Structures 62 (2024) 106264

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/structures

Mechanical performance of Q345 steel after corrosion: Experimental and

theoretical investigation
Zhengyi Kong a, b, Cuiqiang Shi a, Bo Yang a, Fan Yang a, Qinglin Tao a, George Vasdravellis b,
Huu-Ba Dinh c, d, *
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Anhui University of Technology, China
b
Institute for Sustainable Built Environment, Heriot-Watt University, United Kingdom
c
Laboratory for Computational Civil Engineering, Institute for Computational Science and Artificial Intelligence, Van Lang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
d
Faculty of Civil Engineering, School of Technology, Van Lang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Corrosion significantly influences the mechanical performance of steel, and the accurate prediction of stress-
Q345 steel strain curves (S-SC) for steel after corrosion is crucial for the safety evaluation of in-service steel structures in
Corrosion engineering. This study focuses on assessing the degradation performance of Q345 steel following corrosion.
Mechanical properties
Copper accelerated acetic acid salt spray testing (CASS) is employed to corrode Q345 specimens, and a power
Microstructure
Constitutive model
model is established to relate the mass loss rate to the corrosion time of Q345 steel. Uniaxial tension tests are
then conducted to observe the mechanical behavior of corroded Q345 steel. Results indicate that the strength and
ductility of Q345 steel decrease with an increase in the mass loss rate, and the yield plateau of the S-SC gradually
shortens until it disappears. With the increase of corrosion time, the microstructure of the steel surface is
transformed from spherical structure to needle-like structure. Two constitutive models are developed, incorpo­
rating the S-SC with and without the yield plateau, based on existing models. These models demonstrate good
agreement with various test data, providing valuable insights into the mechanical behavior of corroded Q345
steel.

1. Introduction to investigate the mechanical properties of steel after corrosion. Re­

The utilization of steel structures in engineering is rapidly expanding
due to their advantages, including high strength, excellent seismic per­
formance, and rapid assembly. However, the susceptibility of steel
structures to corrosion poses a significant risk, and overlooking this issue
can lead to severe engineering accidents. For instance, in 1996, a steel
column lost stability due to prolonged corrosion, resulting in the
collapse of an office building in Manchester, UK. Similarly, in 2016, the
steel roof of a train station collapsed in Melbourne, Australia. These
incidents underscore the substantial impact of corrosion in natural en­
vironments on the mechanical behavior of in-service steel structures,
posing a threat to the safety of engineering constructions.
The mechanical properties of steel play a crucial role in determining
the structural behavior of engineering structures. Following corrosion,
the mechanical performance of steel undergoes degradation, resulting in
reduced ductility. Consequently, numerous studies have been conducted
searchers such as Hui et al. [1], An et al. [2], and Xu et al. [3,4] have
examined the stress-strain curves (S-SC) of steel with varying mass loss
rates. Their findings suggest that corrosion progressively shortens the
yield plateau of steel, and at high mass loss rates, the ratio of ultimate
strength to yield strength approaches 1.0. Moreover, the elongation at
fracture is significantly influenced by the mass loss rate. Other studies by
Moreno et al. [5], Huang et al. [6], Jin et al. [7], and Xu et al. [8]
emphasize that the strength of steel experiences substantial degradation
with increasing corrosion time. This degradation is attributed to the
significant loss of thickness and mass, as discussed by Cinitha et al. [9].
Corrosion has a notable impact on the microstructure and surface
morphology of steel, and this effect is investigated through microanal­
ysis. Li et al. [10] observed that corrosion induces changes in phase
composition and element composition, the occurrence of hydrogen
embrittlement, and stress concentration in corrosion pits. These factors
collectively lead to a significant decrease in the mechanical performance

* Corresponding author at: Laboratory for Computational Civil Engineering, Institute for Computational Science and Artificial Intelligence, Van Lang University,
Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
E-mail addresses: Z.Kong@hw.ac.uk (Z. Kong), g.vasdravellis@hw.ac.uk (G. Vasdravellis), ba.dinhhuu@vlu.edu.vn (H.-B. Dinh).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2024.106264
Received 11 July 2023; Received in revised form 8 January 2024; Accepted 20 March 2024
Available online 23 March 2024
2352-0124/© 2024 Institution of Structural Engineers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Z. Kong et al. Structures 62 (2024) 106264

Table1
Mechanical properties of steel after corrosion.
Specimen Corrosion time mass loss rate Modulus of elasticity E Yield strength fy Ultimate strength fu Elongation at break A Strength-to- yield ratio
ID (h) (%) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (%) fu/fy

D0-1 0 0 203,000 350 517 28.71 1.48

D0-2 0 0 203,000 353 520. 28.93 1.47
S1-1 1440 5.07 197,000 329 509 26.35 1.55
S1-2 1440 5.07 197,000 331 508 26.32 1.53
S1-3 1440 5.07 196,700 333 511 26.43 1.54
D1-1 1440 7.03 186,000 314. 500 23.94 1.59
D1-2 1440 6.92 185,000 312 498 23.79 1.60
D1-3 1440 7.25 186,000 318 504 24.21 1.59
S2-1 2880 10.92 179,000 311 478 22.37 1.54
S2-2 2880 10.92 178,000 307 472 21.80 1.54
S2-3 2880 10.92 179,000 309 479 22.58 1.55
D2-1 2880 17.04 166,000 285 443 20.59 1.56
D2-2 2880 16.68 166,000 279 437 20.28 1.56
D2-3 2880 16.95 166,000 274 435 20.14 1.59
S3-1 4320 15.31 170,000 284 445 20.34 1.56
S3-2 4320 15.31 170,000 292 453 21.12 1.56
S3-3 4320 15.31 170,000 282 450 20.61 1.59
D3-1 4320 27.18 161,000 262 419 18.45 1.59
D3-2 4320 28.33 160,000 257 423 18.84 1.65
D3-3 4320 28.80 159,000 254 409 17.82 1.61

Note: Specimen ID: XY-Z, X indicates the type of corrosion including sing-side corrosion (S) and double-side corrosion (D), Y shows corrosion time, and Z represents
specimen number, respectively.

of steel. Additionally, Kong et al. [11] identified two distinct micro­
structures on the surface of corroded mild steel: the flower-like micro­
structure (observed in Q235 steel) and the honeycomb microstructure
(observed in Q355 steel). The differing microstructures result in distinct
mechanical behaviors for mild steel.
A constitutive model serves as a crucial tool for representing S-SC,
and the accurate prediction of the constitutive relation is essential.
Historically, various models have been developed by researchers such as
Ramberg and Osgood [12], Hill [13], and Zener and Hollomon [14] to
accurately estimate the S-SC for different grades of mild steel. However,
limited research has been conducted on constitutive models for steel
after corrosion.
To date, Li et al. [15] have proposed a bilinear elastic-plastic
constitutive model to predict the S-SC of corroded mild steel. Addi­
tionally, Xu et al. [4] and Wang et al. [16] developed a constitutive
model for corroded mild steel based on the quadratic plastic flow model.
Notably, these previous works focused on Q235 steel, and there is a
scarcity of research on constitutive models for corroded Q345 steel.
Q345 steel, characterized by medium-strength and cost-effectiveness, is
extensively used in engineering structures, such as the National Stadium
"Bird’s Nest" in China and the Jinan Fenghuang Road Yellow River
Bridge in China. The chemical compositions of Q345 steel differ from
those of Q235 steel. Previous studies [3] have established distinct
constitutive models for Q235 and Q345 steel, underlining the dissimilar
mechanical behavior of corroded Q345 steel when compared to
corroded Q235 steel. Given that Q345 steel is widely employed in global
construction projects as a medium-strength low-alloy steel, it is imper­
ative to assess the safety of in-service corroded Q345 steel, which is
critical to prevent engineering accidents and ensure the structural
integrity of constructions utilizing Q345 steel. In the safety assessment
process, a thorough examination of the mechanical performance of
corroded Q345 steel is essential. Furthermore, the development of an
accurate constitutive model is crucial for estimating the S-SC in corroded
Q345 steel, providing a comprehensive understanding of its material
behavior and ensuring precise predictions for the reliability of safety
assessments in structures incorporating corroded Q345 steel. This study
aims to investigate the mechanical performance of corroded Q345 steel,
with a specific focus on developing constitutive models to accurately
represent the S-SC. In addition to assessing the macroscopic mechanical
properties, the research includes microscopic analysis to elucidate the
degradation behavior of Q345 steel after corrosion. This comprehensive
approach will provide insights into the material’s behavior at both
macroscopic and microscopic levels, contributing to a more thorough
understanding of the mechanical performance of corroded Q345 steel.

Fig. 1. Details of specimens.

