 9 and 14 show the radial displacement of the outer concrete specimen fiber for Tests 1 through 5 and 6 through 10, respectively. They show that the radial deformation de- creases as confinement stress increases. For Test 1, it is suspected that radial displacement was slightly inhibited by the specimen’s oversize. The specimens expand laterally after cracking, reach a fairly constant maximum expansion, then start contracting as the interface between reinforcement and concrete deteriorates. Modena, Coltro, and Rossaro” report a similar type of behavior, except for the contraction phase, probably due to their early termination of the tests at a stip of about one-half the Iug spacing Transverse (radial) versus longitudinal cracks Both types of cracking are always present, as seen in Fig. 10 and II. For Tests 1 through 5, the longitudinal crack 600 Fig. 14—Tests 6 through 10: radial displacement histories rapidly became the most important yielding to the bond failure. However, at higher loads the radial cracks were getting more and more pronounced. For Test 7, radial cracks ‘overcame the longitudinal ones and started bond failure. This failure by radial cracking appears similar to that reported by Hungspreug™ for higher confinement, For the reinforcement with normal ribs, the process zone appears to be in excess, of the specimen size, The cracking bond stress appears to be higher and better bond characteristics are apparent. These bars also showed more crushed concrete gathering at the front of the ribs. CONCLUSIONS ‘Twelve specimens consisting of a #6 reinforcing bar em- bedded in a 3-in, diameter concrete cylinder were tested ‘under controlled confinement, From experimental observations on bond slip behavior it ‘was concluded that: 1. Consistent configuration-independent bond stress-ver- sus-slip relationships for a short embedded length can be ‘obtained for various degrees of confining pressure. 2. Inthe precracking range, influence of confinement stress is suspected, but could not be properly established with the present tests. The scatter in results, particularly in the early stages of loading, are attributed to the important role of adhesion (prior to cracking), reduced radial confining stress ‘on the bar surface, possible eccentricity or misalignment of the bar, and small variation in specimen size. 3. In the post-cracking range, confinement stress was clearly influential. Bond stress increased significantly with applied confining stress, indicating the necessity of consid- ering radial stress on the bar as a modeling parameter. The ‘maximum bond stress could be increased by almost 200 percent by increasing the confinement stress from 500 to 4500 psi at the bar level. The effect of confinement on bond behavior appeared less pronounced for the higher confining stresses, 4. In the post-cracking range, radial deformation measured fon the outer concrete surface showed an increase up to a limit value dependent on the confinement level, then a de- crease indicative of interface deterioration ‘5, Bars with normal ribs (at 90 deg with the longitudinal axis) exhibited better bond characteristics than bars. with ‘ACI Materials Journal / November-December 1992inclined ribs. Bars with normal ribs also produced more severe radial cracking and generated a wider process zone. 6. Increasing radial pressure generated more severe radial, cracking CURRENT WORK Current analytical modeling work at the University of California, Davis indicates that the experimental bond stress-slip relationships obtained can be used to accurately model previous tests with very different specimen configu- rations, such as those reported in References 23 and 25, and reproduce the different uniaxial bond stress-slip behaviors, reported. Additional tests with preformed cracks are also being considered to avoid the need for the precracking cycle. ACKNOWLEDGMENT Funding for the present study was provided by the Office of Naval Research Suppor provided by Dr. T: Shugar and Dr. G. Warren of the Naval ‘Civil Engineering Laboratory, Por Hueneme, and Professor L. Herrmann, University of California, Davis, is gratefully acknowledged, REFERENCES 1. Task Committee on Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Strvctures, “Stae-othe-Art Report Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced ASCE, 1982. ond-slip Simulations Using Smeared Cracks andlor Research Report 85.01, Structural Mechanics Group, Civil Engineering Deparment, Delft Universit of Technology, Delf, 1985. 3.Rots,J.G., "Computational Modeling of Concrete Fracture,” PRD the ss, Civil Engineering Department, Delft Univiversity of Technology Del, Sepe. 1988, 4. RILEM Technical Committe 90-FMA, “Fracture Mechanics of Con crete/Applications.” Second Draft Report, State of the Art, Division of Structural Engineering, Lulea University of Technology Sweden, May 1987 ‘5. Lutz, Leroy A., and Gergely, Peter, “Mechanics of Bond and Slip of Deformed Bars in Concrete." ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 64, No. II, Now. 1967, pp. 711-721 6. Gambarova, P, and Karakoc, C., “Shear Confinement Interaction at the Barto Concrete Interface,” Bond in Concrete, Proceedings of the Inter national Conference, Peisley College of Technology, Scotland, Applied Science Publishers, 1982, pp. 82-96 7. Goto, Yukimasa, “Cracks Formed in Concrete Around Deformed Tension Bars," ACI JOuRNAL, Proceedings V. 68, No. 4, Ape. 1971, pp 244-281 8. Gentle, W. H., and Ingraffea, A. R, “Does Bond-Slip Exist?” Mi- cromechanics of Failure of Quas-Britle Materials, Proceedings of the Intemational Conference, Albuquerque, New Mexico, June 1990, 9, Ngo, D, and Scordlis, A. C., "Finite Element Analysis of Reinforced ‘Concrete Beams,” ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 64, No. 3, Mar. 1967, pp. 152-163, 10. Herrmann, L. R., “Finite Element Analysis of Contact Problems.” Journal ofthe Engineering Mechanics Division, ASCE, V. 104, No. EMS, (ct. 1978, pp. 1083-1057. 11, Groot, A. K. De; Kuster, G. M. A; and Monnier, , "Numerical ‘Modelling of Bond: Slip Behavior.” Heron, V. 26, No, 1B, 1981, 90 p. Hermann, LR. Civil nginecring Deparment, University of Califa, Davis, ACI Materials Journal / November-December 1992 12, Schafer, H., “Contribution tothe Solution of Contact Problems with the Aid of Bond Elements,” Computer Methods in Applied Mechanis and Engineering, V6, 1975, pp. 335.35. 13, Keuser, M., and Mehlhor, G., “Finite Element Models for Bond Problems,” Joumal vf Structaral Engineering, ASCE, V. 113, No. 10, Oe. 1987, pp. 2160-2173, 14. Keuser, M.; Mehlhor, G.; and Comelius, V., “Bond Between Prestressed Stel and Concrete—Computer Analysis using ADINA,” Com puters and Structures, V. 17, No. 5-6, 1983, pp. 669-616, 15. Mehihoe, G.; Kolleger, 1; Keuser, Mand Kolmar, W, "Nonlinear Contact Problems—A Finite Element Approach Implemented in ADINA,” Computer and Structures, V. 21, No. 1-2, 1985, pp. 69-80 16. Mehlbom, G., and Keuse, M. “Isoparametic Contact Elements for ‘Analysis of Reinforced Concrete,” Proceedings of a Seminar sponsored by the Japan Society fr the Promotion of Science and the US National Science Foundation, Tokyo, Japan, ASCE, 1985, pp. 329-347. 17, Allwood, R. J. and Bajarwan, A.A. "New Method for Modelling Reinforcement and Bond in Finite Element Analyses of Reinforced Coo- crete," International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, V. 28, 1989, pp. 833-844, 18, Cervera, Mz Hinton, E. and Hassan, 0., “Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Plate and Shell Stractres using 20-Noded Isopara- metre Brick Elements,” Computes and Stractures, V. 25, No.6 pp. 1987, 45-69. 19, Nilson, Arthur H, “Nonlinear Analysis of Reinforced Concrete by the Finite Element Method," ACI JouRwaL, Proceedings V. 65, No.9, Sep 1968, pp. 757-767 20. Untraver, Raymond E. and Henry, Robert L., “Tafluence of Normal Pressure on Bond Strength,” ACI JouRNAL, Proceedings V. 62, No.5, May 1965, pp. 577-586, 21. Doerr, K., "Bond Behavior of Ribbed Reinforcement under Trans- ‘versal Pressure,” Nonlinear Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Spatial Struc ‘res, V. 1, IASS Symposium, Wemnes-Verlg, Dusseldorf, 1978, p. 13. 22, Robins, PJ, and Standish, I G., "Effect of Lateral Pressure on Bond. of Reinforcing Bars in Concrete.” Bond in Concrete, Proceedings of the International Conference, Paisley College of Technology, Scotland, Applied Science Publishers, Essex, 1982, pp. 262-272 23, Eligehausen, R.; Popov; E. Ps and Benero, V. V., “Local Bond ‘Stress Slip Relationships of Deformed Bars under Generalized Excitations,” ‘Report No. UCB/EERC-83/23, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, Oct 1983 24, Navaratnaajah, V, and Speare, PR, “Theory of Transfer Bond Resistance of Deformed Reinforcing Bars in Concrete under Lateral Pres- sure.” Magazine of Concrete Research, V. 39, No. 140, Sept. 1987, pp 161-168 25. Gambarova, PG. Rosati, G. P; and Zass, B., “Stel-t0-Conerete Bond after Concrete Spiting: Test Results.” Materials and Structures ‘Research and Testing (RILEM, Pais), V. 22, No. 127, Jan. 1989, pp. 35-47 26, Gambarova, P.G.; Rosati, G, P; and Zasso, B., “Stes-t0-Conerete Bond after Concrete Splitting: Constitutive Laws and Interface Deterora- Vion.” Materials and Structures, Research and Testing (RILEM, Paris), V 22, No, 127 Jan, 1989, pp. 347-356. 27. Giuriani, Es Plizzai, Gand Schumm, C., “Role of Stirups and Residual Tensile Strength of Cracked Concrete on Bond,” Journal of Strue~ tural Engineering, ASCE, V. 117, No.1, Jan, 1991 28. Hungspreug, S., “Local Bond Between a Steel Bar and Concrete Under High Intensity Cyclic Load,” PRD thesis, Comell University, 1981, 449 pp. 28, Orangun, C.O.; Sirsa, J.O.; and Breen, J.E., "Reevaluation of Test, ata on Development Length and Spices,” ACI JoueNaL, Proceedings V. 74, No. 3, Mar. 1977, pp. 114-122. '30. Modena, C; Colo, T: and and Rossaro, G.P, “Study of Bond Between Stel and Concrete in Presence of Longitudinal Spliting Cracks ‘Tests Under Prescribed Confinements,” Snudi E. Ricerche, V. 10-1988, Politecnico di Milano, 1989, pp. 179-218. (in Italian) 601