Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia Engineering 190 (2017) 243 – 247

Structural and Physical Aspects of Construction Engineering

Bond Strength Between Reinforcing Steel and Different Types

of Concrete
Vlastimil Bileka,*, Sabina Bonczkováa, Jan Hurtaa, David Pytlíka, Martin Mrovecb
a
Faculty of Civil Engineering, VSB-TU of Ostrava, L.Podeste 1875,708 33 Ostrava - Poruba, Czech Republic
b
Department of Applied Mathematics & IT4Innovations - National Supercomputing Center, VŠB - TU of Ostrava, Czech Republic

Abstract

The present paper discusses bond strength between reinforcing steel and three types of concretes. The first type of concrete was
concrete based on Portland cement. Two concretes were prepared - the first with a low content of cement and the second with a
relatively high content of cement. The second type of concrete was alkali activated concrete, containing slag, and it was activated
with a mixture of sodium water glass and potassium hydroxide. Similar concretes were prepared - the first with a low content of
binder and the second with a high content of binder. Finally, the third type of concrete was designed using hybrid cement, containing
slag and Portland cement, and it was activated with sodium carbonate. Similar concretes were prepared as in the previous cases.
Bond strength was measured using the pull-out test. Usually, alkali activated concrete is considered to have a better bond with steel
in comparison with Portland cement based concrete. The bond between hybrid cement based concrete and steel is very hard to
evaluate. The results are important not only for the evaluation of bond between steel and concrete, but also for the development of
alkali-activated or hybrid cement based steel-fibre concretes.
© 2017
© 2017TheTheAuthors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier
by Elsevier Ltd. is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
Ltd. This
Peer-review under responsibility of the issue editors.
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of SPACE 2016
Keywords: bond strength; alkali activated concrete; hybrid cement; reinforcement steel bar

1. Introduction

The benefit of reinforced concrete as a structural material is derived from the combination of concrete that is brittle,
but strong in compression and relatively durable with reinforcing steel that is strong and ductile in tension. Maintaining
composite action requires a transfer of load between concrete and steel. This load transfer is referred to as bond and is
idealized as a continuous stress field that develops in the vicinity of the steel-concrete interface.

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +420-602-744-586

E-mail address: vlastimil.bilek@vsb.cz

1877-7058 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of SPACE 2016
doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.05.333
244 Vlastimil Bilek et al. / Procedia Engineering 190 (2017) 243 – 247

The bond between concrete and reinforcement steel bars is affected by the surface condition of the rebar and the
formulation of concrete. The surface condition as rust [1], oil polluting [2] are sometimes studied as well as the effects
of testing procedures [1,2,3]. The bond mechanisms in steel bar reinforced concrete are understood well in normal
strength concrete on the basis od Portland cement. Some new aspects were observed in more modern concrete. Very
important is, for example, the composition of concrete, especially the content of fine cementitious particles. Collepardi
[4] presents the results for self-compacting concrete (SCC) and usual vibrated concrete with a much lower content of
fine particles. The bond between SCC and the reinforcement is much better than it is in the case of usual vibrated
concrete. There are two reasons – a higher content of fine particles which envelope better the reinforcing bar and a
better interfacial transition zone (ITZ), thanks to the pozzolanic reaction of some mineral admixtures, A very good
bond between concrete and steel is often observed in the case of a practical application of alkali-activated concrete.
The bond is so tight that it can cause problems during the de-moulding of alkali-activated concrete from steel moulds.
This might mean that the bond strength between AAC and steel is much better that that between Portland cement
based concrete and steel. This can be the consequence of a better ITZ in alkali activated materials. During the hydration
of Portland cement a porous ITZ is formed which contains weak crystals. On the other hand, the ITC in alkali activated
materials is more homogenous [5]. The comparison of the bond strengths of different kinds of concretes - vibrated
and nearly self compacting - Portland cement based concrete, alkali activated concrete and concrete with hybrid
cement (containing a small part of Portland cement and alkali activated) [5,6] is the main target of this paper.

2. Materials and experimental procedures

Three pairs of concretes were designed - for ordinary Portland cement based concrete, for alkali activated concrete
and for hybrid cement concrete. Each pair consists of one "poor" concrete with the content of cementitious material
308 kg/m3 and "rich" concrete with 450 kg/m3, see Table 1. The water to binder ratio was the same - 0.45. The concretes
were mixed in a laboratory mixer in the volume of 30 litres. The cone slump was measured in accordance with EN
12350-2. Three cubes 150 mm were made for the measurement of compressive strength and the tensile splitting
strength. A simple method was chosen to measure bond strength, similarly as in Rao et al [1] or Fu and Chung [2]. A
smooth (without any pattern) steel bar 14 mm was inserted into 150 cube mould and positioned vertically at its centre.
One end of the bar projected 20 mm to measure to free end slip - see Fig. 1. The other end of the bar jutted about 600
mm from the upper surface of the cube to the grip bar for loading. After fixing the bar, the concrete mixture was put
into the mould and was carefully compacted. Three specimens were made for the pullout test. At the age of 1 day all
specimens were demoulded and enveloped in PE foil to avoid water exchange with the environment.

Table 1 - Composition of concretes and workability.

OPC-P OPC-R ACC-P ACC-R HCC-P HCC-R
CEM I 42.5 R [kg] 308 450 - - 31 45
GBFS 420 [kg] - - 308 450 277 405
Na-wg Ms 2.0 [kg] - - 31 45 - -
50% KOH [kg] - - 23 34 - -
Na2CO3 [kg] - - - - 21.5 31.5
PSN superplasticizer [kg] 3.5 3.5 3.5 10.0 6.7 8.0
water [kg] 156 166 139 152 168 195
0/4 sand [kg] 645 910 645 855 645 860
4/8 crushed agg. [kg] 225 410 225 385 225 390
8/16 crushed agg. [kg] 990 425 990 400 990 405
cone slump [mm] 110 220 80 230 200 180

At the age of 28 days 3 cubes 150 mm were tested for compressive and next 3 for tensile splitting strength. A steel
plate approximately 50 x 70 mm was glued onto the bottom of the cubes with a bar. The plate served as a base for
 Vlastimil Bilek et al. / Procedia Engineering 190 (2017) 243 – 247 245

fixing an electronic dial indicator for the measurement of deflection during the pulling-out of the bar; see Fig. 1. The
load displacement rate was 1.5 mm/min. The load for the deflection of 0.001 - 0.002 mm is recommended for the
computation of bond strength W; W - the value of the load for 0.002 mm was used in this work. The next value is the
total value WMAX which is computed for the maximum load which was reached. The bond strength was computed using
formula W = P / (S d l ), where P is load [N], l embedded length [m] and d diameter [m] of the bar.

a b

Fig. 1. Schema of of pull-out test - (a) global view and (b) detail.

3. Results and discussion

The results of the measurement are shown in Table 2. Compressive strengths are the highest for AAC-R and AAC-
P. They exceed very significantly the strengths of OPC based mixtures. The lowest are the strengths of hybrid cement
based concretes - HCC-R and HCC-P. It is interesting that the "poor" HCC-P shows a higher compressive strength
than the "rich" HCC-R. The same could be said about the tensile splitting strength tests results. But there are different
ratios fc/fd - see Table 2. It seems that AAC is more brittle than OPC. HCC shows the lowest values of fd and also the
highest values of fc/fd - they are the least brittle. The same results for concrete with hybrid cement were also obtained
by Bilek et al. [6]. It is interesting that despite the high differences in values of fc and fd in the case of AAC and OPC,
the bonds with a steel bar are nearly the same. There is not a better bond between a steel bar and OPC and a steel bar
and AAC in terms of WMAX and W. For all of the concretes, the bond strength is higher for the concretes with a higher
content of binder. This result corresponds to the discussed results, see Collepardi [4]. Typical bond - slip diagrams are
presented in Figs. 2, 3 and 4 for all of the concretes.

Table 2: Measured characteristics.

OPC-P OPC-R ACC-P ACC-R HCC-P HCC-R
compressive strength fc [MPa] 40.5 49.2 57.9 83.5 25.5 30.5
-3
volume density [kgm ] 2360 2300 2410 2380 2370
tensile splitting strength fd [MPa] 4.25 5.4 6.15 6.5 3.6 3.85
fd / fc 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.08 0.14 0.13
fc / fd 9.5 9.1 9.4 12.8 7.1 7.9
maximum bond strength - WMAX [MPa] 4.6 5.2 4.5 5.3 2.4 2.6
bond strength in deflection 0.002 mm - W2 [MPa] 3.1 3.6 3.0 3.6 2.0 2.3
246 Vlastimil Bilek et al. / Procedia Engineering 190 (2017) 243 – 247

40 40
35 AAC-P 35 AAC-R
30 30
25 25
load [N]

load [N]
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0 6,0 0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0 6,0
slip [mm] slip [mm]

Fig. 2. Load - slip diagrams for AAC.

The increasing branches of the diagrams for AAC and OPC - Figs. 2 and 3 - are nearly the same. But the descending
branches are a bit different - they go down more steeply for OPC, which means that AAC probably enveloped the
surface of steel more tightly, thanks to a better ITZ discussed above. A detailed study of the interface would be
important for a more in-depth discussion of this result.

40
40
35
35 OPC-R
30
OPC-P 30
25
load [N]
load [N]

25
20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0 0
0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0 6,0 0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0 6,0
slip [mm] slip [mm]
Fig. 3. Load - slip diagrams for OPC

40
40
35 HCC-R
35 HCC-P
30 30

25 25
load [N]

load [N]

20 20
15 15
10 10
5 5
0
0
0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0 6,0 0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0 6,0
slip [mm] slip [mm]

Fig. 4. Load - slip diagrams for HCC.

4. Conclusion

Comparisons of the bond strengths of different types of concretes - alkali activated, ordinary Portland cement based
and hybrid cement based concretes - were made in this paper. No significant differences were recorded between the
bond strength of AAC and OPC, as AAC has a significantly higher compressive strength. But the tensile splitting
strengths of AAC and OPC were similar. HCC showed a much lower bond strength, which is probably the consequence
of their lower compressive strengths and tensile splitting strengths. The idea of a better bond between steel and AAC
was not confirmed. The practical experience of a better adhesion of AAC to steel moulds is probably the result of a
reaction between AAC and de-moulding admixture.
 Vlastimil Bilek et al. / Procedia Engineering 190 (2017) 243 – 247 247

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the conceptual development of science, research and innovation for the year 2016
allocated to VSB-TU Ostrava by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports.

References

[1] G. Rao, K. Pandurangan, F. Sultana, Studies on pull-out strength of ribbed bars in high-strength concrete, Proc. of FraMCoS-6 (2007),
Catania, Italy, pp. 295-301
[2] I.H. Musa Albarway, J.H. Haido, Bond strength of concrete with the reinforcement bars polluted with oil, European Scientific Journal,
2/2013, vol. 9, No. 6, ISSN: 1857-7881, pp.255-272
[3] X. Fu, D.D.L. Chung, Interface between steel rebar and concrete, studied by elektrochemical pull-out testing, Composite Interfaces, Vol. 6
(1999), No. 2, pp. 81-92
[4] M. Collepardi, The new concrete, Grafiche Tintoretto, ENCO, 2006, Italy
[5] J. L. Provis, J.S.J. van Deventer, Alkali-Activated Materials, RILEM State-of-the-art-reports TC 224 AAM, RILEM 2014, ISBN 978-94-007-
7671-5, 379 p.
[6] V. Bílek, J. Hurta, P. Done, L. Zidek, T. Zajdllík, Hybrid Alkali Activated Concretes – Conception and Development for Practical Application,
Solid State Phenomena, ISSN: 1662-9779, Vol. 249, pp. 3-7, ©2016, Trans Tech Publication, Switzerland