2
Z. Kong et al.
Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of CASS.
Fig. 3. Specimens after corrosion.
2. Experimental program
In this study, a total of 21 Q345 specimens are designed, organized
into seven groups as outlined in Table 1. Two distinct corrosion sche­
mes—single-side corrosion and double-side corrosion of steel spec­
imens—are implemented, considering four different corrosion durations
(i.e., 0 h, 1440 h, 2880 h, and 4320 h). Standard samples are prepared
for all specimens following the guidelines outlined in GB/T 228.1–2021
[17], as illustrated in Fig. 1. Prior to the Copper Accelerated Acetic Acid
Salt Spray (CASS) testing, the initial mass of each specimen is recorded.
Similar to the authors’ previous work [11], the CASS testing is
employed in accordance with GB/T 10125–2021 [18], as illustrated in
Fig. 2. A copper chloride solution with a concentration of 0.26 g/L
± 0.02 g/L is prepared, and glacial acetic acid is added to achieve a
solution pH in the range of 3.1 to 3.3. The testing adopts an intermittent
spraying method with a spraying time of 6 h followed by a stopping time
of 6 h. The entire testing period spans 4320 h, incorporating four
different corrosion durations. Fig. 3 illustrates Q345 specimens with
varying corrosion times.
After removing the Q345 steel specimens from the salt-spray cham­
ber, brushes are utilized as physical de-rusting method to remove rust
[19,20]. According to Liu et al.’s study [5], the differences between the
initial axial tensile stiffness, the yield strength, and the ultimate
3
Structures 62 (2024) 106264
strengths of the specimen treated without de-rusting and the specimen
treated with manual de-rusting (brushes) is only 4.63%, 1.18%, and
2.70%, respectively. As a result, the impact of the physical de-rusting
method on the tensile properties of steel is deemed negligible and,
consequently, has not been taken into consideration in this study. The
dimensions, including width and thickness, are measured using a Ver­
nier caliper. Following these preparations, a uniaxial tension test is
performed using a Z150 Tensile Testing Machine in accordance with
GB/T 228.1–2021[18].
3. Analysis of corrosion results
3.1. Mass loss rate
Similar with Xu et al.’s [21] method, the mass loss rate can be ob­
tained from Eq. (1).
m0 − m1
η= × 100% (1)
m0
where m0 and m1 represent the mass of specimens before and after
corrosion, and η represents the mass loss rate.
Previously, Liang and Hou [22,23] introduced a power model for
predicting the mass loss rate, as shown in Eq. (2).
Z. Kong et al.
Fig. 4. Mass loss rate versus corrosion time.
0 pit, causing stress concentrations and resulting in a reduction in me­
Fig. 5. XRD spectra of corrosion products.
η = A × tn (2)
where A and n are coefficients or constants related to the service envi­
ronment, and they need to be determined based on empirical data, and t
represents corrosion time in hours.
The experimental results reveal a similar variation trend for the mass
loss rate, as illustrated in Eq. (3) and Fig. 4. It’s important to note that
the corrosion time for double-sided corrosion is considered to be twice
that of single-sided corrosion.
( )
η = 3.45 × 10− 3 t0.99 R2 = 0.97
Based on Li and Du’s method [24], the annual mass loss rate of
corroded steel can be obtained from Eq. (4).
K × Δm
ν= (4)
A×T ×D
where Kis a constant, K= 87,600 mm/y; A represents the initial surface
area of samples in cm2; Δm represents the mass loss of samples in grams;
Structures 62 (2024) 106264
D is the density of the sample material in g/cm3; and Tis the corrosion
time in hours.
According to Eq. (4), the annual mass loss rate of Q345 steel is
determined to be 1.91 mm/y. Based on Liang and Hou’s investigations
[23] and the findings in this study, it can be inferred that the mass loss
rate of samples in the CASS for one month is comparable to that in the
natural outdoor environment in Shanghai, China, over a span of 13
years.
3.2. Microscopic analysis
3.2.1. Corrosion products
In the analysis of corrosion products, X-ray diffraction (XRD) spec­
trum is utilized, as shown in Fig. 5. Similar to Hu’s findings [25], the
corrosion products of Q345 steel include γ-FeOOH, α-FeOOH, with the
main corrosion product identified as Fe3O4. This aligns with the results
from Hu’s study, indicating consistency in the composition of corrosion
products for Q345 steel.
3.2.2. Morphology structure
After retrieving the specimens from the salt-spray chamber, a
microscopic structural analysis is performed using a JEM-6480 scanning
electron microscope (SEM). The images in Fig. 6 display the microscopic
views of corroded Q345 steel.
The description indicates that, based on observations in Fig. 6(a), (c),
and (e), the corrosion process results in an increase in both the number
and volume of corrosion pits as the corrosion time progresses. Addi­
tionally, a substantial accumulation of corrosion products is evident on
the material’s surface. The corrosion-induced cracks become visible,
with their length and width growing over time. The overall effect is a
roughening of the surface of the mild steel due to the corrosion process.
The description highlights similarities with findings in Wu et al. [26]
and Dong and Ke’s experiments [27]. Specifically, both spherical and
needle-shaped microstructures are observed, with the needle-shaped
structures becoming predominant as the corrosion time increases (as
depicted in Fig. 6(b), (d), and (f)). The evolution of microstructures is
evident, with spherical structures dominating at 1440 h of corrosion
time and giving way to complete development of needle-shaped struc­
tures by 4320 h. This transformation in microstructure from spherical to
needle-like is associated with a decrease in the mechanical properties of
steel. The reasoning provided suggests that the microstructural trans­
formation leads to the creation of more voids around grains in the rust
chanical properties [26].
3.3. Mechanical properties of corroded steel
The uniaxial tension tests, conducted in accordance with GB/T
228.1–2021 [18], provide insights into the mechanical performance of
corroded Q345 steel. The results, as illustrated in Fig. 7 and detailed in
Table 1, reveal a correlation between the degree of corrosion and the
mechanical properties of Q345 steel. Notably, with increasing corrosion,
the yield plateau of Q345 steel progressively shortens. For instance,
when the mass loss rate reaches 15.31%, the yield plateau disappears,
accompanied by a 28.21% reduction in elongation at break. Concur­
rently, the yield strength and ultimate strength experience decreases of
18.67% and 13.32%, respectively. It is noteworthy that the yield
(3) strength of corroded Q345 steel without a yield plateau corresponds to
the 0.2% offset yield strength [18]. At a mass loss rate of 27.18%, the
elongation at break is 18.45%, falling below the 20% requirement out­
lined in GB 50011–2010 [28].
4. Degradation mechanical models of corroded Q345 steel
To accurately predict the mechanical behavior of Q345 steel after
corrosion, this study incorporates previous experimental results on
4
Z. Kong et al. Structures 62 (2024) 106264

