Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering

Front Struc Civil Eng    2013, Vol. 7 Issue (1) : 39-45     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-013-0193-y
RESEARCH ARTICLE |
Study of bond strength between various grade of Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) and Portland Pozzolane Cement (PPC) mixes and different diameter of TMT bars by using pullout test
A D POFALE, S P WANJARI()
Department of Civil Engineering, Visvesvarya National Institute of Technology, Nagpur 440010, India
Download: PDF(387 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

Since last two decades, the Portland Pozzolane Cement (PPC) is extensively used in structural concrete. But, till to date, a few literature is available on bond strength of concrete using PPC mixes. There are many literatures available on bond strength of concrete mixes using Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC). Hence, a comparative study was conducted on bond strength between OPC and PPC mixes. In the present investigation, total 24 samples consisting of M20, M35 and M50 grades of concrete and 16 and 25 mm diameter of TMT bar were tested for 7 and 28 days. The pullout bond test was conducted on each specimen as per IS: 2770-1967/1997 [1] and the results were observed at 0.25 mm slip at loaded end called as critical bond stress and at maximum bond load called as maximum bond stress. It was observed that the critical bond strength of PPC mixes is 10% higher than OPC mixes. Whereas, marginal improvement was noticed in maximum bond strength of PPC mixes. Hence, based on these findings, it could be concluded that development length for PPC mixes could be reduced by 10% as compared with same grade of OPC mixes.

