Construction and Building Materials 112 (2016) 691–698

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Construction and Building Materials

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conbuildmat

The effects of material properties on bond strength between reinforcing

bar and concrete exposed to high temperature
Ali Ergün a,⇑, Gökhan Kürklü a, M. Serhat Basßpınar b
a
Afyon Kocatepe University, Faculty of Engineering, Civil Engineering Department, Afyonkarahisar, Turkey
b
Afyon Kocatepe University, Faculty of Technology, Metallurgical and Materials Engineering Department, Afyonkarahisar, Turkey

h i g h l i g h t s

RBS is residual bond strength.

RBS between rebar and concrete exposed to high temperatures were investigated.

A modified pull-out test setup was used in experimental studies.

Math. equations were proposed to predict RBS of specimens exposed to high temperature.

These equations can be used to assess the post-fire strength of concrete structures.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The effects of material properties on bond strength between reinforcing bar and concrete exposed to high
Received 13 February 2012 temperatures are investigated extensively using modified pullout tests. The specimen parameters include
Received in revised form 17 February 2016 various bar diameters, rebar grades and concrete strengths. Three different concrete cubes with compres-
Accepted 26 February 2016
sive strengths of 20, 34 and 44 MPa, 12, 16 and 20 mm rebar diameters and S220a, S420a and S500a rebar
grades were utilized for the tests. In the experimental study, the tests were conducted on 150/300 cylin-
der specimens in which rebars are embedded vertically exposed to high temperatures (100, 200, 400, 600
Keywords:
and 800 °C) and cooled down. Furthermore, 150 mm cube and 100/100/300 mm prism specimens were
Bond strength
High temperature
used to determine compressive and flexural strength of concrete. Bond strengths of these specimens were
Concrete strength compared with each other and then with unheated specimens at 20 °C. Experimental results indicated
Reinforcing bar that residual bond strength between reinforcing bar and concrete decreases with increasing temperature.
Pull-out The first severe bond strength loss was observed for grade S220a at the range of 200–400 °C and for grade
S420a and S500a at the range of 400–600 °C. The residual compressive strength is in tendency with the
residual bond strength of S420a and S500a whereas the residual flexural strength corresponds agrees
with the residual bond strength of S220a.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction reinforcing bars has a different reaction to thermal exposures in

The strength of a structure depends on the strength of the mate-
rials from which it is made. Having knowledge of the materials
characteristics and behavior under load and environmental effects
is fundamental to understanding the performance of reinforced
concrete (RC) structures. Determining the mechanical properties
of RC elements under environmental effects such as high temper-
ature is as important as when they are under loads. Exposure to
high temperatures during fire is one of the most damaging
environmental effects for RC structures. Each of concrete and
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: aergun@aku.edu.tr (A. Ergün).
itself and the behavior of the composite system after high temper-
ature is difficult to model. As the concrete has the low thermal con-
ductivity, it protects reinforcing bars to a certain depth of concrete
cover from thermal exposures. Therefore, the complexities of tem-
perature distributions between reinforcing bar and concrete
exposed to high temperatures lessen [1]. When RC structural ele-
ments are exposed to high temperatures, a number of physical
and chemical changes will occur mainly in concrete material.
The effects of high temperature on the mechanical response of
concrete have been investigated since the middle of the twentieth
century [2–5] and is still being studied today. The research found
in the technical literature can be classified into two categories:
materials testing and element testing. The results of materials

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.02.213
0950-0618/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
692 A. Ergün et al. / Construction and Building Materials 112 (2016) 691–698
testing provide information on the effects of temperature on the
mechanical properties of concrete (such as compressive and tensile
strength, modulus of elasticity, etc.), while the results from ele-
ment testing is used to assess the fire resistance of reinforced-
concrete structural elements (such as beam, columns, slabs). It
was reported that the changes in the mechanical properties of con-
crete with temperatures could depend on several parameters such
as the chemical and physical properties of the concrete con-
stituents, the temperature to which the concrete structure had
been exposed to, the size of the concrete structure as well as the
external applied loadings and cooling conditions to which the
structural member had been subjected to [1,6–16].
The previous studies on bond strength between reinforcing bars
and concrete are less than the studies related to the mechanical
properties of concrete exposed to high temperatures. The bonding
behavior of reinforcing concrete at elevated temperatures has been
investigated using pullout test specimens. Some of the related
studies are the tests by Morely and Royles [17], Haddad and Shan-
nis [18], Haddad et al. [19] and Bingol and Gul [20]. It was reported
that there was a considerable loss in bond strength as the temper-
ature was increased. The findings of these studies showed that the
residual bond strength changed between 30% and 70% according to
examined parameters such as the properties of concrete and rebar,
the size of diameter and embedment length of rebar, the regime of
heating and cooling etc. when subjected to temperatures in excess
of 500 °C [17–20]. Furthermore, the effects of different parameters
of concrete and reinforcing bars on behavior of bond strength at
room temperature using pullout tests have been investigated
[21–24].
In summary, the changes on the bond strength between rein-
forcing bars and concrete with temperatures depend on several
parameters. For this reason, it is very difficult to quantify direct
relationships between the temperature increase and decrease on
the residual bond strength. In fact quantifying such relationships
including the effects of different parameters with each other would
be very useful for practicing engineers in order to assess the
strength of existing buildings when exposed to fire.
In this experimental investigation, the results of 486 pull-out
tests performed were presented with the aim of contributing to
the experimental database and to a better understanding of the
bond behavior between reinforcing bars and concrete exposed high
temperatures. Bonding behavior was extensively examined for dif-
ferent types of concrete strengths, the rebar grades and rebar
diameters to determine the effects of the investigated parameters.
The concrete specimens were grouped in three series: Concrete-A,
Concrete-B and Concrete-C with the cube compressive strength at
28-day of 20 MPa, 34 MPa and 44 MPa, respectively. Grades S420a
and S500a deformed rebars and grade S220a plain rebar were cho-
sen for the tests. The reinforcing bar diameters were 12, 16 and
20 mm. The changes over the bond strength between reinforcing
bars and concrete of the 27 test series under elevated temperatures
(20, 100, 200, 400, 600 and 800 °C) were analyzed by conducting
the pullout tests, as well as the compressive and flexural strength
tests.
2. Experimental studies
In this research, three concrete test series; (namely Concrete-A, Concrete-B and
Concrete-C) were provided from ready-mixed concrete plant. Ready-mixed con-
crete was preferred in order to ensure homogeneity in each sample series through-
out the experimental program. Ready-mixed concrete consists of the ordinary
Portland cement (CEM I 42.5 R), crushed limestone aggregates (0–22 mm) and river
sand (0–4 mm). The designations and proportions of the concrete mixtures for the
three test series are given in Table 1. The cube compressive strengths at 28-day of
test series were 20 MPa, 34 MPa and 44 MPa. Each test series consisted of thirty six
150  150  150 mm cubes (6 trials, 6 cubes in each trial) and thirty six
100  100  300 mm prismatic beams (6 trials, 6 beams in each trial). For compar-
ing with heated specimens, three unheated specimens were tested to determine
compressive and flexural strength of at 28-days and 90-days, respectively. The
others were tested for failure to study the variation of the residual compressive
and flexural strength with temperatures. The experiments were carried out using
a closed-loop servo-hydraulic dynamic testing machine, with a capacity of
2000 kN. The samples were tested under strain control procedures. A constant axial
strain rate was used throughout the experiments.
Three types and diameters of steel bars were used in preparing pullout speci-
mens. The steel rebar types were grade S220a, S420a and S500a. The diameters of
grade 220a plain round steel rebars and grade S420a and S500a deformed steel
rebars were 12, 16 and 20 mm. The mechanical properties for all types and diame-
ters of steel rebars are shown in Table 2.
The grades of S220a, S420a and S500a and the diameters of 12 mm, 16 mm and
20 mm reinforcing bars samples exposed to different temperature such as 200, 400,
600 and 800 °C temperature in the electrical furnace and then cooled slowly. Ten-
sion tests performed on the cooled samples by using universal test machine UTM).
The residual yield and tension strengths obtained from the test results. These
parameters compared with those of the room temperature (20 °C) samples [25].
The pull-out tests were performed to determine the bond strength. The pull-out
test is easier than other test methods and more suitable for comparing relative bond
properties [20,26]. A 150 mm diameter and 300 mm height cylinder mould was
used to prepare the pull-out specimens for all temperature values. A single reinforc-
ing bar 12, 16 and 20 mm in diameter was placed into the centre of concrete spec-
imens with the embedment length of 250 mm. The produced specimens for pull-
out tests were moist cured in the morning and evening for the first 7 days after cast-
ing, and then kept under existing laboratory conditions (20–22 °C) until 90th day
(Fig. 1).
At the end of 90 days, the test cubes, beams and cylinder specimens, that were
supposed to be tested at elevated temperatures, were first put into an oven and
heated to a temperature of 100 °C for 48 h and then allowed to air dry. The electrical
furnace used in this research as well as the heating regimes are shown in
Fig. 2a and b. The samples were heated at a heating rate of 2 °C/min until the tar-
geted test temperature was reached. The heating rate used in this study was chosen
to be based on recommendations obtained from previous conducted researches
[27,28]. However, it is worth mentioning that the rate of heating used is signifi-
cantly lower than that of specified by ASTM E 119 [29], which is about 538 °C in
the first 5 min. Once the targeted temperature was reached, it was maintained
for 45 min to achieve the thermal steady state [30] and then allowed to cool down
at a rate of 1 °C/min. The temperatures are chosen as 200, 400, 600 and 800 °C in
this test programme. While the cylinder specimens with reinforcing bars embed-
ment were being heated, the open-air end of bars were isolated with ceramic insu-
lation coating. The specimens tested at 20 °C were considered as control specimens.
The pull-out tests were carried out. The pull-out test setup is shown in Fig. 3.
The tests were performed using a servo-hydraulic universal test machine (UTM)
with a capacity of 600 kN. A special attachment apparatus made with rigid steel
plates used to pull the rebar rod from the specimen. The rod was fitted with grips
on the machine and was pulled upward from the specimen until failure to obtain
the ultimate load [31]. Total 486 specimens exposed different temperatures were
tested. For each group, the average of 3 specimens’ test results recorded.
3. Results and discussion
The results of present study are reported and discussed accord-
ing to the following sequence. First, the compressive and flexural
strengths of concrete exposed to high temperatures are discussed.
Then, the bond strengths between reinforcing bar and concrete
exposed to high temperature are evaluated using pull-out tests.
Both the relationship between the grade of bar and bar diameter
and the relationship between the grade of bar and concrete
strength over bond strength are examined. Finally, a nonlinear
empirical model that relates percentage residual bond strength
to exposure temperature are developed.
Table 1
Concrete mix proportions (kg/m3).
Series Concrete-A Concrete-B Concrete-C
w/c 0.73 0.60 0.48
Cement 200 240 320
Fly ash 50 50 50
Water 182 172 175
Super-plasticizer 2.0 2.4 3.2
River sand 0–4 mm 366 – –
Crushed sand stone 0–4 mm 627 951 878
Crushed stone II 6–12 mm 461 495 477
Crushed stone III 12–22 mm 445 443 462
 A. Ergün et al. / Construction and Building Materials 112 (2016) 691–698 693

Table 2 severe loss in strength was noted when the specimens were heated
The mechanical properties of steel rebar. to 800 °C. At such a temperature, the reduction in the residual
Grade S220a S420a S500a compressive strength of concrete was found to be about 73%. This
Diameter (mm) 12 16 20 12 16 20 12 16 20 severe strength deterioration is attributed to the decomposition of
Yield strength (MPa) 354 302 301 485 449 499 595 593 591 the CSH gel [32].
Ultimate strength 491 447 466 595 702 703 709 692 705
(MPa)
Strain at failure (%) 29.2 32.0 32.1 24.1 18.1 21.7 18.7 17.7 18.0 3.2. Residual flexural strength

The residual flexural strength of the beam specimens was

obtained by subjecting the beam-specimens to three point bending
tests. All flexural tests were carried out after cooling the specimens
following the same procedures previously outlined for the
residual-compressive testing. Fig. 5 illustrates the variation of the
residual flexural strength with temperature for the three test series
(concrete A, concrete B and concrete C). Fig. 5 shows that when
exposed to heat, the residual flexural strength of concrete reduces
almost linearly with increase in temperature.

3.3. The residual yield and tension strengths

According to the test results, the mechanical properties of steel

Fig. 1. The produced specimens for pull-out tests in laboratory.
3.1. Residual compressive strength
The residual compressive strengths of cube specimens are
shown in Fig. 4. The figure shows the variation of the residual com-
pressive strength with temperature for the three test series (i.e.,
concrete A, concrete B and concrete C, respectively). The test
results indicate that as the temperature increases the residual
compressive strength of concrete decreases.
The test results show that when concrete is heated to about
100 °C, the average residual compressive strength is increased by
about 1%. At a temperature of 200 °C, a strength reduction of about
6% is noticed. At temperatures between 400 and 600 °C, the resid-
ual compressive strength was found to be reduced by about 29–
49%; this reduction in strength is attributed to the dehydration of
the CSH gel as well as to the volumetric expansion resulting from
the transformation of the chemical compounds Ca(OH)2 to CaO. A
bars exposed to high temperature differed from those of steel bars
at elevated temperature. The considerable residual mechanical
strengths were observed at temperatures 800 °C. The mechanical
properties for all types and diameters of steel rebars exposed high
temperature (200, 400, 600 and 800 °C) are shown in Table 4.
The lowest residual yield strength is shown in grade S500a. The
yield strength losses of steel bars exposed 800 °C are 8% for S220a,
17% for S420a and 46% for S500a. The ultimate strength steel bars
exposed 800 °C are 8% for S220a, 17% for S420a and 30% for S500a.
The mechanical strength losses of steel bars are low compared the
mechanical strength losses of concretes exposed high
temperatures.
3.4. Residual bond strength
The bond strength was determined using the pull-out tests. The
results of the pull-out tests according to exposure temperature are
given in Table 3. The average tabulated results will be used to
assess the effect of the main variables (i.e., temperatures, bar diam-
eters, the grades of bar and concrete strengths) over the bonding
behavior. It is worth noting that the word ‘‘average” will be omit-
ted hereafter in the subsequent sections, figures and tables.
The experimental bond strength (s) between reinforcing bars
and concrete exposed to high temperature was computed using
the following formula;

Fig. 2. High temperature furnace and heating regimes.

694 A. Ergün et al. / Construction and Building Materials 112 (2016) 691–698

Fig. 3. The pull-out test setup.

Fig. 4. Variation of relative residual concrete compressive strength with temperature.

Fig. 5. Variation of relative residual flexural strength with temperature.

F In all the test specimens, the axial stresses (r) for the rebars
s¼ ð1Þ
pxdxl were lower than the yield strength given in Table 2; as a conse-
where s is the bond stress (MPa), F is the applied load (N), d is the quence, the rebars under the applied load did not yield. Plain bars
nominal bar diameter (mm) and l is embedment length (mm). Fur- (S220a) failed by pulling out of concrete whereas, deformed bars
thermore, using Eq. (2), the axial stress (r) was computed under the (S420a and S500a) failed by concrete cover cracking and sudden
applied load to determine whether the rebar would yield. splitting of concrete along the rebars.
In the evaluation of experimental results, the main variables
F were assembled into three series based on rebar grade (S220a,
r¼ ð2Þ S420a and S500a). To better assess the effects of temperatures,
pxd2 =4 bar diameters and concrete strengths on the residual bond
 A. Ergün et al. / Construction and Building Materials 112 (2016) 691–698 695

Table 3
The results of pull-out tests.

Temp. Grade of bar Bar diameter (r) Axial stress (MPa) (s) Bond strength (MPa) Coefficient of variation (%)
Concrete class Concrete class Concrete class
A B C A B C A B C
20 °C S220a 12 mm 200 245 253 2.40 2.93 3.04 2.55 2.09 5.33
16 mm 152 187 212 2.44 3.00 3.39 6.79 4.06 5.90
20 mm 142 179 209 2.84 3.58 4.18 3.42 2.71 3.17
S420a 12 mm 442 460 465 5.30 5.52 5.59 0.00 0.00 1.10
16 mm 333 356 404 5.33 5.70 6.47 2.59 2.90 1.42
20 mm 244 301 373 4.88 6.02 7.47 3.77 2.66 0.49
S500a 12 mm 569 574 607 6.82 6.89 7.28 2.37 1.54 0.84
16 mm 350 441 510 5.59 7.05 8.17 0.82 1.72 2.45
20 mm 246 317 399 4.92 6.34 7.98 1.49 0.58 1.22
100 °C S220a 12 mm 203 239 259 2.44 2.86 3.11 4.35 3.70 5.21
16 mm 152 199 215 2.44 3.18 3.45 3.77 5.00 3.53
20 mm 145 181 199 2.91 3.63 3.99 5.51 3.04 0.92
S420a 12 mm 451 463 468 5.41 5.55 5.62 0.00 1.10 0.00
16 mm 312 370 406 4.98 5.91 6.50 2.44 2.80 3.53
20 mm 230 279 319 4.60 5.58 6.38 3.48 3.48 0.58
S500a 12 mm 583 610 619 7.00 7.32 7.42 0.00 0.00 0.00
16 mm 338 447 537 5.41 7.16 8.59 2.94 1.11 2.45
20 mm 223 312 358 4.45 6.24 7.17 3.78 2.70 2.23
200 °C S220a 12 mm 141 168 209 1.70 2.02 2.51 12.50 5.26 6.45
16 mm 114 139 156 1.83 2.23 2.49 4.35 3.57 3.69
20 mm 97 121 132 1.93 2.42 2.63 9.52 2.63 6.98
S420a 12 mm 380 442 460 4.56 5.30 5.52 0.00 0.00 0.00
16 mm 282 351 409 4.51 5.62 6.55 2.04 1.63 0.70
20 mm 229 260 307 4.58 5.20 6.13 2.41 3.53 3.65
S500a 12 mm 486 507 563 5.83 6.08 6.75 0.00 2.01 1.81
16 mm 283 320 366 4.53 5.12 5.86 0.00 3.24 2.07
20 mm 204 223 259 4.07 4.45 5.18 1.56 1.43 1.88
400 °C S220a 12 mm 115 121 136 1.38 1.45 1.63 0.00 4.22 3.77
16 mm 81 94 109 1.30 1.51 1.75 7.07 5.26 0.00
20 mm 67 73 81 1.34 1.46 1.61 0.00 0.00 6.03
S420a 12 mm 365 383 407 4.38 4.60 4.88 1.40 3.53 0.00
16 mm 300 321 370 4.80 5.14 5.91 0.96 0.89 0.78
20 mm 203 229 256 4.05 4.58 5.11 3.95 3.67 3.13
S500a 12 mm 404 483 533 4.84 5.80 6.40 3.34 4.22 2.53
16 mm 273 292 341 4.38 4.67 5.46 1.82 3.94 2.22
20 mm 177 192 270 3.54 3.84 5.41 2.07 4.17 3.11
600 °C S220a 12 mm 47 50 56 0.57 0.60 0.67 10.83 10.19 18.23
16 mm 38 43 50 0.61 0.69 0.80 7.53 6.66 10.00
20 mm 28 35 46 0.55 0.70 0.91 6.66 9.09 8.06
S420a 12 mm 239 312 324 2.86 3.75 3.89 0.00 6.54 3.15
16 mm 146 177 224 2.33 2.84 3.58 5.21 4.28 2.22
20 mm 99 116 167 1.97 2.31 3.33 8.53 6.36 3.98
S500a 12 mm 218 277 309 2.62 3.32 3.71 4.68 3.69 2.86
16 mm 133 174 189 2.12 2.78 3.02 8.66 0.00 2.63
20 mm 91 122 144 1.82 2.44 2.88 2.01 3.98 2.55
800 °C S220a 12 mm 19 28 37 0.23 0.34 0.44 13.32 9.12 6.93
16 mm 14 18 22 0.23 0.29 0.34 10.19 15.75 13.32
20 mm 12 15 17 0.23 0.30 0.34 15.75 12.37 10.83
S420a 12 mm 150 186 191 1.80 2.23 2.30 0.00 4.76 7.05
16 mm 96 118 128 1.54 1.88 2.04 2.99 4.88 4.50
20 mm 46 69 78 0.91 1.38 1.57 10.66 9.61 10.20
S500a 12 mm 127 147 186 1.52 1.77 2.23 4.03 9.17 4.76
16 mm 78 109 124 1.25 1.75 1.99 9.75 7.87 4.00
20 mm 56 77 84 1.12 1.55 1.68 6.54 6.28 5.80

Table 4
The mechanical properties of steel rebar exposed different high temperature.

Grade S220a S420a S500a

Diameter (mm) 12 16 20 12 16 20 12 16 20
Yield strength (MPa) 200 °C 354 302 301 485 449 499 595 593 591
400 °C 374 313 306 474 446 502 590 592 592
600 °C 365 298 301 469 452 516 592 590 593
800 °C 321 314 305 463 442 503 558 553 558
Ultimate strength (MPa) 200 °C 494 458 463 587 700 695 699 691 708
400 °C 492 446 461 586 701 704 708 691 707
600 °C 466 462 461 576 679 685 653 647 663
800 °C 423 414 430 480 638 586 496 477 494
696 A. Ergün et al. / Construction and Building Materials 112 (2016) 691–698
Fig. 6. Variation of relative residual bond strength with temperature for S220a.
strength (RBS), two different groups were taken into consideration
in each series. First group included the experimental results of the
bar diameters variable determining the average of RBS according to
different concrete strengths (concrete A, concrete B and concrete
C). The other group included the experimental results of concrete
strengths variable determining the average of RBS according to dif-
ferent bar diameters (12 mm, 16 mm and 20 mm).
As can be seen from Table 3, RBS of specimens mostly decreased
with increasing bar diameter. The bond stress (s) in Eq. (1) is
related to perimeter of bars. As the diameter of the bar increases,
the ratio of perimeter to area decreases. As a result of this, RBS of
specimens decreased with increasing bar diameter.
Figs. 6–8 plot the variation of the residual bond strength of
cylinder specimens exposed to high temperature to that of the con-
trol specimen with temperature for the three test series. The rela-
tive RBS for S220a, S420a and S500a test series were given in
Figs. 6–8, respectively.
The residual bond strength increased at 100 °C for grade S220a.
It is thought to result from the increase in residual tensile strength
of steel [25–33] and residual compressive strength of concrete at
100 °C. The test results indicated that as the temperature (over
100 °C) increased the residual bond strength of specimens
decreased. The first severe bond strength loss was observed for
grades S220a and S500a at the 200 °C and for grade S420a at the
range of 400–600 °C. This is considered to be due to the decrease
in residual compressive and flexural strength of concrete. The main
cause of strength reduction in concrete is the formation of internal
cracks due to the evaporation of water and to the pore structure
Fig. 7. Variation of relative residual bond strength with temperature for S420a.
coarsening at a temperature 200 °C [34]. At temperatures between
400 and 600 °C, the strength reduction is attributed to the dehy-
dration of the CSH.
The lowest residual bond strength is shown in grade S220a. RBS
of S220a specimens are 71%, 49%, 22% and 10% at 200, 400, 600 and
800 °C, respectively. The resistance of a plain bar against pulling
out is provided mainly by adhesion and friction between reinforc-
ing bar and concrete. Adhesion is lost at early stages of loading
when slip is initiated. Therefore, resistance to pulling out is mainly
provided by friction [26]. As the concrete exposed to high temper-
ature was deteriorated, the friction was weakened and the resis-
tance to pulling out was lessened. As friction between plain bars
and concrete is influenced by the tensile strength of concrete, the
residual flexural strength of concrete and the residual bond
strength of S220a show similar tendencies.
RBS of deformed bars are 92%, 84%, 52% and 30% for S420a spec-
imens and 79%, 73%, 40% and 24% for S500a specimens at 200, 400,
600 and 800 °C, respectively. For deformed bars, which have lugs
on the surface, the resistance against pulling out is mainly pro-
vided by bearing of the lugs opposing the surrounding concrete.
Adhesion and friction have little contribution. When the deformed
bar is pulled, forces with two components act on lugs. The horizon-
tal component tries to shear the concrete between two lugs
whereas the vertical component produces radial pressure, which
cause tensile stresses in surrounding concrete [26]. The tensile
and compressive strength of concrete become main parameters
influencing the bond resistance in members reinforced with
deformed bars. According to this relation and observed the test
 A. Ergün et al. / Construction and Building Materials 112 (2016) 691–698 697

Fig. 8. Variation of relative residual bond strength with temperature for S500a.

results, the combined residual compressive strength and flexural (5) As the diameter of the bar increases, the ratio of perimeter to
strength of concrete is tendency with the residual bond strength area decreases. As a result of this, RBS of specimens
of S420a and S500a at the range of 200–600 °C. decreased with increasing bar diameter.
Here also, proposed mathematical equations, relating the resid- (6) Mathematical equations were proposed to predict the resid-
ual bond strength at a given temperature to that of concrete at ual bond strengths of specimens with high temperatures.
ambient temperature are given below: These equations can be used to assess the post-fire strength
for S220a T P 200 °C of concrete structures.
"
2
 #
T T
RBSðTÞ ¼ 0:618   1:681  þ 1:036
1000 1000
Acknowledgement
 RBSðT¼20 CÞ ðR ¼ 0:99Þ ð3Þ
for S420a T P 200 °C The testing equipment used in this investigating research was
"
2
 # provided by Scientific Research Fund (Project No. 08.TEF.03) of
T T Afyon Kocatepe University.
RBSðTÞ ¼ 0:821   0:0268  þ 1:023
1000 1000
 RBSðT¼20 CÞ ðR ¼ 0:98Þ ð4Þ References

for S500a T P 200 °C [1] I.A. Fletcher, S. Welch, J.L. Torero, R.O. Carvel, A. Usmani, Behaviour of concrete
"
2
 # structure in fire, Therm. Sci. 11 (2) (2007) 37–52.
T T [2] C.A. Menzel, Tests of the fire resistance and thermal properties of solid
RBSðTÞ ¼ 0:629   0:352  þ 0:905 concrete slabs and their significance, in: Proceedings, American Society for
1000 1000 Testing and Materials (ASTM) 43, 1943, pp. 1099–1153.
[3] C.R. Binner, C.B. Wilkie, P. Miller, Heat Testing of High Density Concrete,
 RBSðT¼20 CÞ ðR ¼ 0:96Þ ð5Þ
Supplement, Declassified Report HKF-1, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1949.
[4] H.L. Malhotra, The effect of temperature on the compressive strength of
where, T is the temperature which the specimen was exposed to (in concrete, Mag. Concr. Res. (Lond.) 8 (22) (1956) 85–94.
°C) and RBSðT¼20 CÞ is the residual bond strength at 20 °C. [5] J. Xiao, G. König, Study on concrete at high temperature in China—an overview,
Fire Saf. J. 39 (2004) 89–103.
[6] N. Yüzer, F. Aköz, L. Dokuzer Öztürk, Compressive strength–color change
4. Conclusions relation in mortars at high temperature, Cem. Concr. Res. 34 (2004) 1803–
1807.
Based on the obtained residual bond strength using modified [7] World Trade Center: Building Performance Study: Data Collection, Preliminary
Observations, and Recommendations, FEMA, Report # 403, 2002.
pullout tests conducted in this research, the following conclusions [8] Ö. Arıöz, Effects of elevated temperatures on properties of concrete, Fire Saf. J.
can be made: 42 (2007) 516–522.
[9] M.A. Youssef, M. Moftah, General stress-strain relationship for concrete at
elevated temperatures, Eng. Struct. 29 (2007) 2618–2634.
(1) The residual bond strength of cylinder specimens with rein- [10] M. Husem, The effects of high temperature on compressive and flexural
forcing bar embedment exposed to high temperatures (over strengths of ordinary and high-performance concrete, Fire Saf. J. 41 (2006)
100 °C) decreased in all series. The lowest residual bond 155–163.
[11] L. Biolzi, S. Cattaneo, G. Rosati, Evaluating residual properties of thermally
strength observed is in grade S220a. damaged concrete, Cem. Concr. Compos. 30 (2008) 907–916.
(2) As the concrete cover around the bar protects the steel bar [12] M. Li, C.X. Qian, W. Sun, Mechanical properties of high-strength concrete after
from fire, the mechanical properties of concrete are more fire, Cem. Concr. Res. 34 (2004) 1001–1005.
[13] Report No: NISTIR 5934, Fire performance of high strength concrete: a report
effective on RBS of specimens exposed high temperatures
of the state-of-the-art by L.T. Phan, Building and Fire Research Laboratory,
than those of steel. NIST Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899; Dated December 1996.
(3) The residual compressive strength is in tendency with the [14] A.M. Neville, Properties of Concrete, Halsted Press, John Wiley & Sons Inc., New
York, 1973.
residual bond strength of S420a and S500a whereas the
[15] B. Georgali, P.E. Tsakiridis, Microstructure of fire-damaged concrete. A case
residual flexural strength corresponds agrees with the resid- study, Cem. Concr. Compos. 27 (2005) 255–259.
ual bond strength of S220a. [16] Y.-H. Chen, Y.-F. Chang, G.C. Yao, M.-S. Sheu, Experimental research on post-
(4) The relative RBS of specimens were found not to directly fire behaviour of reinforced concrete columns, Fire Saf. J. 44 (2009) 741–748.
[17] P. Morely, R. Royles, Response of the bond in reinforcing concrete to high
depend on the concrete strength used in this investigation. temperatures, Mag. Concr. Res. 35 (123) (1983) 67–74.
698 A. Ergün et al. / Construction and Building Materials 112 (2016) 691–698
[18] R. Haddad, L. Shannis, Post-fire behavior of bond between high strength
pozzolanic concrete and reinforcing steel, Constr. Build. Mater. 18 (2004) 425–
435.
[19] R.H. Haddad, R.J. Al-Saleh, N.M. Al-Akhras, Effect of elevated temperature on
bond between steel reinforcement and fiber reinforced concrete, Fire Saf. J. 43
(2008) 334–343.
[20] A.F. Bingol, R. Gul, Residual bond strength between steel bars and concrete
after elevated temperatures, Fire Saf. J. 44 (2009) 854–859.
[21] J.J. Chang, W. Yeih, C.L. Tsai, Enhancement of bond strength for epoxy-coated
rebar using river sand, Constr. Build. Mater. 16 (2002) 465–472.
[22] T. Ichinose, Y. Kanayama, Y. Inoue, J.E. Bolander Jr., Size effect on bond strength
of deformed bars, Constr. Build. Mater. 18 (2004) 549–558.
[23] M. Haskett, D.J. Oehlers, M.S. Mohamed Ali, Local and global bond
characteristics of steel reinforcing bars, Eng. Struct. 30 (2008) 376–383.
[24] M. Valcuende, C. Parra, Bond behaviour of reinforcement in self-compacting
concretes, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (2009) 162–170.
[25] A. Ergün, G. Kürklü, S. Basßpınar, Investigation of the mechanical properties of
different grade reinforcing bars exposed to high temperature Afyon Kocatepe
University, J. Sci. 02 (2009) 97–103.
[26] U. Ersoy, G. Özcebe, T. Tankut, Reinforced Concrete, METU Press, Ankara,
Turkey, 2008.
[27] A. Behnood, H. Ziari, Effects of silica fume addition and water to cement ratio
on the properties of high-strength concrete after exposure to high
temperatures, Cem. Concr. Compos. 30 (2008) 106–112.
[28] C.S. Poon, S. Azhar, M. Anson, Y. Wong, Comparison of the strength and
durability performance of normal and high-strength pozzolanic concretes at
elevated temperatures, Cem. Concr. Res. 31 (2001) 1291–1300.
[29] ASTM E 119-00A, Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building
Construction and Materials, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA,
2000. 21p.
[30] G.T.G. Mohamedbhai, Effect of exposure time and rates of heating and cooling
on residual strength of heated concrete, Mag. Concr. Res. 38 (136) (1986) 151–
158.
[31] ASTM C234-91a, Standard Test Method for Comparing Concretes on the Basis
of the Bond Developed with Reinforcing Steel, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, 1991 (Withdrawn 2000).
[32] W.M. Lin, T.D. Lin, L.J. Powers-Couche, Microstructure of fire-damaged
concrete, ACI Mater. J. 93 (3) (1996) 199–205.
[33] G. Kürklü, S. Basßpınar, A. Ergün, A comparative study on bond of different
grade reinforcing steels in concrete under accelerated corrosion, Steel Compos.
Struct. 14 (3) (2013) 229–242.
[34] S.Y.N. Chan, G.F. Peng, M. Anson, Residual strength and pore structure of high-
strength concrete and normal-strength concrete after exposure to high
temperatures, Cem. Concr. Compos. 21 (1999) 23–27.