Fig. 6. Morphology of corroded Q345 steel.

corroded Q345 steel from sources such as Chen [29], Shi et al. [30], Wei
[31], Feng [32], Qiao et al. [33], Wang [34], Gao et al. [35], and Hong’s
work [36], as illustrated in Fig. 8. The trends reveal that the strength,
modulus of elasticity, and elongation at break of Q345 steel decrease as
the mass loss rate increases, as depicted in Fig. 8. Adopting a method­
ology similar to Yu et al. [37] and Akbarian and Barghian [38], reduc­
tion factors for mechanical parameters—such as the yield strength (Ry),
ultimate strength (Ru), modulus of elasticity (RE), and elongation at
break (RA)—are introduced to account for the impact of corrosion, as
shown in Eqs. (5)–(8).
f ′y
Ry = = 1.00 − 7.31 × 10− 3 η − 7.80 × 10− 5 η2 (5)
fy
A′
RA = = 1.00 − 2.42 × 10− 2 η0.83 (8)
A
Wherefy and f ′y are the yield strength of specimens with and without
corrosion, respectively; fu and f ′u are the ultimate strength of specimens
with and without corrosion, respectively; Eand E′ are the modulus of
elasticity of specimens with and without corrosion, respectively;Aand
A′are the elongation at break of specimens with and without corrosion,
respectively; and η is the mass loss rate of steel. Note that yield strength,
ultimate strength and modulus of elasticity are all in MPa in this work.
5. Constitutive model of corroded Q345 steel

f ′u 5.1. Current constitutive model

Ru = = 1.00 − 7.36 × 10− 3 η (6)
fu
Previously, Esmaeily and Xiao [39] suggested a model including the
RE =
E′
= 1.00 − 0.03η0.59 (7) elastic, the yield, the strengthening, and the quadratic yield stages for
E the S-SC of Q345 steel, as shown in Eq. (9).

