Open Access Journal

Journal of Research in Engineering 1 (2) 2014, 20-26

Journal homepage: www.jkuat-sri.com/ojs/index.php/sri/index

Modeling
Effect of Heat of on
a Still Reactor Banana
Mechanical Properties Peelsand
Fermentation:
Microstructure Waste to Energy
of Reinforcing Steel Bars Approachmade from
Scrap 1*
George O. Nyandiga , Zachary O. Siagi , Augustine B. Makokha 1 1

1
Department of Mechanical and ∗1
Production Engineering, Moi University, P.O. Box 3900-30100, Eldoret-Kenya
J. O. Bangi , S. M. Maranga1 , S. P. Ng’ang’a1 and S. M. Mutuli2

*
1 Department Corresponding
of Mechanical Engineering, Author
Jomo - E-mail:
Kenyatta nyandigageorge@gmail.com
University of Agriculture and Technology (JKUAT), P.O.
BOX 62000, Nairobi, Kenya.

2 Department
Abstract Limitedof information
Mechanical on optimal biofuel production
& Manufacturing conditions
Engineering, leads to non-economical
University of Nairobi, Main and inefficient
Campus, P.O. process
BOX hence
uncompetitive low grade biofuels. Fermentation 30197, process
00100, optimization
Nairobi, Kenyais very .crucial especially while using relatively low
fermentable sugars substrates. In this research, banana peels derived from Ngombe cultivar were dried, ground into fine powder to
pass through a 1 mm screen, and then hydrolyzed using 60% concentrated H2SO4 at 50oC. Bioethanol was produced by anaerobic
∗ Corresponding Author - Email: bangij@kebs.org.
fermentation of the hydrolysate using Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Erlenmeyer Flasks fitted with non-return air valves were used as
laboratory scale still reactors. Fermentation systems were subjected to various conditions based on half factorial Central Composite
RotatableMechanical
Abstract Design (CCRD). Totalof
properties Reducing Sugars
reinforcing steel(TRS) concentrations
bars (rebars) degrade and bioethanol
with elevatedyield analyses were
temperatures done
and this by Dubois and
deterioration has
Gas Chromatography methods respectively. Optimum bioethanol yield of 13.09 ml/L was obtained at 180 g/L substrate
to be properly accounted for to understand the behaviour of rebars and composite structures in fire. In this study, the effect of
concentration, 35oC fermentation temperature, 5.5 initial medium pH, 2 g/L yeast concentration, and 120 hours incubation
heat on the mechanical properties and microstructures of rebars made from local scrap was studied. Rebar Samples of 10, 12,
corresponding to a TRS degradation of 30.30 g/L. Lowest yield of 1.44 ml/L was obtained at 84.86 g/L substrate concentration,
ando 16 mm in diameter and 450 mm length were prepared using a power saw from samples purchased from the local steel
35 C fermentation temperature, 5.5 initial medium pH, 2 g/L yeast concentration, and 120 hours incubation corresponding to a
factories and the spectrometry
TRS degradation analysis was
of 2.85 g/L. Maximum carried yield
bioethanol out. Seven specimens
realized from these of wastes
the above types ofviable
manifested rebarsconcentrations
were heated in an electric
which could
o
furnace
further be distilled and dried to be used as an energy resource. The mathematical model developed also posed as a predictive their
to temperatures ranging from 100 to 1000 C for one hour and then cooled in air to room temperature. Thereafter, tool
residual mechanical
on bioethanol properties
yield while using(Yield
bananaStrength,
peels andUltimate TensileinStrength,
similar wastes Percentage
energy resource Elongation, and Young’s Modulus) were
generation.
determined using a 1MN Universal Testing Machine. Brinell hardness testing was performed using the Universal Hardness
Tester and Metallographic
Keywords Anaerobic, banana analysis
peels,and grain size
bioethanol, determination
Central Composite was studiedDesign
Rotatable by an optical
(CCRD). microscope with an inbuilt camera
to correlate mechanical properties to the microstructure. Results showed that normal mechanical properties and microstructure
can be assumed after exposure to temperatures up to 500o C for one hour.tons
metric For for
higher
40% temperatures,
under oTissue the Culture
retained (TC)
yield stress
banana as
a1.proportion
Introduction
of normal bar properties after exposure times of one - 600 C - 0.9, 900 o
and 25% under TC respectively are predicted for the yearC
hour was as follows: C - 0.7, 1000 o
o
- Ethanol
0.6. Variation of the microstructure
can directly be used as aoccurred
fuel orabove
mixed C , whereby the grain size reduced from 17.3 to 12 µm when the
500with
2016 assuming total land coverage of 90,580 ha [2].
temperature
gasoline toincreased
act as anfrom 500 to
octane 1000o C.[1].
enhancer TheItstudy
is a provides
proven precise information on mechanical properties and microstructure
ofsource
rebars of
to steel producers, designers, building industry,
It has been established through research that about 10%
and standardization bodies. The results may also be used to support
energy as it burns to produce heat energy
other research
alongside projects
other aimed
products. at studying
Ethanol the from
derived behaviour of rebar of
biological
Musa
steels Spp. isin comprised
structures fire. of wastes including stems,
skins or peels, and leaves [3]. This enormous quantity of
fermentation
Keywords of carbonaceous
Elevated feedstock
temperature, Fire, e.g.properties,
Mechanical banana Microstructure,
banana wastesRebar Steel
can be converted to bioethanol to assist in
peels, molasses, sorghum amongst others is referred to as meeting the energy demand especially in the automotive
bioethanol. Ethanol is less toxic as compared to fossil industry. Banana peels are common food wastes usually
Nomenclature
fuels and is biodegradable. 1. Introduction
discarded because people feel they lack economic value
In Kenya, Horticultural Crops Development Authority [3]. They haveare
relatively large sugar content which
(HCDA) cited 15 different varieties of banana [1] which Iron and steel manufactured from iron ore andcan be
scrap.
harnessed into bioethanol production rather
Scrap has become increasingly important to the steel than being
are following
The grown in symbols
differentareparts
usedofin the
thiscountry.
paper; Banana discardedRecycling
as wastes.steel
They have enormous possiblepotentialand
in
industry. is technologically
Rproduction
e Yield is widely
Strength spread
(MPa) across Kenyan counties. bioethanol industry
economically and can
profitable. be isused
Steel the as a cheaper
world’s mostsource
recy-
RBanana
m withstands
Tensile short
Strength flooding
(MPa) periods as long as there cled material [1].
of alternative fuel. Global
BananaIndustry
plant partsAnalysts (GIA)
including [2]
stems,
Rismadequate
/Re Tensile
soil- aeration [1].
Yield Ratio announces thatand
fruits, pulps, thepeelings
global steel
havescrap
been market
used asisbioethanol
projected
dn In Kenya,
Grain banana
Size production (Fig. 1) has been rising in to reach 631.5 million tons by 2015. Scrap metals can be
production feed-stocks [5]-[6].
EL Elongation (%)
the past years. Productions of about 2.0 M and 1.7 M recycled and used again for an indefinite period, meaning
HB Brinell hardness we protect and preserve some of nature’s most limited
E Young’s modulus (GPa) resources. It is always cheaper to recycle steel than to
mine virgin ore and move it through the process of mak-
 JSRE J. Bangi et al., Effect of Heat on Mechanical Properties and Microstructure of Reinforcing Steel Bars
ing new steel. Steel mills using scrap steel in place of
virgin iron ore to make a new product gives the pub-
lic outstanding value. The new product is comparable
in performance to a similar product made from virgin
iron ore and its manufacturing process poses fewer risks
to the environment [1]. Therefore the use of scrap is
done for economic as well as environmental reasons.
In Kenya, the main sources of steel are recycled local
scrap and imports. The government of Kenya banned
the exportation of scrap steel in its 2009/2010 budget
speech [3] and this is expected to spur recycling of local
scrap steel. Iron and steel are used widely in the con-
struction of roads, railways, buildings and manufacture
of wire products such as barbed wire, chain link and
nails. Most large modern structures, such as stadiums
and skyscrapers, bridges, and airports, are supported by
a steel skeleton. Even those with a concrete structure
will employ steel for reinforcing.
In fire situations, the loss of strength for rebars at
elevated temperatures may be significant and design re-
quirements for fire are covered in Section 5 of AS3600
for rebars [4]. The yield strength of steel is reduced to
about half at 550 o C. At 1000 o C, the yield strength
is 10 percent or less [6]. Near-total depletion of strength
occurs at approximately 1,204 o C [5]. Because of its high
thermal conductivity, the temperature of unprotected in-
ternal steelwork normally will vary little from that of the
fire [6]. Young’s modulus does not decrease with temper-
ature as yield strength does [6]. Cold-worked reinforced
bars, when heated, lose their strength more rapidly than
do hot-rolled high-yield bars and mild-steel bars. The
differences in properties are even more important after
heating. The original yield stress is almost completely
recovered on cooling from a temperature of 500 to 600
o C for all bars but on cooling from 800 o C, it is reduced
by 30 percent for cold-worked bars and by 5 percent for
hot-rolled bars [6]. The loss of strength for prestress-
ing steels occurs at lower stressing temperatures than
that for rebars [6]. Cold-drawn and heat-treated steels
lose a part of their strength permanently when heated
to temperatures in excess of about 300 o C and 400 o C,
respectively [6]. Under fire conditions, the temperatures
in the steel will increase, resulting in both thermal ex-
pansion of the member and transient deterioration of its
mechanical properties. The magnitude of these effects
depends upon several factors, including the composition
of the steel, the sizes and shapes of the parts and whether
it was protected or not and the duration and nature of the
fire [7]. These are important considerations if heat has
been applied to assist bending or if the rebars have been
subjected to a fire. If the duration and the intensity of the
fire are large enough, the load bearing resistance can fall
to the level of the applied load resulting in the collapse
of the structure [8]. Thus, load bearing strength of steel
decreases when steel or composite structure is subjected
to a fire action. However, the failure of the World Trade
Centre on 11th September 2001 and, in particular, of
building WTC7 alerted the engineering profession to the
21
possibility of connection failure under fire conditions [9].
In addition, grain size has a measurable effect on most
mechanical properties. For example, at room tempera-
ture, hardness, yield strength, tensile strength, fatigue
strength and impact strength all increase with decreasing
grain size [10]. Machinability is also affected; rough
machining favours coarse grain size while finish ma-
chining favours fine grain size. The effect of grain size
is greatest on properties that are related to the early
stages of deformation. Thus, for example, yield stress is
more dependent on grain size than tensile strength [10].
Fine-grain steels do not harden quite as much and have
less tendency to crack than coarse-grain steels of simi-
lar analysis. Also, fine-grain steels have greater fatigue
resistance, and a fine grain size promotes a somewhat
greater toughness and shock resistance. Cold working
frequently alters grain size by promoting more rapid
coarsening of the grains in critically stressed areas. The
original grain size characteristics, however, can usually
be restored by stress relieving. Coarse-grain steels have
better creep and stress rupture properties because dif-
fusion at high temperatures is impeded by sub grain
low-angle boundaries present in coarse-grain steels [10].
Hence the response in mechanical properties of different
structural steel grades at elevated temperatures should be
well known in order to understand the behaviour of steel
and composite structures when subjected to fire.
To study thoroughly the behaviour of certain steel struc-
tures at elevated temperatures, one should use the mate-
rial data of the used steel material obtained by testing.
In this study, 10, 12, and 16 mm ribbed steel rebars
were subjected to seven different temperatures to deter-
mine the high temperature behaviour of the rebars. This
study was aimed at investigating the effect of heat on the
mechanical properties and microstructure of rebars made
from local scrap and heated to temperatures ranging from
100 o C to 1000o C for one hour and then cooled in air
to room temperature.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Materials
The 10, 12 and 16 mm diameter and 12 m length re-
bar steel samples used for this study were from Athi-
River Steel ltd and Apex steel ltd, Kenya. The chemical
composition of the as-received and elevated temperature
samples of the 16 mm rebars from Athi-River Steel ltd
and Apex steel ltd was determined as given in Tables 1
and 2 respectively. Seven specimens each from the differ-
ent diameter rebars were heated in an electric furnace for
one hour and then cooled in air to room temperature. The
specimens were placed in the heating chamber and the
furnace heated until it reached the desired temperature.
The furnace temperature was initially raised and when
the desired temperature level was attained, specimens
were put into the heating chamber. To simulate temper-
atures likely to be experienced by the rebars during a
