TOPIC 8 - BOND MECHANICS OF BOND

Mechanics of Bond Stages of Bond Resistance

Average
Factors Influencing Bond Bond Stress,
Transverse Cracking
Partial Splitting
b
Tests to Investigate Bond Through Splitting
0.5 fc
Code Provisions for Bond Stage IVc

Anchorage at Precast Girder Ends

Pull-Out Failure
Analytical Models for Bond Stage II

Modeling Bond in ATENA and DIANA Stage III Stage IVb Residual Strength
1DB
Modeling for Bond for Cyclic Applications 1PB Confinement (Friction)
Deformed Bar Splitting Failure
References for Figures Stage I Plain Bar - Pull-Out Failure
Stage IVa
fib Bulletin No. 10, Bond of reinforcement in concrete, State-of-art report,
Pages: 434, 30 tables, 251 illustrations 0
Bar Slip, t (or s)
Lowes, L.N., Moehle, J.P., and Govindjee, S., Concrete-Steel Bond Model
for Use in Finite Element Modeling of Reinforced Concrete Structures, ACI
Structural Journal, V. 101, No. 4., July-August 2004

Splitting Cracks Due to Circumferential Tension Modes of Bond Failure

Splitting Failure
A splitting failure occurs when the transverse splitting
p* F cracks can extend to a free surface and thereby
eliminate the development of confinement.
r
Pull Out Failure
c
l
Occurs in more heavily confined concrete. Force transfer
Splitting mechanism can change from rib bearing to friction after
Crack shear resistance of concrete between adjacent ribs is
p*
exceeded.
Complex Modes of Failure
F + F
At failure, the conditions along the length of a bar can


vary, and consist of pull-out with no visible concrete
splitting, pull-out induced by partial or thorough splitting,
and splitting induced by concrete spalling.
 FACTORS INFLUENCING BOND TESTS TO INVESTIGATE BOND
Many factors affect bond resistance
Reinforcement Type
Numerous models developed to describe influence of
Size and spacing of ribs, plain bars, prestressing
strands various factors
Quality and Stress State of Concrete Tests designed to investigate influence of specific factors,
Compressive and tensile strength (hsc) calibrate bond models, and investigate limits of applicability
Position of reinforcement in casting
Active and Passive Confinement
Tests for Bond OF Deformed Bars with Short
Active confinement from support and continuity
Passive confinement from transverse reinforcement Embedment Length
and concrete tensile rings is only mobilized in
conjunction with concrete dilation during cracking and
thus is a function of bond stress
Poissons effect in strands
Other Factors
Size and number of bars, spacing of layers
Rusting, temperature extremes RILEM/CEB/FIP (1970) Tassios (1982)

Tests for Evaluating the Effects of Confinement Tests for

Investigating Long
LVDT Anchorage Zones
(Ring Opening)

Clamping
Teflon Device
Strain Gauge
Hydraulic
Jack Confining Ring
Plan View
 Long Beam Tests
Tension Pullout Tests
on Prestressing
P P
2 Strand

CODE PROVISIONS FOR BOND Code Provisions (ACI Code/Deformed Bars)

ACI 318-56 (Allowable Stress Design)
Code Provisions (ACI Code/Deformed Bars)
design force A f d f db f s
ACI Design Equations for Bond ub b s b s or Ld
(Development Length of Deformed Bars)
bond area d b Ld 4 Ld 4ub
Fergusons recommendation (1965): ub 0.04f c.
Therefore, Ld=30 db
18 f y (ACI 318-02 Eq. 12-1)
ld for Grade 60 No.8 bar, 4000psi concrete, fs = 24ksi.

db
20 f c c K tr
'

d SI Unit
30 bar diameter
b rule of thumb
where = reinforcement location factor, Atr f yt
= coating factor, K tr
= reinforcement size factor,
1500 sn
= lightweight aggregate concrete factor,
c = spacing or cover dimension,
Ktr = transverse reinforcement index
Code Provisions (ACI Code/Deformed Bars) Code Provisions (ACI Code/Deformed Bars)
Orangun, Jirsa and Breen (1975, 1977) ACI 318-95
The bond expressions have been reevaluated and restated in
C d Atr f yt ' terms of bar diameter.
ub 0.1 0.25 4.15 b fc
db Ld 41.52 sd b SI Unit

- empirical relationship
18d b f y (c K )
Ld tr
- 2nd term: confining influence of cover and the negative 20 f ' d b SI Unit
effects of close bar spacing on bond c


- 4th term: passive confinement influence
For standard Configuration, this equation reduces to
Simplifying this equation gives the following.
12d b f y
0.02 Ab f y Ld ( )
Ld 20 f ' SI Unit
f c' SI Unit c

Code Provisions (CEB Model Code/Def. Bars) Code Provisions (Prestressing Strand)
CEB Model Code (1990) ACI 318-02

db f y SI Unit 2
Ld Ld f ps f se d b
4 f bd 3
where
Term fbd represents the design bond stress of concrete, fps = stress in prestressed reinforcement at nominal strength
given by fse = effective stress in prestressed reinforcement after all
loss.
f bd 1 23 f td' SI Unit
AASHTO Eq. (9-32)
where n1 is a geometry factor taken as 2.25 for ribbed bars, Ld 1 / 3 f se d b ( f su* f se )d b
n2 is an orientation factor for bond (1.0 in most cases), and n3
is a bar size factor set at 1.0 for 32 mm and smaller bars. The -1st term: transfer length of strand
term ftd is the design tensile strength of concrete. - 2nd term: flexural bond length of the strand
Code Provisions (Prestressing Strand)
Ld 1 / 3 f se d b ( f su* f se )d b
Code Provisions (Prestressing Strand)
Transfer Length
A transfer bond stress of 4000psi (2.76MPa) and Grade 250
strand applies to the actual perimeter of seven-wire strand,
4db/3. For equilibrium of a strand over the transfer length:

4d b
F x 0.400
3
Lt 0.725(d b / 4) f se 0

2

Solving this yields:

f se d b
Lt
3

Code Provisions (Prestressing Strand)

Application LRFD ACI 318-95
Development d f y d f y
Flexural Bond Length:
length for deformed ld 1 2 ld d
bars, deformed wire f c' ( c K tr ) / d b f c' b
in tension
lap length of bars in l sp l m l d l sp l m l d
tension
Development f f
length for l d 4 k pe d b ( f ps f pe )d b or l d 4 se d b ( f ps f se ) d b
prestressing strand 3 3

4 f pbt d 6.4( f ps f pe )( d b )
ld 5 '
10
fc f c'
Transfer length f
60 db or pe d b 50 db or f se d b
3 3
Application CEB-FIP MC90 Eurocode2
Local bond stress- max ( s / s1 )
slip model
Ld Lt ( f su* f se )d b Basic anchorage or
Ap f pd 2
length
lb
p 1 2 3 f ctd
lb lt d 2

l b 2 6 7 8 9 10 l b As ,cal / As ,ef
lap length of bars in lo 6 8 9 10 11l b As ,cal / As ,ef
Fig. Flexural bond length recommended by ACI Committee 323 tension
Transfer length l t 12 13 14 l b pi / f pd lt 15 p p
 ANCHORAGE AT PRECAST GIRDER ENDS Longitudinal Tension Reinforcement:
Longitudinal Tension Reinforcement: Demand LRFD Demand STM

Mu N u Vu
Aps f ps As f y
dv
0.5

V p 0.5Vs cot
Aps f ps As f y R cot

Longitudinal Tension Reinforcement: Capacity Longitudinal Tension Reinforcement: Capacity