5
Z. Kong et al. Structures 62 (2024) 106264

⎧
⎪
⎪ Es ε
⎪
⎪ ( )
⎪
⎪ ε ≤ εy )
⎪
⎨ σy (
εy ≤ ε ≤ k1 εy )
σ= Es (1 − k3 ) (
(
)2 k ε ≤ ε ≤ k ε (9)
⎪
⎪ k3 σ y + ε − k2 εy 1 (y )2 y
⎪
⎪ 2
⎪
⎪ εy (k 2 − k 1 ) ε ≥ k2 εy
⎪
⎩
σu

where σ represents the stress value; σy is the yield strength; Es is the

modulus of elasticity of the steel; ε is the strain value; εy is the yield
strain; k1, k2, k3 are the control parameters of the S-SC; and σu is the
ultimate strength.
However, this simplified model does not reflect the effect of corro­
sion, as depicted in Fig. 9. As such, Xu et al. [40] proposed a correction
coefficient β for considering the influence of corrosion in the strength­
ening stage, as shown in Eq. (10).
Es (1 − k3 ) ( )2 ( )
σ = k3 σ y + β ε − k2 εy k1 εy ≤ ε ≤ k2 εy (10)
εy (k2 − k1 )2
Fig. 7. S-SC of Q345 steel with different mass loss rate.
whereβ is the correction coefficient, and it can be obtained from Eq.
(11).
( )
ε − k1 εy 2
β= 1− (11)
k2 εy − k1 εy

Fig. 8. Mechanical parameters versus mass loss rate of corroded steel.

6
Z. Kong et al. Structures 62 (2024) 106264

k1 = 9.57 − 35.95η (12)

k2 = 110 (13)

k3 = 1.47 (14)
As depicted in Fig. 10, Xu et al.’s model [40] is not good for the S-SC
of corroded Q345 steel. Thus, a new constitutive model for the S-SC of
corroded Q345 steel is necessary to be developed.

5.2. New constitutive models of corroded Q345 steel

Two different types of S-SC (i.e., S-SC with yield plateau (Type I) and
S-SC without yield plateau (Type II)) are found in this work, as discussed
in Section 3.3.

5.2.1. Type I
To accurately estimate the S-SC of corroded Q345 steel with yield
Fig. 9. Comparison of S-SC between Esmaeily and Xiao’s model [39] and
plateau (Type I), the control parameters of the S-SC in Xu et al.’s model
test data. [40] is modified according to the experimental results [36,41], as shown
in Eqs. (15)-(17) and Fig. 11.
( )
k1 = 10.92 − 31.47η R2 = 0.96 (15)

k2 = 64.34 (16)

k3 = 1.58 (17)

Fig. 10. Comparison of S-SC between various models and test data.

7
Z. Kong et al. Structures 62 (2024) 106264

Fig. 10. (continued).

8
Z. Kong et al. Structures 62 (2024) 106264

Fig. 11. Controlling parameters versus mass loss rate.

To validate the proposed model, various S-SC of corroded Q345 steel,

5.2.2. Type II
including data from Xu et al. [40], Hong [36], and experimental results
As the yield plateau of corroded Q345 steel is not shown in Type II,
from this study, are utilized, as illustrated in Fig. 10. It is important to
Ban et al.’s model [42] for the S-SC without yield plateau is utilized, as
note that Xu’s model [40] is deemed unsuitable for specimens with a
show in Eq. (18).
mass loss rate greater than 26.6% due to the control parameter k1 being
⎧
⎪ Es ε ( ) less than zero. The presented constitutive models exhibit good agree­
⎪
⎪(
⎨ )( )
( 0 ≤ ε ≤ εy ) ment with the experimental curves.
σu − σy
σ= ε − εy + σy εy ≤ ε ≤ εu (18)
⎪
⎪ εu − εy
⎪
⎩ (ε ≥ εu ) 6. Conclusion
σu
To consider the effect of corrosion, a modified coefficient, is pro­ In this study, Q345 steel with varying mass loss rates was subjected
posed, as shown in Eq. (19). to CASS, followed by uniaxial tension tests to assess the impact of
( )( ) corrosion on its mechanical behavior. The analysis of the corrosion
σ − σy ( )
σ=λ u ε − εy + σ y εy ≤ ε ≤ εu (19) products and morphology of corroded Q345 steel was carried out using
εu − εy XRD and SEM. The key conclusions drawn from this research are as
follows:
where,
λ = a − bε (20) (1) Corrosion pits on the corroded Q345 specimens enlarge, and
microcracks extend as the mass loss rate increases. Additionally,
a = 5.88η + 1.02 (21) the microstructure transforms from a spherical to a needle-like
structure with increased corrosion time, leading to a decrease
b = 110.62η − 6.88 (22) in mechanical properties.

9
Z. Kong et al.
(2) Corrosion has a significant impact on the mechanical perfor­
mance of Q345 steel. When the mass loss rate reaches 15.31%,
the yield strength and ultimate strength experience decreases by
18.67% and 13.32%, respectively.
(3) The yield plateau of the S-SC of Q345 steel gradually shortens
with increasing corrosion time, disappearing entirely when the
mass loss rate reaches 15.31%.
(4) Constitutive models are proposed to accurately predict the S-SC
of corroded Q345 steel, accounting for scenarios both with and
without the yield plateau.
Declaration of Competing Interest
We declare that we have no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Horizon 2020 - Marie Skłodowska -
Curie Individual Fellowship of European Commission (No. SS-DSC
01107320) and EPSRC Fellowship award (No. EP/Y020278/1), Excel­
lent Young Talents Fund Program of Higher Education Institutions of
Anhui Province, China (No. gxyq2022015), Postdoctoral Research Fund
of Anhui Province, China (No. 2021B525), and Natural Science Foun­
dation of Anhui Province, China (No. 1908085ME171).
References
[1] Hui Y, Lin Z, Li R. Experimental study and analysis on the property of corroded
rebar. Ind Constr 1997;06:11–4.
[2] An L, Ouyang P, Zheng Y. Effect of stress concen tration on mechanical properties
of corroded reinforcing steel bars. J Southeast Univ(Nat Sci Ed) 2005;06:940–4.
[3] Xu S, Ren S. The calculation model of elastic modulus and yield strength for
corroded steel. Mater Mech Eng 2015;10:74–8.
[4] Xu S, Zhang Z, He Y, Qin G. Experimental study on monotonic tensile behavior of
corroded steel in neutral salt spray environment. J Xi’ Univ Archit Technol 2017;
49:164–71 (In Chinese).
[5] Moreno E, Cobo A, Palomo G, González MN. Mathematical models to predict the
mechanical behavior of reinforcements depending on their degree of corrosion and
the diameter of the rebars. Constr Build Mater 2014;61:156–63.
[6] Huang H, Jia C, Zhao O, Guo L. Local corrosion morphology analysis and
simplification of low carbon steel plates. Ocean Eng 2023;268:113372.
[7] Jin L, Zhang X, Liang X, Wang Z, Wu Q. Mechanical properties of corroded carbon
steel based on random pit corrosion in marine environment. Ocean Eng 2022;260:
111759.
[8] Xu S, Zhang Z, Li R, Wang H. Effect of cleaned corrosion surface topography on
mechanical properties of cold-formed thin-walled steel. Constr Build Mater 2019;
222:1–14.
[9] Cinitha A, Umesha P, Iyer NR. An overview of corrosion and experimental studies
on corroded mild steel compression members. KSCE J Civ Eng 2014;18:1735–44.
[10] Li L, Mahmoodian M, Li C-Q, Robert D. Effect of corrosion and hydrogen
embrittlement on microstructure and mechanical properties of mild steel. Constr
Build Mater 2018;170:78–90.
[11] Kong Z, Jin Y, Hossen GMS, Hong S, Wang Y, Vu Q-V, et al. Experimental and
theoretical study on mechanical properties of mild steel after corrosion. Ocean Eng
2022;246:110652.
[12] W. Ramberg, W.R. Osgood, Description of stress-strain curves by three parameters;
1943.
[13] Hill H. Determination of stress-strain relations from" offset" yield strength values.
Pittsburgh Pa: Aluminum Co of America; 1944.
10
Structures 62 (2024) 106264
[14] Zener C, Hollomon JH. Effect of strain rate upon plastic flow of steel. J Appl Phys
1944;15:22–32.
[15] Li D, Xiong C, Huang T, Wei R, Han N, Xing F. A simplified constitutive model for
corroded steel bars. Constr Build Mater 2018;186:11–9.
[16] Wang Y, Zhou X, Wang H, Kong D, Xu S. Stochastic constitutive model of structural
steel based on random field of corrosion depth. Case Stud Constr Mater 2022;16:
00972.
[17] GB/T 228. Metallic materials—tensile testing—part 1:method of test at room
temperature. 1-. Peking: Standards Press of China; 2021.
[18] GB/T 10125. Corrosion tests in artificial atmospheres—salt spray tests (-). Peking:
Standards Press of China; 2021.
[19] GB/T 16545-2015, Corrosion of metals and alloys—removal of corrosion products
from corrosion test specimens. (In Chinese).
[20] Liu H, Chen H, Chen Z. Residual behaviour of welded hollow spherical joints under
corrosion and de-rustin. J Constr Steel Res 2020;167:105977.
[21] Xu S, Zhang H, Wang Y. Estimation of the properties of corroded steel plates
exposed to salt-spray atmosphere, Corrosion Engineering. Sci Technol 2019;54:
431–43.
[22] Liang C, Hou W. Atmospheric corrosion of carbon steels and low alloy steels.
Corros Sci Prot Tech 1995;7:183–6.
[23] Liang C, Hou W. Atmospheric exposure corrosion of carbon steel and low alloy
steel in 16 years. J Chin Soc Corros Prot 2005;25:1–6.
[24] Li J, Du C. Corrosion test methods and monitoring techniques. China Petrochemical
Press; 2007.
[25] Hu J, Cao S, Yin L, Liang Q, Xie J. Study on the corrosion behavior of Q235A
carbon steel in RO product water of seawater. Anti Corros Methods Mater 2012;59:
305–10.
[26] Wu H, Luo Y, and, Zhou G. Corrosion behaviors and mechanical properties of Q235
steel pipes collapsing due to corrosion after 25-year service in urban industrial
atmospheric environment. Constr Build Mater 2023;395:132342.
[27] Dong J, Ke W. The accelerated test of simulated atmospheric corrosion and the rust
evolution of low carbon steel. J Electrochem 2009;15:170.
[28] GB 50011. Code for seismic design of buildings (-). Peking: Standards Press of
China; 2010.
[29] Chen Y. Research on the degradation of steel structures for the needs of structural
life-cycle design and time-dependent reliability in corrosive environment.
Southeast University; 2021 (In Chinese).
[30] Shi W, Tong L, Chen Y, Li Z, Shen K. Experimental study on influence of corrosion
on behavior of steel material and steel beams. J Build Struct 2012;33:53–60.
[31] Wei T. Study on the local bucking behavior of corroded h-shape steel short column
under axial compression. Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology; 2019
(In Chinese).
[32] Feng D. Study on fatigue properties of Q345B steel after neutral salt spray
corrosion. China University of Mining and Technology; 2019.
[33] Qiao W, Yang F, Hu Q, Zhang H, Jiao X. Experiment on mechanical property
degradation of Q345 steel after strong corrosion. J Traffic Transp Eng 2022;22:
231–46.
[34] Wang Y. Research on mechanical behavior of end-plate semi-rigid connection of
hybrid steel frame. Harbin: Harbin Institute of Technology; 2018.
[35] Gao S, Peng Z, Guo L. Experimental study on axial performance of concrete-filled
steel tubular stub column under salt spray corrosion. J Build Struct 2019;40:214–9.
[36] Hong S. Research on carrying capacity of corroded high-strength bolt shear
connections. Ma’anshan: Anhui university of Technology; 2021.
[37] Yu QB, Zhao XP, Sun B, Yu AM, Chen B. Yield-strength ratio of steel plate for high-
rise building. Iron Steel 2007;42:74–8.
[38] Akbarian B, Barghian M. The effect of post-yield stiffness ratio on strength
reduction factors due to ductility with an emphasis on iran’s strong ground
motions. J Civ Eng Urban 2013;3:310–6.
[39] Esmaeily A, Xiao Y. Behavior of reinforced concrete columns under variable axial
loads: analysis. Acids Struct J 2005;102:736.
[40] Xu S, Wang H, Su L. Degradation law of mechanical properties of Q235 steel plate
in neutral salt spray corrosion environment. Mater Mech Eng 2016;40:86–91.
[41] Zhang H, Qiao W, Yang F, Zhu H. Tensile finite element simulation of q345 bridge
steel with strong corrosion based on J-C model. J Zhengzhou Univ(Eng Sci) 2021;
42:99–104.
[42] Ban H, Shi G, Shi Y. Research on design method for overall buckling behavior of
welded box columns fabricated from high-strength steels. J Build Struct 2014;35:
57–64.