fire, the rebar were heated to 100, 300, 500, 600, 900
JSRE Journal of Sustainable Research in Engineering Vol. 1 (2), 2014
and 1000o C. and individual martensite are considered as separated
grains. At the same time, the relative quantities of ferrite,
pearlite, bainite, and martensite were assessed.
2.2. Determination of Mechanical Properties
Mechanical properties of the as-received, heated and air 3. Results and Discussion
cooled samples were determined using standard meth-
ods. For hardness testing, oxide layers formed during
3.1. Chemical compositions
heating were removed by stage-grinding and polishing.
Average Brinell hardness (HB) readings were determined The chemical composition of the as-received and ele-
by taking three hardness readings at different positions vated temperature samples of the 16 mm rebars from
on the samples, using a universal hardness tester, type Athi-River Steel ltd and Apex steel ltd was determined as
Verzus-700TM, model 700AS, with a test force of 306 given in Tables 1 and 2 respectively. It was observed that
N and a steel ball of 1 mm diameter as per ASTM E10 the carbon content increased from 0.203 % to 0.216 %
[11]. Device calibration using a reference block was per- and from 0.158% to 0.172 % for the Athi-River Steel ltd
formed for measuring credibility. Tensile tests were car- and Apex steel ltd rebars respectively as the temperature
ried out on samples according to ISO 6892-1 [12]. The increased from 22o C to 1000 o C. This may have been
tensile machine used was a Servo hydraulic universal due to Carburizing as the different sizes of the rebars
testing machine of 1MN capacity. The tensile machine were being heated to elevated temperatures. Diffusion of
was calibrated as per ISO 7500-1 [13] before use. For Carbon atoms from the rebars with higher carbon content
each size of rebar steel and after each heating, two tensile into rebars of low carbon content may have occurred.
tests were carried out. The values were recorded using
the machine’s own plotter and a computer connected to 3.2. Effect of Heat on Mechanical Properties
a data logger. Load-elongation data were recorded and
converted into stress-strain graphs. The residual yield The mechanical properties of the as-received and the
strength, ultimate tensile strength, Young’s modulus and heated samples for 10, 12, and 16 mm rebars are shown
ductility (% elongation) were measured for the as-received in Tables 3 - 5 respectively. The effects of the heat on the
rebars and for the samples after a complete cycle of mechanical properties ( Yield Strength, Ultimate Tensile
heating and air cooling. Strength, Percentage Elongation, Young’s Modulus, and
Brinell Hardness) of the air cooled samples are shown
in Fig. 1-5 respectively.
2.3. Grain size and Microstructure Examination
The microstructure examination of the rebar steel in the
as-received state and the heated and air cooled samples Table 1. Chemical Composition of 16 mm rebar from Athi-River
were examined by using an optical microscope as per the steel Ltd (wt.%)
specifications in ASTM E3 [14] and ASTM E112 [15].
The grain size was determined by the intercept method.
Rebar samples were cut and sectioned using a wet cutting
machine Jean Wirtz CUTO 20. The samples were then
cold mounted in epoxy to avoid inducing microstructure
changes. Following mounting, the samples were mechan-
ically ground starting with 120 grit emery paper and con-
tinuing with progressively finer grits (240, 400, 600, 800,
and 1200). The usual standardized procedure of rotating
through 90 o when changing from one grade of paper
to the next was observed. Water was continuously added
during the operations. After using the 1200 grit emery
paper, the samples were then polished using rotating
polishing clothes along with 1µm alumina slurry. Finally,
to reveal the microstructure of the polished surface for
imaging, a 2% Nital at room temperature etchant was
used, with cleaning and rinsing done with ethanol. Mi-
croscopic examination of the etched surface of various
specimens was undertaken using a metallurgical micro-
scope, with an inbuilt camera and computer system at-
tached through which the resulting microstructure of the
samples was all photographically recorded with a 400x
magnifications. The average grain size measurement was
done when ferrite grains, pearlite nodes, granular bainite
22
 JSRE J. Bangi et al., Effect of Heat on Mechanical Properties and Microstructure of Reinforcing Steel Bars
Table 2. Chemical Composition of 16 mm rebar from Apex steel Table 4. Mechanical Properties of 12 mm rebar
Ltd (wt.%)

Table 5. Mechanical Properties of 16 mm rebar

Table 3. Mechanical Properties of 10 mm rebar

was found to be 430 MPa. This value is lower than the

standard allowed value of 460 MPa for high yield steel
rebars [18]. It will be necessary to increase the carbon
and manganese contents to increase the yield strength of
the 12 mm rebar.

3.3. Yield Strength(Re )

Yield strength of 10, 12 and 16 mm rebars was affected
by the elevated exposure temperatures. It can be seen
in Fig. 1 that there is no significant variation in yield
strength of rebars cooled by air up to 500o C. Plain re-
bars have experienced the strain hardening already for
this temperature. According to Eurocode 3 [16], below
400o C, there is no decrease in yield strength, but above
this temperature a significant yield strength loss occurs.
The yield strength losses for 10, 12 and 16 mm rebars
were 25%, 12% and 38% for 900o C exposure temper- Fig. 1. Yield strength of steel rebars against temperature.
ature, respectively when compared to that of the as-
received rebars. For further increase of temperature up to
1000o C, yield strength decreased by 37%, 18% and 45%, 3.4. Tensile Strength (Rm )
respectively for rebar 10, 12, and 16 mm. It can also
be observed that the as-received 16 mm rebar showed From Fig. 2, it was observed that the tensile strength re-
higher yield strength than the as- received 10 and 12 mained high up to 500 o C for all the three types of rebars,
mm rebars. This higher yield strength for the 16 mm after which it began to drop. After 500o C, the tensile
rebar may have been due to the chemical composition. strength left is lower than the tensile strength of the as-
The 16 mm rebar have contained a higher content of received rebars. The tensile strength losses for the 10, 12
carbon and manganese than 10 mm and 12 mm rebars. and 16 mm rebars were 19%, 14% and 26% for 900o C
These two elements are known for the overall strength exposure temperature, respectively when compared to
[17]. The yield strength of the as-received 12 mm rebar that of the as-received rebars. For the highest exposure
23
JSRE Journal of Sustainable Research in Engineering Vol. 1 (2), 2014
temperature at 1000o C, tensile strength decreases were
17%, 12% and 28%, respectively when compared to the
as-received rebars. However, it should be noted that there
is a possibility of complete strength loss of rebars at
high temperatures when a structure is subjected to a high
temperature fire. Consequently, the remaining strength
of the rebars in structures is influenced by the exposure
time and type of fire and will depend on the rate of heat
transfer through the concrete cover to rebar steel [19].

Fig. 3. Elongation ratios of steel rebars against temperature.

of the test specimen. The result was expressed in giga-

pascals (GPa) and reported to three significant figures.
The values of E obtained, are presented in Fig.4. It can
be seen that E decreased with an increase in the temper-
ature. The relationship shown was nearly the same for
all rebars steels. E does not decrease with temperature as
rapidly as does yield strength [6]. Also from the results
Fig. 2. Tensile strength of steel rebars against temperature. in Tables 3 and 4, E varied with diameter. This variation
in E was due to the differences in sample composition,
the test method and the direction of the applied force
3.5. Elongation with respect to the material’s grain structure orientation
After the rebars cooled to room temperature, the retained (anisotropy). Measured steel modulus easily varies from
ductility (elongation) after heating was measured as a 180-220 GPa [21].
ratio of the as-received room temperature elongation and
the relationship is as shown in Fig. 3. It can be seen in
Fig. 3 that there was no significant variation in ductility
of rebars cooled by air up to 500o C. After 500o C, the
elongation decreased with increasing temperature. The
decrease for 10, 12 and 16 mm rebars was found to be
20%, 18% and 29% for 900 o C exposure temperature,
respectively. For further increase of temperature to 1000
o C , elongation ratio decreases were 19%, 19% and 35%,
respectively. The 10, 12 and 16 mm rebars showed sim-
ilar elongation behaviour under elevated temperatures.
Another relevant expression of ductility involves a stress
ratio between the tensile strength Rm and the yield stress
Re of the rebar (Rm /Re ) [20]. The Rm /Re ratio deduced
from the stress-strain diagram could be used as an indi- Fig. 4. Young’s modulus of steel rebars against temperature.
rect means to express the extent of uniform elongation
before fracture, i.e. the elongation up to the ultimate ten-
sile strength. In all cases it is higher than the minimum 3.7. Brinell Hardness
allowed value of 1.08 [18].
The results of Brinell hardness measurements are shown
in Fig. 5. The precipitation phenomena occurred at tem-
3.6. Young’s Modulus peratures up to approximately 500 o C and are accom-
Young’s modulus, E, was calculated by drawing a tan- panied initially by a slight increase of hardness up to
gent to the initial linear portion of the stress-strain curve, 300 o C, which thereafter becomes constant up to 500 o C.
selecting any point on this tangent, and dividing the The hardness values of 12 mm rebar were slightly higher
tensile stress by the corresponding strain. For purposes than the corresponding values of 10, and 16 mm rebars
of this calculation, the tensile stress was calculated by at temperatures from 100 up to 900o C. The difference
dividing the load by the average as-received cross section could presumably be attributed to their different chemical
24
 JSRE J. Bangi et al., Effect of Heat on Mechanical Properties and Microstructure of Reinforcing Steel Bars
compositions. Further work on the rebar sizes may be
necessary to verify this observation. For the 16 mm rebar,
the hardness increase was not in direct proportion to the
increase in tensile strength as expected. This is evidenced
with a tensile strength 690 MPa corresponding to HB of
165, while tensile strength 495 MPa corresponded to HB
of 186. This is because the overall tensile performance
depends also on the core. A decrease in HB occurred in
the tempered outer layer but the material of the inner core
presented higher HB. For a given diameter and chemical
composition of the rebar steel, the properties of the steel
can be varied to a large extent by choosing the duration
of the fast cooling step. Cooling is applied to the bar
as near as possible to the exit of the last finishing stand,
resulting to a quenched skin. Subsequently, the core heats
the quenched layer by conduction, leading to tempering
of the hardened layer while the austenitic core transforms
quasi isothermally [20].
Fig. 5. Brinell hardness of steel rebars against temperature.
3.8. Effect of Heat on Microstructure
The metallographic study showed that as-received rebar
steel has a ferrito-pearlitic structure. Ferrite (white) and
pearlite (black) as shown in the micrograph in Fig. 6. The
microstructures of the samples heated to 100, 500, 600,
900 and 1000o C are shown Fig. 6 (a-f) respectively. No
significant microstructural changes occurred after heat-
ing the rebars up to 300 o C. However, a slight increase
of hardness occurred in this temperature. Heating further
up to 600 o C Fig. 6 (d) causes only recovery phenom-
ena, as it is certified by a constant drop of hardness
without remarkable microstructural changes. At 900o C,
Fig. 6 (e) the deformed structure was fully homoge-
nized and during the slow cooling from austenizing range
to room temperature the final microstructure consisted
of fine ferrite grains in which the pearlite was more
uniformly distributed. The grain size of the rebars was
comparatively small and the dn values for specimens was
25
noted to decrease from 17.3 to 12 µm as the temperature
increased from 500 to 1000 o C shown in Table 5. It is
also worth noting that yield stress decreased with the
decrease in grain size (inverse Hall-Petch effect). This
trend is less well established for finer grains. Some of
the deviation from Hall-Petch strengthening could simply
be due to pores in the material. Additional complications
arise due to impurities at the grain boundaries such as
oxides and impurities inside the grain such as trapped or
diffused gas [22].
Fig. 6. Optical micrographs (400X) of various heated and air cooled
rebars (a) as- received, (b) 100o C, (c) 500o C , (d) 600o C, (e) 900o C,
and (f) 1000o C
4. Conclusions
The results presented in this paper and their discussion
allow for the formulation of the following conclusions:
• The rebars sampled showed stable mechanical prop-
erties and microstructure after heating up to 500 o C,
hence normal bar properties can be assumed after
exposure to temperatures up to 500o C for one hour.
• For higher temperatures, the retained yield Strength
as a proportion of normal rebar properties was: -
600o C - 0.9, 900o C - 0.7, 1000o C - 0.6.
• Yield strength, tensile strength, Young’s modulus,
Brinell hardness, and ductility of the rebars decreased
as the heating temperature increased from 500 to
JSRE Journal of Sustainable Research in Engineering Vol. 1 (2), 2014
1000o C. The weakening of these mechanical prop- Switzerland, 2004
erties is attributed mainly to the extensive tempering [14] ASTM E 3, ”Standard Guide for Preparation of Metallographic
occurring above this temperature. Specimens”, Anual book of ASTM standardS, ASTM Inter-
national, http://www.astm.org/Standards, West Conshohocken,
• The effect of heating the rebars to temperatures
PA, 2011
from 500o C to 1000o C, was a corresponding de- [15] ASTM E 112, ”Standard Test Methods for Determining Aver-
crease in grain size from 17.3 to 12 µm. age Grain Size ”, Anual book of ASTM standardS, ASTM Inter-
• The chemical Composition was found not to have a national, http://www.astm.org/Standards, West Conshohocken,
remarkable effect on the critical temperature above PA, 2013
[16] CEN, Eurocode 3, prEN1993-1-2:, Part 1.2: Structural Fire
which the residual Yield strength becomes lower Design, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures, Stage 49
than the standard allowed value of 460 MPa. This draft, CEN, European Committee for Standardization, Brus-
temperature lies between 500 and 600 o C for all sels, 2003
rebars examined. [17] A. Oyetunji, ” Effects of Microstructures and Process Vari-
• The load-carrying capacity of the rebars decreased ables on the Mechanical Properties of Rolled Ribbed Medium
Carbon Steel”, Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering
with the increase of temperature. The residual ca- and Applied Sciences (JETEAS) 3 (3), 2012, pp.507-512
pacity after cooling depended on the yield strength [18] KS 573, ” High yield steel bars for the reinforcement of
of the rebar, temperature reached, and the degree of concrete-Specification”, 2008
deformation. [19] I.B. Topcu, and B. Isikdag, ”The effect of cover thickness on
rebars exposed to elevated temperatures”, Construction and
Acknowledgments Building Materials. In press.
[20] J. Nikolaou, G.D. Papadimitriou, ” Microstructures and me-
The authors wish to acknowledge Kenya Bureau of Stan- chanical properties after heating of reinforcing 500 MPa class
weldable steels produced by various processes”, Construction
dards for providing the tensile testing and chemical anal- and Building Materials, vol. 18, 2004, pp. 243-254
ysis facilities and the University of Nairobi for grain size [21] U. Gandhi, ”Investigation of anisotropy in elastic modulus of
and microstructure examination facilities whose results Steel ”, Workshop on Addressing Key Technology Gaps in
have been presented. Implementing Advanced High-Strength Steels For Automotive
Light weighting, TRINA, TTC, 8/30/10, 2012
References [22] H. Hofmann, ” Advanced Nanomaterials ”, MechanicalProp-
erties.pdf, 2011
[1] http://www.norstar.com.au/Recycling/Processing/Benefits.aspx.
[2] http://www.strategyr.com/Steel Scrap Market Report.asp (GIA
report)
[3] GOK, Budget Speech for the Fiscal Year 2009/2010, GOK,
2009
[4] AS3600, Australian Standard for Concrete Structures, Sydney
Austria, 2009
[5] American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc, Manual of Steel
Construction , Facts for Steel Buildings-Fire, 2003, AISC,
Chicago, IL, 2003
[6] ASHI reporter, ” The Effects of Fire on Structural Systems”,
American Society of Home Inspectors, 2007
[7] J. Rassizadehghani, S. Raygan, and M. Askari, ” Comparison
of the quenching capacities of hot salt and oil baths”, Metal
Sci. Heat Treat, vol. 48, 2006, pp. 5-6
[8] I. B. Topcu, C. Karakurt, ”Properties of Reinforced Concrete
Steel Rebars Exposed to High Temperatures”, Research Letters
in Materials Science, vol. 2008, Article ID 814137, 4 pages
[9] F. Wald, L. S. Da Silva, D. B. Moore, T. Lennond, M. Chladna,
A. Santiagob, M. Benes, M. Borgesf, ”Experimental behaviour
of a steel structure under natural fire,”, Fire Safety Journal, vol.
41, no. 7, 2006, pp. 509-522
[10] D. H. Herring, ”Grain Size and Its Influence on Materials
Properties”, GrainSize.pdf, 2005
[11] ASTM E10- 12 Standard Test Method for Brinell Hardness
of Metallic Materials , Brinell,hardness, mechanical test, met-
als , Brinell hardness, Metallic hardness, Anual book of
ASTM standardS, ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
PA, 2012, [Online]. Available: http://www.astm.org/Standards
[12] ISO 6892-1, ”Metallic materials-Tensile testing-part 1: Method
of test at room temperature”, International Organization for
Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2009
[13] ISO 7500-1, ”Metallic materials - Verification of static uniaxial
testing machines - Part 1: Tension/compression testing ma-
chines -Verification and calibration of the force-measuring sys-
tem”, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva,

26