Keywords bond strength      Portland Pozzolane Cement (PPC) concrete      Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) concrete      bond between concrete and steel      pullout test      development length     
Corresponding Authors: WANJARI S P,Email:swapnil_wanjari@yahoo.co.in   
Issue Date: 05 March 2013
 Cite this article:   
A D POFALE,S P WANJARI. Study of bond strength between various grade of Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC) and Portland Pozzolane Cement (PPC) mixes and different diameter of TMT bars by using pullout test[J]. Front Struc Civil Eng, 2013, 7(1): 39-45.
 URL:  
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-013-0193-y
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y2013/V7/I1/39
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
A D POFALE
S P WANJARI
No.physical testsresult obtainedIS: 12269-1987 specifications
OPC 53PPC
1fineness/(m2·kg-1)309334225 (min)
2standard consistency28.5%31.5%-
3initial setting time185 min240 min≥30 min
4final setting time270 min335 min≤600 min
5compressive strength/MPa
3 days41.030.527 MPa (min)
7 days50.042.037 MPa (min)
28 day64.056.053 MPa (min)
Tab.1  Physical properties of OPC and PPC as per IS 12269-1987 []
No.chemical testobservedrequired
1% carbon content by wt0.250.30
2% sulfur content by wt0.0240.055
3% phosphorus content by wt0.0360.055
4% sulfur and phosphorus0.0600.105
Tab.2  Chemical properties of reinforcement steel as per IS 1786-2008 [] (part-1)
No.propertiesF. AC.A 10 mmC.A 20 mm
1specific gravity2.302.712.95
2fineness modulus3.126.167.04
3water absorption/%1.200.900.66
Tab.3  Physical properties of aggregates
mixesOPC20OPC35OPC50PPC20PPC35PPC50
cement/(kg·m-3)310410450350521608
water/(kg·m-3)171164158185190195
W/C ratio0.550.400.350.520.360.32
F.A/(kg·m-3)691691691691691691
C.A 10 mm/(kg·m-3)494494494494494494
C. A 20 mm/(kg·m-3)987987987987987987
slump range/mm25-5025-5025-5025-5025-5025-50
fresh density/(kg·m-3)264527402770259826862797
Tab.4  Design mixes
Fig.1  Combined grading curve
Fig.2  Test setup of pullout bond test
Fig.3  Pullout testing under progress
Fig.4  Crushing of concrete due to pullout by lugs after pullout test
No.identification marksdurationcritical bond stress/MPamaximum bond stress/Mpa
specimen 1specimen 2specimen 3averagespecimen 1specimen 2specimen 3average
1OPC-M20-16?72.492.813.112.809.6509.48010.2309.79
2OPC-M35-16?74.705.604.564.9512.54013.67211.64812.62
3OPC-M50-16?76.506.126.406.3415.66115.79012.05714.50
4OPC-M20-16?283.843.103.753.5613.43014.23013.56713.74
5OPC-M35-16?285.255.815.625.5615.55515.40216.46515.81
6OPC-M50-16?287.206.986.196.7918.20918.12917.51617.95
7PPC-M20-16?73.472.172.542.7311.32812.45611.24811.68
8PPC-M35-16?73.993.994.344.1114.56015.21013.26214.34
9PPC-M50-16?76.506.216.356.3515.70915.46415.67515.62
10PPC-M20-16?284.343.653.823.9414.97313.23514.68214.30
11PPC-M35-16?285.626.585.625.9416.05616.72216.72216.50
12PPC-M50-16?287.106.987.587.2218.59717.91418.04718.19
13OPC-M20-25?73.533.953.023.5011.43810.11211.18910.91
14OPC-M35-25?74.114.875.344.7714.13413.97613.16113.76
15OPC-M50-25?76.747.115.856.5714.01914.44413.76514.08
16OPC-M20-25?283.733.933.733.8014.78312.78911.82813.13
17OPC-M35-25?285.305.635.305.4116.48315.63315.46315.86
18OPC-M50-25?285.856.077.566.4917.24717.24718.01217.50
19PPC-M20-25?73.634.143.033.6012.03011.12311.56711.57
20PPC-M35-25?75.345.154.454.9814.31314.10312.92013.78
21PPC-M50-25?78.196.565.856.8714.89015.38714.34014.87
22PPC-M20-25?284.454.454.044.3113.61114.31415.22314.38
23PPC-M35-25?285.305.635.305.4117.54115.83515.41916.27
24PPC-M50-25?286.976.407.546.9717.21317.12519.48117.94
Tab.5  Test result of pullout bond test specimens
Fig.5  Relation between critical bond stress and grade of concrete for 16 mm diameter TMT bar
Fig.6  Relation between critical bond stress and grade of concrete for 25 mm diameter TMT bar
Fig.7  Relation between maximum bond stress and grade of concrete for 16 mm diameter TMT bar
Fig.8  Relation between maximum bond stress and grade of concrete for 25 mm diameter TMT bar
1 IS: 2770–1967/1997, Part-1. Methods of Testing Bond in Reinforcement Concrete, Pullout Test, Bureau of Indian Standards , New Delhi, India
2 95th Report on Performance of Cement Industry. Department Related Parliamentary Standing Committee On Commerce, Rajya Sabha Secretariat New Delhi, February, Phalguna , 2011, 1932
3 Mindess S, Young J, Darwin D. Concrete. 2nd Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc, 2004, Ch.5, 106-111
4 Ravina D, Mehta P. Properties of Fresh Concrete Containing Large Amounts of Fly Ash. Cement and Concrete Research , 1986, 16(2): 227-238
doi: 10.1016/0008-8846(86)90139-0
5 Mehta P, Monteiro P. Concrete: Microstructure, Properties, and Materials, 3rd edition. The McGraw Hill Companies, Inc , 2006, 485-491
6 Soltani A. Bond and serviceability characterization of concrete reinforced with high strength steel. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree, Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh , 2010, 13
7 Hossain K M A, Lachemi M. Bond behavior of self consolidating concrete with mineral and chemical admixtures. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering , 2008, 20(9): 608-616
doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0899-1561(2008)20:9(608)
8 Nadim Hassoun M. Akthem Al- Manaseer. Structural concrete, Therory and Design, Forth Edition, John Wiley and Sons , Canada
9 Sarker P K, 0. Bond Strength of reinforcing steel embedded in fly ash- based geopolymer concrete. Materials and Structures , 2011, 44(5): 1021-1030
doi: 10.1617/s11527-010-9683-8
10 ACI 408R–03. Bond and Development of Straight Reinforcing Bar in Tension, ACI Committee 408
11 IS: 383–1970. Specifications for Coarse and Fine Aggregates from Natural Sources for Concrete, Bureau of Indian Standards , New Delhi, India
12 IS: 10262–2009. Recommended Guidelines for Concrete Mix Design, Bureau of Indian Standards , New Delhi, India
13 IS: 12269–1987. Specification for 53 grades of Ordinary Portland Cement, Bureau of Indian Standards , and New Delhi, India
14 IS 1786–2008. High Strength Deformed Steel bars and Wires for Concrete Reinforcement-Specification, Bureau of Indian Standards , New Delhi, India
15 Chan Y W, Chen Y S, Liu Y S. Development of bond strength of reinforcement steel in self-consolidating concrete. ACI Structural Journal , 2003, 100(4): 490-498
16 CEB/FIB Model Code. Structural Concrete. Volume-1, International Federation of structural concrete, Switzerland . 1990
17 IS 456–2000. Plain and Reinforcement Concrete-Code of Practice, Bureau of Indian Standards , New Delhi, India
Related articles from Frontiers Journals
[1] Gudimella RAMAKRISHNA, Sriraman PRIYADHARSHINI. Effect of embedment length of untreated natural fibres on the bond behaviour in cement mortar[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2018, 12(4): 454-460.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed