Characterisation of steel
reinforcement for RC
structures: An overview and
related issues
Prabir C. Basu, Shylamoni P
P.. and Roshan A. D.
Characterisation of steel reinforcement is as important as that
of concrete ingredients. The paper presents an overview of
characterisation along with some related issues. After briefly
highlighting the mechanics of RC structures, important
characteristics of reinforcement, namely, bond with concrete,
strength, ductility, resistance to corrosion are discussed. The
effects of manufacturing process on the rebar characteristics
are then described. Finally, a comparison of specifications of
standards of different countries dealing with reinforcing steel
is presented. The authors have suggested certain modifications
in the Indian specifications IS 1786.
Steel is the time proven match for reinforcing concrete
structures. Reinforced concrete structure is designed on the
principle that steel and concrete act together to withstand
induced forces. The properties of thermal expansion for both
steel and concrete are approximately the same, this along
with excellent bendability property makes steel the best
material as reinforcement in concrete structures. Another
reason steel works effectively as reinforcement is that it bonds
well with concrete. When passive reinforcement (steel bars)
is employed, the structure is known as reinforced concrete
(RC) structure. In prestressed concrete structure, the
reinforcement (steel wire) is stressed prior to subjecting the
structure to loading, which may be viewed as active
reinforcement. Passive steel reinforcing bars, also known as
rebars, should necessarily be strong in tension and, at the
same time, be ductile enough to be shaped or bent.
Rebars are rolled from billets that are obtained from a
furnace. Billets can be produced either from iron-ore through
the blast furnace converter route, or by melting scraps and
refining the same in the furnace. When billets are produced
from scrap, they are known as re-rollables. IS : 17861 allows
manufacture of billets for reinforcing steel by open hearth,
January 2004 * The Indian Concrete Journal
electric, duplex, basic-oxygen or a combination of these
processes. Higher strength is imparted to rebars either by
post rolling process or by adopting additional measures
during manufacturing of billets. Rebars are generally rolled
in round section. Ribs are indented on the surface of the
deformed rebars or wires during the process of rolling. The
prime objective of such deformation is the enhancement of
bonding with concrete by mechanical interlocking.
In India, construction of reinforced concrete structures
started about 100 years back. Plain mild steel (MS) rebars of
grade Fe-250 were used widely till about 1967. Square twisted
bars (deformed bars) were first introduced in India in 1965.
But this was phased out due to their inherent inadequacies.
The high yield strength was first imparted to the rebars
by raising carbon as well as manganese contents, and to a
great extent, by cold twisting. The cold twisted deformed
(CTD) bars are produced by cold working process, which is
basically a mechanical process. It involves stretching and
twisting of mild steel, beyond the yield plateau, and
subsequently releasing the load. CTD round rebars having
yield strength in the range of 405 MPa (Grade 40) were
introduced in 1967. Since then, there has been an increasing
demand for high strength deformed bars.
Thermomechanically treated (TMT) bars were introduced
in India during 1980-1985. Thermo mechanical treatment is
an advanced heat treatment process in which hot bars coming
out of last rolling mill stand are rapidly quenched through a
series of water jets. Rapid quenching provides intensive
cooling of surface resulting in the bars having hardened
surface with hot core. The rebars are then allowed to cool in
ambient conditions. During the course of such slow cooling,
the heat released from core tempers the hardened surface
while core is turned in to ferrite-pearlite aggregate
composition. TMT process thus changes the structure of
19
 material to a Typical cross sections of MS, CTD and TMT rebars are
c o m p o s i t e shown in Fig 1. For engineering a sound and durable concrete
structure of structure, it is essential to use reinforcement of appropriate
ductile ferrite- characteristics and quality. Characterisation is a process to
p e a r l i t e control and ensure the quality of a material. Principal objective
composition with of characterisation of a material is to ensure that it possesses
tough surface rim the requisite properties necessary for its intended engineering
of tempered usage. Properties of rebars are influenced by the chemical
martensite composition of the steel from which it is manufactured.
providing an Table 1 shows the influence of different chemical ingredients
o p t i m u m of steel on the properties of rebar.
combination of
high strength, ductility, bendability and other desirable Characterisation is generally performed by checking the
properties. TMT bars of grade Fe415, Fe500 and Fe550 are chemical composition and certain specified physical
now available in India. properties. The particular chemical ingredients and physical
properties, which are selected for characterisation, again
Now-a-days, alloy steels are also being introduced as depend on the attributes of the material that are important
reinforcing steel. Microalloying is found to be an efficient for its specified application. A summary of specifications for
way to improve the properties of steel for rebars. rebar characterisations as per Indian standards is given in
Table 2.
Three grades of rebar are presently available in India for
structural use. The rebars are graded according to their Characterisation of steel rebars is as important as that of
specified yield strength. These are Fe415, Fe500 and Fe550. concrete for a sound RC structure of desired strength. Present
CTD rebars of grade more than Fe415 are scarcely available paper tries to address the various aspects of characterisation
in market. However, TMT rebars of Fe500 grade are easily of reinforcement and also related issues, which are important
available in the market. Fe250 grade mild steel rebars are for design. Only passive reinforcement bars falls within the
also available, but these are presently used generally as scope of the paper. Clear understanding of mechanics of
secondary reinforcement such as distribution steel in slabs, reinforced concrete structures helps in understanding the
stirrups in beams and column ties. intricacy involved with the characterisation of rebars.
Moreover, basic knowledge on
Table 1: Influence of different chemical ingredients in steel on properties of rebars manufacturing process of steel
helps in appreciating various facets
No Chemicals Effects on rebars
of the characterisation. These two
Controlling Actual effect
property
aspects are also discussed briefly
1 Carbon (C) Hardness, Higher carbon contributes to the tensile strength of steel, that is, higher load
in the paper along with issues
strength, bearing capacity and vice versa. Lower carbon content less than 0.1 percent related to characteristics of rebars
weldability and will reduce the strength. Higher carbon content of 0.3 percent and above vis-a-vis performance of RC
brittleness makes the steel bar unweldable and brittle.
structure. A comparative study of
2 Manganese Strength and The manganese content in steel is not specified as per IS: 1786. the national standards of a few
(Mn) yield strength However higher manganese content in steel increases the tensile strength
and also the carbon equivalent property.
countries is presented followed by
concluding remarks.
3 Sulphur (S) Present as an Presence of sulphur should be limited as per IS:1786. Presence of higher
impurity in sulphur makes the bar brittle during twisting, as higher sulphur content
steel which brings the hot shot problem during rolling. Brief overview of
increases its
brittleness. mechanics of RC
4 Phosphorus Present as an Higher phosphorus content contributes to the increase in strength and structures
(P) impurity which corrosion resistance properties but brings brittleness due to the formation
increases of low euctoid phosphicles in the grain boundary. Also lowers the impact Reactions are induced within
strength and value at sub zero temperature level (transition temperature). structural elements under the
brittleness action of applied forces. In three-
5 Copper (Cu) Strength and Being a pearlite stabiliser, it increases the strength and corrosion resistance dimensional cartesian co-ordinate
corrosion property systems, these reactions are
resistance
properties translational forces along the three
coordinate axes (axial and two
6 Chromium Weldability Present as an impurity from the scrap and influences carbon equivalent;
(Cr) and corrosion weldability and increases corrosion resistance property. shear forces) and moments about
resistance these three axes (twisting moment
7 Carbon Hardness, This property is required to set the cooling parameters in TMT process and bending moments). Structures
Equivalent tensile strength and a slight variation in carbon equivalent may alter the physical may fail in many ways due to the
(CE or Ceq) and weldability properties. In case of CTD bars, carbon equivalent has a maximum limit action of these induced forces. Out
of 0.42 percent but there is no lower limit prescribed. As such, as long as the
chemical composition and physical properties of raw materials are within of which, three types of failures,
specified limits, the variation in carbon equivalent as in the case of TMT namely, stability failure, strength
bars. failure and serviceability failure are

20 The Indian Concrete Journal * January 2004

Table 2: Summary of specifications for rebar characterisation that tensile steel provided is so low in quantity that the neutral
No Characteristics Specification axis is close to the mid-depth of the rectangular beam (nearer
1. Chemical composition to the compression edge), such that the maximum concrete
(a) Mild steel IS 2026
14
strain, εcu, is attained simultaneously when the tensile rebar is
(i) Carbon yielded3,4. The concept of under reinforced design of beam of
Dia ≤ 20mm
Dia > 20mm singly reinforced section is explained in Fig 2. The maximum
(ii) Sulfur allowable strain in concrete, εcu, under flexure is limited to
(iii) Phosphorus
1
0.0035 as per IS 456 : 20005. Strain in rebar at the limit state of
(b) High strength deformed bars IS 1786
(i) Carbon
collapse could be more and there is no restriction on its
(ii) Sulfur maximum value. This implies that the reinforcing steel should
(iii) Phosphorus have high capability of elongation after yielding. This is a
2. Mechanical properties very important characteristic of reinforcing steel for under-
(a) Mild steel IS 43215 /IS 202614
(i) Ultimate tensile strength
reinforced design.
(ii) Yield stress
Dia ≤ 20mm The concept of under-reinforced section is important for
Dia > 20mm achieving ductile design of structure. One of the important
(iii) Elongation
applications of ductile design is the aseismic design of the
(b) High strength deformed bars IS 17861 6
(i) 0.2 percent proof stress structures . Structures are expected to experience more severe
(ii) Ultimate strength ground motion than the one specified in codes for design.
(iii) Elongation gauge length 5.65 √A Utilising ductile behaviour of the structure is therefore most
1 15
3. Bendability IS 1786 / IS 432 desirable as this enables the structure to withstand higher
4. Tolerance of nominal mass shocks without collapse. Considering this, IS 1893, has laid
Dia ≤ 10mm ± 7 percent per metre run
10 ≤ Dia ≤ 16 ± 5 percent per metre run down regulations so that the structure shall suffer only a
7
Dia > 16mm ± 3 percent per meter run desired level of damage during earthquake of all magnitudes .
5. Ribs of high strength deformed bars IS 17861 Rather, the objective is to ensure that, as far as possible,
Note: Sampling for quality control should satisfy the requirements of IS 10790 structures are able to respond without much structural
damage to shocks of moderate intensities, and without
collapse to shocks of high intensities.
important in most of the design cases. Stability failure usually
relates to overall structural systems, whereas strength failure Shear failure is a brittle type of failure and occurs without
relates to elements of a structure. Serviceability failure is warning. Such type of failure should be avoided as far as
related to both overall structures as well as to individual possible by appropriate design measures. In the shear design,
element. Reinforcement plays a key role in the design and reinforcement is restrained from yielding.
construction of sound and durable structures for strength
The basic principle behind the design of a RC structure is
and serviceability.
to achieve ductile rather than brittle failure of the structure.
Failure modes of RC structural elements due to the Ductility refers to a structure’s ability to undergo large
induced forces (six degrees of freedom) are generally deformation before failure and dissipate more energy. This
categorized in two groups for the design: means that the structure will not fail without sufficient prior
warning, and will be capable of large plastic deformations at
• axial force and flexure near maximum load-carrying capacity. Concrete is
• torsion and shear.
For the design of RC structural elements subjected to bi-
axial bending or shear force (along two axes), bi-axial
moments or shear forces (along two axes) are decoupled to
uniaxial moments or shear forces along each axis and the
design is performed separately for each uniaxial forces along
with corresponding moments. Adequacy of reinforcement
as well as strength of elements against the effect of combined
biaxial moments or forces is checked by satisfying interaction
equations.

For flexure design of the concrete structural elements, it

is desirable to have enough warning time before failure.
Concrete itself cannot provide such warning. It is the
properties of steel reinforcement as well as judicious selection
of its type/quantity, which contribute this attribute to the
designed section. Under-reinforced design of section for
bending moment is important in this respect2,3. The ultimate
strength of under reinforced beams is computed on the basis

January 2004 * The Indian Concrete Journal 21


comparatively brittle material. It is the steel reinforcement
whose ductile property is the main contributor to the overall
ductile behaviour of designed section of a RC structural
element.
IS 456 allows re-distribution of moments for the design of
structural elements, such as slabs and beams, supporting
gravity loads. Studies established that ductility of rebar
enhances the available capacity of concrete section of such
elements for moment re-distribution8, 9.
Important characteristics of reinforcement
Good strength, bond with concrete, thermal expansion
characteristics (similar to concrete) and bendability are prime
attributes which make steel rebars most effective reinforcing
material for engineering of RC structures. Besides strength,
the durability of the structure depends upon rebar quality.
Durability is the ability of the structure to maintain safety
and serviceability criteria during its design life. Durability is
dependent on the condition of concrete and reinforcement.
Corrosion of reinforcement is one of the main factors that
could impair durability. Corrosion can be either due to chloride
intrusion or due to the effect of carbonation. Chemical
composition of reinforcement plays an important role in this
respect.
Two characteristics of rebars — bendability and
weldability — are important for construction. Bendability is
essential from giving requisite shape to the rebar to suit the
demand of the structures. Sometimes, welding of high
diameter rebars is resorted to reduce congestion. Weldability
22
of rebar is also an important factor for
fixing embedded parts in the concrete
before pouring.
To summarise, attributes of
reinforcements that are important for
engineering of sound and durable RC
structures are:
• bond with concrete
• strength
• ductility
• resistance against corrosion.
Enhancement of strength by cold
working process or by changing
chemical composition (for example
increase in carbon content) has
conflicting effect in the ductility and
weldability. Therefore, balancing of
conflicting requirements is required in
fixing the characteristics of rebar to
strike an optimum balance between
strength, ductility, durability and cost.
Bond with concrete
The bond between rebar and concrete
depends upon many factors, such as
shape, geometry of ribs. Steel rebars are generally round in
cross section. To restrict longitudinal movement of the bars
relative to the surrounding concrete, lugs or protrusions called
deformations or ribs are rolled on to the bar surface. For
appropriate bond strength, the deformations of ribs of rebar
1
should satisfy certain specifications .
Strength
Typical stress strain curve of monotonically loaded (tension)
mild steel rebar is shown in Fig 3(a). The curves exhibit an
initial elastic portion, a yield plateau (that is, a yield point
beyond which the strain increases with little or no increase in
stress), a strain hardening range in which stress again increases
with strain, and finally a range in which the stress drops off
until fracture occurs. The slope of the linear elastic portion of
the curve represents the modulus of elasticity of steel. The
stress at the yield point, referred as the yield strength, is a
very important property of steel reinforcement.
Reinforcement is generally characterized by its yield strength.
Stress-strain curves of the steel in compression and
tension are considered to be the same. In case of mild steel,
yielding sometimes is accompanied by an abrupt decrease in
stress, and the stress-strain diagram has two stress (yield)
levels, which are marked as A and B in Fig 3(a). Points A and
B are referred as upper and lower yield strengths respectively.
The position of the upper yield point depends on the speed
of testing, the shape of the section and the form of the
specimen. The lower yield strength is usually considered as
the true characteristic of the material and simply referred as
yield strength, which is around 250 MPa for mild steel rebars.
The Indian Concrete Journal * January 2004
 In cold working (stretching and twisting) process, the mild
steel bar is subjected to repeated loading. the steel will follow
a similar linear elastic path, as that of original mild steel till it
reaches the point where unloading started, which becomes
the new yield point, Fig 3(b). The cold working of steel can
cause the shortening of the yield plateau or even eliminating
it completely. Desired increase in yield strength is achieved
by appropriate selection of unloading point
Fig 3(b). This is why high strength bars generally do not
exhibit definite yield strength as that in case of mild steel.
Fig 3(c) presents a typical stress strain curve of cold twisted
high strength rebar. Cold working process is simple, reliable
as well as cost effective, but reduces elongation of rebar
compared to mild steel. In India most of the high strength
deformed bars are manufactured by cold working process.
CTD bars does not exhibit specific yield point and 0.2 percent
proof stress is taken as yield strength, Fig 3(c).
to the strain corresponding to 0.2 percent proof stress. For a
Stress-strain curve of TMT bars is similar to that for MS
given value of εy, µ increases with εu, which increases with
bars, Fig 3(d). But in case of TMT bars, there are no distinct
elongation of rebars. This makes elongation a good indicator
yield plateau and two yield points.
of ductility and is used as a parameter to characterise the
The actual yield strength of the rebar is usually somewhat rebar for ductility.
higher than that considered in design. The specified yield
Under the repetitive loading when the load is released
strength normally refers to a guaranteed minimum value of
before failure, the specimen will recover along a stress-strain
the yield strength — lower yield strength in case of mild steel
path that is parallel to the original curve, Fig 3(b), with perhaps
rebar. Fatigue strength of reinforcement depends on its yield
a small hysteresis and/or strain-hardening effect. The virgin
strength and rebars having higher fatigue strength have
curve is then closely followed, as if unloading had not
better capability of withstanding dynamic loads.
occurred. Hence, the monotonic stress-strain curve gives a
Bond strength signifies its ability for holding concrete good idealization for the envelope curve of rebar under
around it. It depends on the reinforcing properties of the repeated loading of the same sign2.
bars, such as yield strength, adhesion with concrete matrix,
indentation (configuration of deformed shape).

Ductility
During initial period of reinforced concrete construction,
requirement of ductility was considered synonymous with
bendability. However, ductility of reinforcement has been
found to have far reaching effects on the safety and durability
of the structure. The physical property of rebar, which is
responsible for ductility, is its elongation. As discussed earlier,
ductility refers to ability of dissipating energy and large
deformation. Ductility of a beam under flexure, µf, is given
by,

φu
µf = φ (1)
y

Where, φu and φy are the curvature of the section at collapse

and yield state respectively. Ductility of rebar, which has
significant influence on µf, is expressed as the ratio of ultimate
deformation at collapse to deformation at yielding. Referring
to Fig 3(a), the ductility of a mild steel rebar under the
monotonic tensile loading is given by

εu
µ = ε (2)
y

Where µ, εu and εy are ductility factor, ultimate strain and

yield strain of the rebars respectively. In CTD bars, εy refers

January 2004 * The Indian Concrete Journal 23


Requirement of ductility is more important where the
structure is subjected to cyclic loading (for example,
earthquake load) or impact. If axial loading of cyclic nature
(tension-compression) is applied to a mild steel specimen in
the yield range, a stress-strain curve of the type presented in
Fig 4 is obtained. Due to Bauschinger effect, that is, strain
softening that takes place under reversed loading, the stress-
strain curve becomes nonlinear at a stress much lower than
the initial yield strength2. This behaviour of steel bars is
strongly influenced by previous strain history; time and
temperature also have an effect. The unloading path follows
the initial elastic slope.
An idealisation by Kato et al22, based on observation of
experimental stress-strain data, obtains the stress-strain curve
for reversed loading from the monotonic curves for tension
and compression in the manner illustrated in Fig 5. The
reversed load diagram (Fig 5(a)) is divided in curves
corresponding to loadings attained for the first time,
unloading branches (straight lines), and loadings attained in
previous cycles (softened curves due to the Bauschinger
effect). The parts of the diagram of the same sign can be
plotted in sequence, as in Fig 5(b). Connecting the segments
of the first loading branches end for end (Fig 5(c)) leads to a
diagram similar to the monotonic curves. A difference exists
at the initial part of the curve in compression, which is
considerably curved, compared with the monotonic curve.
The above discussion essentially
indicates that the behaviour with respect
to ductility of rebar, against monotonic,
repetitive and cyclic loading can be
characterised by means of ultimate
strain at fracture or total elongation. The
requirement of minimum strain at
fracture or minimum elongation is
specified in codes. Such specification is
essential for the safety of the structure
and in order to ensure that the steel is
ductile enough to undergo large
deformations before fracture. It may be
noted that CTD bar has lesser elongation
before fracture than the mild steels.
24
Resistance against corrosion
Resistance of rebars against corrosion depends upon its
chemical composition. Corrosion of rebars in reinforced
concrete structure is a complex phenomenon. Corrosion of
steel occurs due to a number of initiating causes that expose
the rebars to moisture and oxygen either by carbonation or
chloride intrusion. During the process of cement hydration,
a thin protective alkaline passive film is formed around rebars.
Corrosion process is initiated when this protective film is
broken. Though good quality concrete is a pre-requisite for
the corrosion resistance of RC structure, the quality of rebars
has also a significant influence on it.
No carbon steel reinforcement bar could be termed as
corrosion resistant steel; one type may have lower corrosion
potential than the other. Experience shows that MS rebars
are more corrosion resistant than CTD bars. Possible reasons
for higher corrosion resistance of MS reinforcement bars
compared to that of CTD and also of TMT rebar are listed
below.
(i) In the manufacture of MS bars, a thin film is formed
around the bars during cooling operation, and this
film acts as a barrier. This barrier retards the initiation
of corrosion in MS bars. In the case of TMT bars this
film almost does not exist, while for CTD bars the
thin film is lost during the twisting process.
(ii) During the cold twisting process a part of residual
strain is withheld in the periphery of the CTD bars.
This locked-in strain initiates the corrosion process
faster.
(iii) The level of induced stresses in CTD and TMT rebars
are much higher than those in MS bars which again
enhances the potential of initiating corrosion .
Effect of manufacturing process on rebar
characteristics
Production of high-strength CTD bars are achieved through
three stages:
(i) manufacturing of billets
(ii) rolling of billets into rebars, and
The Indian Concrete Journal * January 2004
 (iii) process to impart further strength.
Production of TMT rebars involves only the first two
processes. All the stages have significant influence on the
characteristics of rebars. In general, both the quality of basic
materials used in rolling the rebars and its manufacturing
process are important. Quality of metal scrap has utmost
impact on the performance of rebars when re-rollables are
used. Kaushik and Singh discussed in detail the influence of
manufacturing process on the quality of rebars11.
The so called mild steel rebars are rolled from general
carbon steel billet without adopting any special measures or
imparting further strength. In India, more than 50 percent of
the rebars are manufactured from the re-rollables
manufactured from the scrap materials such as scrap rails,
automobile scrap, defense scrap, defectives from steel plants,
and scrap generated from ship breaking or discarded
structures. Composition of scrap steel was fixed based on the
purpose of original usage from which the scrap is generated.
Such composition may not always be suitable for
manufacturing of rebars having required characteristics.
It is necessary to refine the molten scrap to control the
contents of carbon, sulphur, phosphorus etc. to desired levels.
Though lower carbon content reduces the strength of steel,
higher value makes steel brittle and unweldable. Higher
sulphur and phosphorus content makes the steel brittle, even
though higher phosphorus content may have beneficial effect
like increasing strength and corrosion resistance. All these
conflicting aspects indicate that certain level of refinement of
the composition of steel is necessary. The desired refinement
can be suitably achieved with the use of an electric arc furnace,
which unfortunately is not being employed now-a-days due
to prohibitive cost of production. Induction furnace is mostly
used in India for manufacturing of rebars from scraps. It is
well known that induction furnace cannot yield sufficient
refinement of molten scrap to produce billets of desired
quality.
Enhancement of rebar strength is generally achieved by
three processes:
(i) cold working,
(ii) thermo mechanical treatment (TMT), and
(iii) micro alloying.
The first process may be viewed as post rolling process
while the second one is a part of rolling process and the third
one is associated with the billet production process.
The technology of producing CTD bars had been
introduced in mechanised cooling bed across the country for
a long time. Proper equipment, manpower and overall good
quality of raw material are necessary for achieving
appropriate quality of CTD bars. The effects of process
parameters are established. For example, tensile strength
can be controlled by pitch of the twist. The limitation of the
process is that it cannot produce bars below 8 mm diameter.
For the TMT process, rolling mill with automatic cooling
bed is essential. Proper control during cooling of the rebars is
January 2004 * The Indian Concrete Journal
essential to ensure the quality of the finished products. Good
quality of raw material (billet) and skilled manpower are of
course the prerequisites for producing TMT bars of desired
quality. The effect of process parameters on its characteristics
are yet to be established. Corrosion resistance of TMT bars is
claimed to be better than that of the CTD bars but certainly
not better than MS bars. TMT rebars are more ductile and
have better capability to withstand dynamic loading as their
elongation is expected to be better at higher strengths.
However, their fire resistance property is still in experimental
stage.
In micro alloying process, strengthening micro alloys like
Niobium (Nb), Vanadium (V), Boron (B) and Titanium (Ti)
are added during the production of billet. When individual
ingredient or combination does not exceed 0.3 percent, the
strength of rebars is increased. Other properties depend on
other ingredients as usual. This is an expensive process and
generally not employed in India.
Performance by RC structures greatly depends on the
quality of rebars; this need not require any emphasis. The
danger is due to defective and/or substandard rebars found
occasionally in the market. Defective or substandard rebars
are produced due to several reasons: lack of quality control
in the basic material used in the billet production process,
rolling process and post rolling process. Defective bars are
those that can be detected by visual inspection. However, on
many occasions, visual inspection fails to identify substandard
bars, which are generally identified by testing — mechanical
tests to determine strength and stress-strain curve are very
useful tools for this purpose. Substandard bars are more
dangerous than the defective ones, as they cannot be detected
visually by the users, especially in smaller projects.
Fig 6 contains stress-strain curves of three samples of
commercially-procured TMT rebars marketed as Fe 415 grade
steel. Stress-strain curve of Fe415-CTD bar, as given in SP16
is also plotted in Fig 6. The difference between the three bars
are obvious from this figure. Yield strength of sample-1 was
tested as 511 MPa and its elongation is quite high, this sample
is acceptable as per IS I7861. Yield strength of sample-2 is
acceptable but its elongation is low and hence is liable to be
rejected. Sample-3 was not acceptable as its yield strength
was 380 MPa — lower than the specified value.
Performance of these three rebars in design is illustrated
with an example illustrated in Fig 7. The section was designed
for the induced moments and shear force using Fe415 grade
12
CTD rebars following the provision of IS 456 and IS 13920 .
Moment curvature (M-φ) diagram of this section is evaluated
for the design stress-strain curve given in SP 164 for CTD
rebar of grade Fe415 and those given in Fig 6. It may be
mentioned that there is no design stress-strain curves
specified by Bureau of Indian Standards for TMT either in IS
456 or SP 16 or IS 13920, though IS 13920 explicitly allows the
usage of TMT bars. These M-φ curves are plotted in Fig 8.
The curve evaluated using sample-1 is almost similar with
that evaluated using CTD bars specified in SP-16 in linear
zone and higher in nonlinear zone. M-φ curve using sample-
3 always falls below the curve determined using CTD rebar
25
 Table 3: Grades of rebar considered in the comparative study
Group India USA Russian Australian / European
New Zealand
_ b _ _ _
1 Grade-300
a b d f g
2 Fe415 Grade-420 A III Grade 430 B450C
Grade-420 c
a b e f g
3 Fe500 Grade-520 A 500 S Grade 500 L B500A
f g
500 N B500B
500 Ef
a _ _ _
4 Fe550 -
1
Notes: a - Rebar conforming to IS 1786 ; b - Rebar conforming to ASTM A 615/A
615M17; c - Rebar conforming to ASTM A 706/A 706M18; d - Rebar conforming to
16 19
GOST 5781 ; e - Rebar conforming to STAOCHEM ; f - Rebar conforming to AS/
20 13
NZS 4671 ; g - Rebar conforming to prEN 10080-1 -1999

studied along with Indian Standard specifications. Three

specified in SP16. The ultimate moment of the section is
lower even though the curvature is higher in case of sample-
3. Similar trend is observed for CTD bars of SP16. But in case
of samples-1 and 2, while the ultimate moment is higher, the
curvature at failure is lower indicating low ductility of the
section. It is evident from Fig 8 that yielding of tension steel
occurs in sample-3 and CTD bars of SP16 whereas the ultimate
moment in sample 1 and 2 are achieved when concrete
crushes. The moment-curvature diagrams of sample-3 and
CTD bars of SP16 indicate well defined points for yield and
ultimate curvatures and the curvature ductility factor is around
1.8. For samples 1 and 2, though their yield stresses are above
acceptable limits, the moment curvature diagrams are
characterised by a lack of well spaced points for yield and
ultimate curvature of the specimens. Both the specimens show
almost a linear behaviour before sudden failure.
Variability of properties of rebars have very significant
influence on the safety of structure. The variability can be
minimised if the desired level of quality control in each phase
of production is strictly adhered to. Statistical analysis of the
test results of strength of about 500 samples were carried out
for rebars designated as Grade-415 and the results are as
below.
Yield strength Ultimate strength
Mean value 509.8 MPa 620.68 MPa
Standard deviation 43 43.61
Coefficient of variation 8.93 7.02
The coefficient of variation of the yield strength, in the
opinion of the authors, is on the higher side; it should be
within 5 percent.
grades of rebar; Fe415, Fe500 and Fe550 or their equivalent
are taken for this exercise and the equivalent grades adopted
in the USA, European nations, Australia/New Zealand and
Russian Federation are given in Table 3. Different grades of
reinforcement, which are commonly used, are clustered in
four groups. It is noted that there is only one grade of ASTM
A706/A706M rebar available, which is Grade-420
recommended for earthquake resistant design. Australian/
New Zealand specification allows three categories of rebars
of Grade-500: Class L (low ductility) – 500L, Class N (normal
ductility) – 500N, and Class E (high ductility for earthquake
prone region) – 500E. Similar observation can be made on
Eurocode.
From sustainability view point, the use of steel from scrap
is inevitable now-a-days. In the USA and Europe, systems
11
exist for quality control of scrap to be used for steel making .
Example of such systems are: Institution of Scrap Iron and
Steel (ISIS), which provides code numbers that relate to 29
different types of scrap in the USA, and similar system by the
Committee of National Scrap Federations and Association of
the Common Market (COFENAF) in Europe. Unfortunately,
no such system exists in India for controlling the scrap used
in steel making.
There exists a high risk in using rebars, re-rolled from
scrap materials that do not adhere to the quality requirement
of basic material in line with the relevant national
specifications. Again, it may not always be possible for small
users of rebars to institute quality control measures before
procurement. Branding system is useful in this respect.
American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) has established
a standard for branding of deformed reinforcing bars. The
branding system consists of marking the following on the
reinforcing bars,

• Manufacturer’s identity mark

Comparison of specifications of different
countries
Practices followed in different countries, for characterisation
of rebars are outlined in the specifications published by the
respective national bodies. A comparison of specifications of
different countries would help to understand the status of IS
specification vis-à-vis practices followed in other countries.
Specifications followed in the USA, European nations (EN),
Australia/New Zealand and Russian Federation (RF) were
• Bar size
• Type of steel: new billet (-N-), rolled rail steel (-I-) or
rolled axle steel (-A-)
Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) has not specified any
such system. The branding system may not be a full proof
system. But, this is an effective system for a reasonable level
of control, under the action of market dynamics, in selecting

26 The Indian Concrete Journal * January 2004

Table 4: Chemical composition of group-2 rebar (grade: 415 to 430) contents is in general higher in IS 1786 than
Item IS 1786
(a,b)
ASTM Russian European those in ASTM A615M and 706M, Russian and
Percentage Variation over 615M (c) 706M European specifications. This also increases the
maximum specified percentage by percentage risk of higher brittleness of Indian rebars. IS
maximum manufacturer by purchaser 1786 and ASTM A615/A615M do not put
limit, percentage,
maximum limitation on the carbon equivalent, while
ASTM A706/A706M and European code
Carbon 0.30 0.02 - 0.30 0.33 0.2-0.29 0.22
specify such limitation. However, IS 1786
Sulphur 0.060 0.005 - 0.045 0.053 0.05 0.05
specifies limits on variation over specified
Phosphorus 0.060 0.005 0.06 0.035 0.043 0.045 0.05
maximum limits of carbon, sulphur and
Sulphur and 0.11 0.010 - - - - -
Phosphorus phosphorus. It also limits the quantity of micro
Manganese - - - 1.50 1.56 1.2-1.6 - alloying elements.
Silicon - - - 0.50 0.55 0.6-0.9 -
The mechanical properties of rebars,
Nitogen - - - - - - 0.012
(d) (e) whose minimum values are generally given
Carbon - - - 0.55 - - 0.5
equivalent in most of the specifications, are yield strength
Nickel - - -
-
- 0.3 - (0.2 percent proof stress in case of CTD bars),
Copper - - - - - 0.3 - ultimate strength (or maximum tensile
Chromium - - - - - 0.3 - strength) and elongation as parameters for
Notes: characterisation. Following observations could
(a): For guaranteed weldability, the percentage of carbon shall be restricted to 0.25 percent maximum. be made from the comparative study.
(b): Addition of micro alloying elements is not mandatory for any of the above grades. When strengthening
elements like Nb (Niobium), V (Vanadium), B (Boron) and Ti (Titanium) are used individually or in • Ratio of ultimate strength (tensile
combination, the total contents shall not exceed 0.30 percent; in such case manufacturer shall supply strength) to yield strength decreases
the purchaser or his authorized representative a certificate stating that the total contents of strengthening
elements in the steel do not exceed the specified limit.
with increase in yield strength in IS
(c): (i) An analysis of each heat of steel shall be made by the manufacturer from test samples taken preferably
1786. Similar observation is made from
during the pouring of the heats. The percentage of carbon, manganese, phosphorus, and sulphur the specifications of other countries.
shall be determined. The phosphorus content thus determined shall not exceed 0.06 percent.
(ii) An analysis may be made by the purchaser from finished bars. The phosphorus content thus
• Differences between the specified
determined shall not exceed by more than 25 percent of above value. values of minimum tensile strength and
(d): Carbon equivalent, CE, shall be calculated using the following formula: minimum yield strength of IS 1786 are
% M n %C u % N i %C r % M o %V lower than those of ASTM, AS/NZS,
CE = %C + + + + − −
6 40 20 10 50 10 GOST and STOACHEM for
(e): Carbon equivalent, Ceq, shall be calculated using the following formula: corresponding grades of rebar.
Mn Cr + M o + V N i + Cu • ASTM A706/A706M and AS/NZS 4671
C eq = C + + +
6 5 15 specifies both minimum and maximum
yield strengths.
requisite quality of steel depending on their usage, especially • Specified value of minimum elongation generally
for small users. decreases with the increase of steel grade.
Rebars falling under groups 1 and 4, Table 3, are no longer • Minimum elongations specified for Fe 415, Fe 500, Fe
used in India now, while those under groups-2 and 3 are 550 grade rebars in IS 1786, Grade 420 rebars in ASTM
predominantly used. Findings of comparative study of these A706/A706M; and Grade 500E and 430 in AS/NZS
groups, 2 and 3, are discussed in the
present paper. Comparison of chemical Table 5: Mechanical properties of group-2 rebar (grade: 415 to 430)
composition and mechanical properties
specified in IS 1786, ASTM A615/ Attributes IS 1786
615M
ASTM
706M
Australian / Russian
New Zealand
European

A615M, ASTM A706/A706M, Russian Tensile 10 percent more 620 550

(a)
Ratio of ultimate 585 Ratio of ultimate
and European standards of these two strength than the actual tensile strength to tensile strength to yield
groups are given in Tables 4 to 7. The yield stress but not yield strength should strength should be ≥
less than 485 MPa be ≥ 1.15 and ≤ 1.50 1.15 and ≤ 1.35
comparison of chemical composition
indicates that limits on the carbon Yield 415 420 420 ≥ 410 395 450
content is in general lower in Russian Strength,
and European specifications in minmum
comparison to IS 1786, though the limit Yield
Strength, - - 540 ≤ 520 - -
specified in ASTM A706M is similar to maximum
that of IS 1786. Allowing high carbon Elongation 14.5 For bar # 10 9 14 ≥ 10 14 7.5
content implies Indian rebars have the For bar # 13, 16 9 14
risk of possessing lesser ductility in For bar # 19 9 14
For bar # 22, 25 8 12
comparison to that of other countries. For bar # 29, 32, 36 7 12
Limits on the sulphur and phosphorus For bar # 43, 57 7 10

January 2004 * The Indian Concrete Journal 27

Table 6: Chemical composition of group-3 rebar (grade: 500 to 520)
Item IS 1786(a,b) ASTM 615(c) Russian European
Carbon 0.30 - 0.22 0.22
Sulphur 0.055 - 0.05 0.05
Phosphorus 0.055 0.06 0.05 0.05
Sulphur and 0.105 - -
Phosphorus
Manganese - - 1.6 -
Silicon - - 0.9 -
Nitrogen - - 0.012 0.012
Carbon equivalent
(d)
Cequiv - - 0.50 0.50
Nickel - - - -
Copper - - - -
Chromium - - - -
Notes:
(a):For guaranteed weldability, the percentage of carbon shall be restricted to 0.25
percent maximum.
(b):Addition of micro alloying elements is not mandatory for any of the above grades.
When strengthening elements like Nb (Niobium), V (Vanadium), B (Boron) and
Ti (Titanium) are used individually or in combination, the total contents shall
not exceed 0.30 percent; in such case manufacturer shall supply the purchaser or
his authorized representative a certificate stating that the total contents of
strengthening elements in the steel do not exceed the specified limit.
requirements of minimum elongation and ultimate and yield
(c): (i) An analysis of each heat of steel shall be made by the manufacturer from test strengths specified in GOST, STOACHEM and European stand-
samples taken preferably during the pouring of the heats. The percentage of ards also ensure inelastic deformability of the structural mem-
carbon, manganese, phosphorus, and sulphur shall be determined. The
phosphorus content thus determined shall not exceed 0.06 percent.
bers.
(ii) An analysis may be made by the purchaser from finished bars. The phosphorus 22
content thus determined shall not exceed by more than 25 percent of above As per ACI 318 , rebar complying with ASTM A706/
value. A706M is to be used in earthquake-resistant design of concrete
(d):Carbon equivalen, Ceq, shall be calculated using the following formula:
Mn Cr + M o + V N i + Cu structures. In Australia and New Zealand, rebars of grade
C eq = C + + +
6 5 15 500E and 430 of AS/NZS 4761 are used for earthquake-
resistant design. In earthquake-resistant design where ductile
behaviour of structure is required (for example, design
4671 are higher than those specified for corresponding against the earthquake forces), it is undesirable to have actual
rebars in ASTM A615/A615M; and Grade 500L and yield strength much higher than its minimum specified value
500N of AS/NZS 4671. that is considered in design. This is because higher the actual
yield strength of rebars, higher would be the ultimate moment
Requirements of minimum elongation and that of tensile capacity of a RC section. Again, increase in flexural strength
strength or ultimate strength shall not be less than 1.25 times of a member will enhance the shear demand on the member
the actual yield strength in case of ASTM A706/A706M en- under seismic loads. Fig 9 shows the increase in shear demand
sure adequate inelastic deformability of the reinforcement, with the increase in yield strength for the RC beam section of
which then translates into inelastic deformability of structur- Fig 7. This scenarios could lead to higher risk of brittle shear
al members. The tensile strength of grades 500E and 430 failure of the member rather than a ductile flexure failure,
rebars by AS/NZS 4671 is specified to fall within 1.15 to 1.4 which is against the spirit of safe aseismic design criteria of
(for 500E grade) or 1.5 (for 430 grade) times the characteris- RC section. From this consideration, specification of both
tics yield strength, which is used in design. Minimum elonga- minimum and maximum yield strengths in ASTM A706/
tion is required to be more than or equal to 10 percent to A706M and AS/NZS 4671 (for rebars to be used in seismic
ensure inelastic deformability of the structural members. The

Table 7: Mechanical properties of group-3 rebar (Grade: 500 to 520)

Attributes IS 1786 ASTM 615 M Australian/ New Zealand Russian European
500L 500N 500E B500A B500B
Tensile 8 percent more than 690 Ratio of ultimate Ratio of ultimate Ratio of ultimate 600 Ratio of ultimate Ratio of ultimate
strength the actual yield tensile strength tensile strength tensile strength to yield tensile strength to tensile strength to
stress but not less to yield strength to yield strength strength should be ≥ yield strength yield strength
than 545 MPa should be ≥ 1.03 should be ≥ 1.08 1.15 but ≤ 1.40 should be ≥ 1.05 should be ≥ 1.08
Yield 500 520 ≥ 500 ≥ 500 ≥ 500 500 500 500
strength,
minimum
Yield - - ≤ 750 ≤ 650 ≤ 600 - - -
strength,
maximum
Elongation 12 For bar # 10 - ≥ 1.5 ≥ 5.0 ≥ 10.0 14 2.5 5.0
For bar # 13, 16 -
For bar # 19 7
For bar # 22, 25 7
For bar # 29, 32, 36 6
For bar # 43, 57 6

28 The Indian Concrete Journal * January 2004

design) is effective. This important aspect is missing in IS
1786.
It is not possible for direct comparison on elongation as
different countries have different specifications for testing
elongation. However, the requirements of elongation
specified in IS 1786 is in line with other international
specifications for Fe 415 and Fe 500 grades from ductility
consideration. Fe 550 grade steel falls short of it. IS 1786 does
not guarantee the requirement of minimum ratio of tensile
strength to minimum yield strength for inelastic deformability
as are the cases of ASTM A706/A706M. Moreover, IS1786
does not specify both the minimum and maximum yield
strengths for safeguarding against brittle shear failure.
Specification of IS 1786 seems to be somewhat
conservative as far as design for ductility of rebars is required.
Specifications of Fe 415 grade may guarantee the attributes
of ductility. But, this cannot be stated for other grades,
particularly for Fe 550. Detailed study is required for using
this grade of rebars in the design requiring ductility. Cautious
approach may be solicited before using Fe 550 grade steel in
the design of earthquake-resistant design following
stipulations of IS189319.
No codes specifies any limitation on the statistical
parameters of the reinforcement properties such as yield
strength. It was seen in the discussion of preceding section
that coefficient of variation of yield strength could increase
due to variability in the production process. The safety in
design is adversely affected with the increase in coefficient of
variation of yield strength. This calls for a need in specifying
coefficient of variation on the yield strength of rebars, at
least, for projects of higher importance.
Concluding remarks
Characterisation of steel reinforcement is as important as
that of concrete ingredients for engineering sound and durable
concrete structures. Manufacturing process, design
requirements and construction method have significant
impact on characterisation of rebars. Chemical composition
and mechanical properties like yield strength, ultimate
strength and elongation are generally considered for
characterisation of rebars. The ribs on the surface of the
deformed bars also need to be characterised.
Strength, ductility and corrosion resistant properties of
rebars are important from design considerations. From
construction point of view, bendability and weldability of
rebar are two important characteristics. The required ductility
of rebars could be guaranteed against all type of loadings,
that is, monotonic, repetitive and reversed loading by
elongation.
It is inevitable to re-roll rebars from metal scraps both
from the sustainability and economic angles. A degree of
control on scrap metal is necessary to manufacture requisite
quality of rebars. Well-defined systems exist in the USA and
Europe for this purpose but, not in India. Similar system is
necessary to implement requisite control, especially in the
present free market regime. In addition, branding system to
January 2004 * The Indian Concrete Journal
identify whether the rebar is manufactured from new steel
or scrap is needed. This will help the small users, as a mean of
preliminary quality control.
A maximum limit for yield strength is desirable to be
specified in standards used for earthquake-resistant design.
The absence of such a maximum limit may lead to brittle
failure (shear) of the structure. Requirements specified in IS
1786 for Fe 415 grade rebars are in line with the requirements
of other countries for ductile design. However, this does not
hold good for rebars of grade Fe 550 as per IS 1786. Cautious
approach should be adopted in using rebar grades higher
than Fe 415, especially Fe 550 grade, where ductility of rebars
is necessary for inelastic deformation of structural members
as demanded by design philosophies. Such design cases are
earthquake-resistant design, design for impact load, design
of slabs/beams, with adjustment of support moments/load,
against gravity load, etc.
TMT bars are used presently in India for construction of
concrete structure. Neither IS 456 nor SP 16 provides design
stress strain curve of TMT rebar. Use of the design curve of
CTD bar is not correct. BIS should come out with design
stress-strain curve and design value of the yield strength of
TMT bars.
A limitation on coefficient of variation on yield strength
of rebars is desirable for the project of higher importance.
Acknowledgement
Authors thankfully acknowledge the help and cooperation
rendered by Dr C. S. Viswanatha of Torsteel Research
Foundation, Bangalore in preparation of the paper.
References
1. ______Indian standard specification for high strength deformed steel bars and
wires for concrete reinforcement (Third Revision), IS 1786 : 1985, Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi
2. PARK, R. and PAULAY, T. Reinforced Concrete Structures, John Willey & Sons,
1975, New York.
3. PURUSHOTHAMAN, P. Reinforced Concrete Structural Elements — Behaviour,
Analysis and Design, Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Ltd, 1984, New
Delhi.
4. ______Design aids for reinforced concrete to IS 456 : 1978, SP 16, Bureau of
Indian Standards, New Delhi.
5. ______Plain and reinforced concrete – Code of practice, IS 456, Fourth revision,
September 2000, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
6. BASU, PRABIR C. Seismic upgradation of buildings: An overview, The Indian
Concrete Journal, Mumbai, August 2002, Vol 76, No 8, pp. 461-475.
7. ______Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures, Part 1 General
provisions and Buildings, IS 1893, 2002, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
8. GRAVINA, R.J. and WARNER, R.F. Moment re-distribution in indeterminate RC
beams and slabs constructed with 500 MPa Grade, Class L and Class N
reinforcing steels, Proceedings of the Concrete Institute of Australia conference,
2001.
9. GILBERT, R.I. The impact of 500 MPa reinforcement on the ductility of concrete
structures – Revision of AS 3600, Proceedings of the Concrete Institute of
Australia Conference, 2001.
10. BISHNOI, L. R. and BASU, PRABIR C., Methodology for rehabilitation of aged
nuclear safety related concrete structures, Proceedings of first national
29
 symposium on ageing management of nuclear facilities (AMNF-94), January 13-
15, 1994, BARC, Mumbai.
11. KAUSHIK, S.K. and SINGH, B. Influence of steel-making processes on the quality
of reinforcement, The Indian Concrete Journal, July 2002, Vol. 76, No 7,
pp. 407-412.
12. ______Ductile detailing of reinforced concrete structures subjected to seismic
forces - Code of practice, IS 13920 : 1993, Bureau of Indian Standards, New
Delhi.
13. ______European standard on steel for the reinforcement of concrete- weldable
reinforcing steel, prEN 10080-1, 1999, European Committee for
Standardization, Brussels.
14. __________ Indian standard specification steel for general structural purposes
(Fourth Revision), IS 2026: 1985, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
15. ______Indian standard for mild steel and medium tensile steel bars and hard-
drawn steel wire for concrete reinforcement (Third Revision), IS 432 (part 1):
1982, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
16. ______USSR standard of hot rolled steel for reinforcement of ferro concrete
structure, GOST 5781-83, 1983, Moscow, Russian Federation.
17. ______Standard specification for deformed and plain billet-steel bars for concrete
reinforcement, ASTM A 615/A 615M, American Society of Testing Materials,
USA.
18. ______Standard specification for low-alloy steel deformed and plain bars for concrete
reinforcement, ASTM A 706/A 706M-01, American Society of Testing
Materials, USA.
19. ______Rolled material of periodic profile of reinforcement steel, STOACHEM 7-
93, 1993, Moscow, Russian Federation, USA.
20. ______Steel reinforcing materials, AS/NZS 4671: 2001, Standards Association
of New Zealand.
21. ______Building code requirements for reinforced concrete, ACI-318, 1999,
American Concrete Institute, USA.
22. KATO. B, AKIYAMA, H. and YAMANOUCHI, Y. Predictable properties of material
under incremental cyclic loading, Sympoisum on resistance and ultimate
deformability of structures acted on by well-defined repeated loads, Reports of
working commissions, Vol 13, International Association for Bridge and
Structural Engineering, Lisbon, 1973, pp 119-124.
2003 ICJ Bound Volume Available
The ICJ Bound Volumes have always proved to be a useful
ready reference to our readers. We have now brought out the
latest bound volume of the year 2003, due to enormous
readership demand, which we are sure will be of great benefit to
you. The following bound volumes are also available with us:
1995, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002.
Each volume consists of twelve issues of the corresponding year
and is available for Rs. 700/-* only.Please mention the year of
the bound volume desired by you, while placing an order.
Please send us your remittance in favour of "The Associated
Cement Cos. Ltd.". Cheques will be accepted only for Mumbai,
Navi Mumbai and Thane. For outstation, only DDs will be
accepted.
Contact:The Circulation Manager, The Indian Concrete Journal
The Associated Cement Cos. Ltd, Research & Consultancy Directorate, CRS
Complex, L.B.S. Marg, Thane 400 604.
Tel: +91 (022) 55973965; Fax:+91 (022) 2582 0962;
E-mail: info@icjonline.com *RATES APPLICABLE IN INDIA ONLY
30
Dr Prabir C. Basu is presently the director, civil and
structural engineering division of Atomic Energy
Regulatory Board (AERB), Mumbai. He graduated
from the Bengal Engineering College, Shibpore,
Howrah and obtained his M-Tech degree from the
Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur. He was
awarded the Commonwealth Scholarship for research
at Liverpool University, UK which led him to his PhD degree.
Before joining AERB, Dr Basu worked with Development
Consultants Ltd and M.N. Dastur and Company, Calcutta where
he had commendable achievements to his credit in design and
project engineering of high-tech projects in the strategic sectors.
Dr Basu has made significant contribution in the development of
high performance concrete (HPC) and preparation of specifications
for the construction of the primary containment dome of the
Nuclear Power Plant at Kaiga using HPC. His work in the
development and preparation of codes and guides of nuclear
power plant structures is outstanding. A fellow of Institution of
Engineers (India), Dr Basu has authored about 50 technical papers.
His current interest in research is in the field of HPC and
earthquake engineering. He was awarded the ICI-Fosroc award
for Outstanding Concrete Technologist, 2003.
Ms Shylamoni P. is presently working as scientific
officer (D) in civil & structural engineering division
of AERB, Mumbai. She obtained her B.Tech from
T.K.M. College of Engineering, Kollam, Kerala. She
worked with Uhde India Ltd and Bhagwati Designs
Pvt Ltd, Mumbai where she was associated with
analysis and design of multi stored industrial
structures. Her areas of interest include analysis and design of
steel structures.
Mr Roshan A. D. is presently working as scientific
officer (D) in civil & structural engineering division
of AERB, Mumbai. He obtained his B.Tech from
Regional Engineering College, Calicut and M.Tech in
structural engineering from Indian Institute of
Technology, Kanpur. He has also completed a one-
year orientation course in nuclear science and
engineering conducted by Bhabha Atomic Research Centre. His
areas of interest include seismic analysis, design and non linear
finite element analysis of concrete structures.
•••
Renew your subscription early!
We know how precious ICJ issues are to
you.
Obviously, you wouldn't like to miss any
of them.
So please renew your subscription well in
advance!
Contact:
The Circulation Manager,
The Indian Concrete Journal,
The Associated Cement Cos. Ltd,
Research & Consultancy Directorate,
CRS Complex, L.B.S. Marg, Thane 400 604.
Tel: +91 (022) 55973965 (D) 2582 3631
Fax: +91 (022) 2582 0962, E-mail: subscribe@icjonline.com
The Indian Concrete Journal * January 2004