At nominal resistance of member
f ps

1600
14.7 kips/ft
Ef fective prestress 18.2 kips/ft
f pe
f px f pe
l px 60 d b f f pe 1200 21.5 kips/ft
Steel l d 60 d b ps
23.7 kips/ft

Strain (x10 -6)

Stress 800 26.4 kips/ft
f pe l px 27.9 kips/ft
f px 32.7 kips/ft
60 d b
400

End of
member or 60d b 0
End of transfer length
f ree end of
strand l px
-400
ld Bearing
plate
-800
0 12 24 36 48 60 72
Distance From End (inch)

G8W
 ANALYTICAL MODELS FOR BOND Model for Bond
Ineffective
Region
included in CEB 1990 Model Code
F F

Bond
l l Stress
s s 1
s0
s0

R Z x R=Z x 3

s, c s, c

s0
s0
s
s
S1 S2 S3 Slip
c0 c R Z x c0 R=Z x
c

Unconfined Confined Shortcomings of models

Assumption of zero slip
Concrete* Concrete**
Neglects effects of confinement, cover
Good Other Good Other Most models assume linear elastic behavior
Bond Bond Bond Bond Most models for monotonic loading Concrete
Conditions Conditions Conditions Conditions Reinforcement

s1 0.6 mm 0.6 mm 1.0 mm 1.0 mm

s2 0.6 mm 0.6 mm 3.0 mm 3.0 mm
Concrete
s3 1.0 mm 2.5 mm clear rib clear rib Reinforcement
spacing spacing
T3 2.0 f ck 1.0 f ck 2.5 f ck 1.25 f ck
Concrete

T1 0.15 T3 0.15 T3 0.4 T3 0.4 T3 Reinforcement

* Failure by splitting, ** Failure by shearing at ribs

 MODELING BOND in ATENA and DIANA
Reinforcement bars with prescribed slip
Bond behavior models in ATENA
Defines the bond strength depending on the value of
current slip between reinforcement and surrounding
concrete
ATENA contains three models Stress in steel i
ui 1 i 1 ui i E
l i

CEB-FIP model code 1990, Bigaj model, User defined law Equilibrium condition x p
where p:perimeter, A:cross-section of bar
c
A
In equilibrium, the change of stress in rebar is fully transferred
to cohesive stress.
li li 1
Discretized form A i i 1
2
p c

If the equilibrium is not satisfied, the slip will occur to reduce

the stress in steel.

How to use in the program (I) How to use in the program (II)
Define the behavior model in material
How to use in the program (III) Bond behavior models in DIANA
Assign behavior model to discrete rebar DIANA contains three models
Select rebar assign properties of the bar Cubic, Power Law, and Multi-linear

Figures from DIANA material manual

Shear relations for positive and negative values of slip are

equal.
The material option is combined with the line interface
element.

Line interface element with bond option Finite element implementation

Bond-slip option is used in the line interface 2-D, L8IF. The relationship between the normal traction and normal
relative displacement is modeled as linear elastic.
tn kn un
The relationship between the shear traction and the slip
is modeled as a nonlinear function.
tt ft dt
Interface element between two lines in a two-dimensional
configuration. Tangential stiffness coefficients for relative displacements
kn 0
The bond-slip is a function of relative displacement. 0 f t dt

ABSTRACT
Reinforced concrete requires bond between plain concrete
and reinforcing steel. Accurate numerical modeling of
structures that exhibit severe bond-stress demand requires
explicit representation of bond-zone response. A bond
element is presented for use in high-resolution finite element
modeling of reinforced concrete structures subjected to
general loading. The model is defined by a normalized bond
stress versus slip relationship and a relationship between
maximum bond strength and the concrete and steel stress-
strain state. A finite element implementation of the model is
proposed that enables a one- or two-dimensional
representation of bond-zone action. Nonlocal modeling is
used to incorporate the dependence of bond strength on the
concrete and steel material state. Comparisons of simulated
and observed response for systems with uniform and variable
bond-zone conditions are presented.