A Proposed Model For Corrosion-Induced Bond Degradation in Reinforced Concrete

A Proposed Model for Corrosion-Induced Bond Degradation
in Reinforced Concrete

Authors
Kapilesh Bhargava, Architecture & Civil Engineering Division, Bhabha Atomic Research
Center, Trombay, Mumbai 400 085, India, kapil_66@magnum.barc.ernet.in
A.K. Ghosh, Health Safety and Environment Group, Bhabha Atomic Research Center,
Trombay, Mumbai 400085, India, ccss@magnum.barc.ernet.in
Yasuhiro Mori, Associate Professor, Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Nagoya
University, Nagoya 464-8603, Japan, yssu@sharaku.nuac.nagoya-u.ac.jp
S. Ramanujam, Architecture & Civil Engineering Division, Bhabha Atomic Research
Center, Trombay, Mumbai 400 085, India, ramjam@apsara.barc.ernet.in

INTRODUCTION

Rebar corrosion is identified as the most predominant factor of deterioration of reinforced
concrete (RC) structures; which seriously affects the serviceability and the durability of
the structures. Damage to the concrete occurs in the form of cracking and eventual
spalling of cover concrete, reduction in cross-section of the reinforcement bars and
reduction in the bond strength at the interfacial zone of rebar and concrete. Because of the
increased corrosion effects on the RC structures, repair and rehabilitation of the existing
structures is becoming a major part of the construction activities. Optimal decisions
regarding the repair and rehabilitation of the existing structures undergoing rebar
corrosion are basically governed by the residual structural capacity of such structures.
The residual structural capacity estimation would further help in assessing the remaining
service life of the corrosion affected structures.
Reinforcement corrosion basically causes a volume increase due to the oxidation of
metallic iron which is mainly responsible for exerting the expansive radial pressure at the
steel-concrete interface and development of hoop tensile stresses in the surrounding
concrete. Cracking occurs, once the maximum hoop tensile stress exceeds the tensile
strength of the concrete. This would further result in the weakening of bond and
anchorage between the concrete and reinforcement due to the degradation of the rib
height of the deformed bars and the subsequent reduction of the interlocking forces
between the ribs of the bars and the surrounding concrete. Loss of bond would directly
affect the serviceability and ultimate strength of the concrete structures. Therefore, it is
essential to assess the effect of reinforcement corrosion on the progressive degradation of
bond between concrete and reinforcing steel to evaluate the residual strength of RC
structural members in corrosion damaged structures which is a key requirement for
predicting the remaining service life of such structures.
Many researchers have studied the bond behaviour of corroded reinforcement [1-13].
It is worthwhile to mention that most of these works are experimental in nature. Some of
the researchers have proposed empirical formulae to describe the influence of rebar
corrosion on the bond strength based on their experimental results [3,8,10,12]. Some of
17 ANALYSIS AND COMPUTATION SPECIALTY CONFERENCE
th
Copyright ASCE 2006 17th Analysis and Computation Conference
Structures Congress 2006
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m

a
s
c
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
.
o
r
g

b
y

Q
u
e
e
n
'
s

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

L
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s

o
n

1
1
/
1
9
/
1
3
.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

A
S
C
E
.

F
o
r

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

u
s
e

o
n
l
y
;

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.
the researchers have proposed general models for predicting the bond strength of
corroded reinforcement [14-16]. Three dimensional finite element program DIANA was
used to model the corrosion effect on bond strength by Lundgren [14]. Coronelli [15]
proposed a model to predict both the pressure around a corroded reinforcing bar and the
bond strength at the onset of pullout in an anchorage. Wang and Liu [16] proposed
theoretical modeling of bond strength for corroded bars before and after corrosion
cracking. Load carrying capacity of the concrete structures with corroded reinforcement
has also been studied by some of the researchers [17-20]. However, despite these efforts
some discrepancy exists between the predicted and the experimentally observed values;
which may be attributed to the different testing procedures, the imposed corrosion current
in the experiments and the different material strengths for concrete and steel due to the
different researchers. Also the use of available empirical formulae to describe the
influence of rebar corrosion on the bond strength is limited; since they have been
proposed based on the results of a particular and specific experimental program.
In the present study, simple empirical formulae have been proposed for the reduction
in bond strength as a function of rebar corrosion. These formulae have been proposed by
considering a wide range of the experimental data pertaining to pullout testing and
flexural testing of RC members. The formulae are then evaluated through their ability to
reproduce the experimental data. A methodology has also been proposed to evaluate the
flexural strength of the corrosion damaged RC beams failing in bond. The predicted
flexural strengths from the proposed study are then compared with the available
experimentally observed and analytically predicted flexural strengths of other researcher
[20]. The comparison shows that the proposed models are practicable in predicting the
residual bond strength of corroded reinforcements.

EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES FOR THE PROPOSED BOND
DEGRADATION MODELS

The concentric pullout test, tension pullout test, bond beam test, Bureau of Standards
beam test, cantilever bond test and the University of Texas beam test are some of the tests
which are widely used by the researchers to evaluate the bond strength [4,21]. The
selection of a proper test specimen to evaluate the bond strength is of great importance
and still a matter of active research because it significantly affects the bond
characteristics. Each of the aforementioned tests has its own advantages and
disadvantages and until now no test specimen has been devised which would represent
the realistic bond behaviour in the RC structures. Therefore, in the present study, the
results of the experimental investigations of different researchers towards the progressive
bond degradation between concrete and reinforcing steel due to rebar corrosion have been
used for developing the empirical bond degradation models. For the sake of simplicity,
these experimental studies have been broadly divided into two categories namely pullout
testing and flexural testing and their details are explained as follows.

Experimental Studies of Pullout Testing

PT1 [1] : The pullout tests were conducted on cubic concrete specimens of 150 mm
per side. The specimens were reinforced with a centrally embedded rebar of 10, 14
th
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m

a
s
c
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
.
o
r
g

b
y

Q
u
e
e
n
'
s

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

L
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s

o
n

1
1
/
1
9
/
1
3
.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

A
S
C
E
.

F
o
r

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

u
s
e

o
n
l
y
;

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.
and 20 mm diameter to give cover-to bar diameter ratios of 7.50, 5.36 and 3.75
respectively. The embedment length to bar diameter ratio was chosen as 4.0. The
average yield strength of the reinforcement was 450 MPa. The concrete specimens
were cast from a 0.55 water-cement ratio with an average compressive strength of 30
MPa. Corrosion of rebar was measured as the loss of metal relative to the original
rebar weight. The ultimate bond strengths have been reported for precracking,
cracking and postcracking corrosion stages and as a function of percent corrosion.
PT2 [2] : The pullout tests were performed on the cubic concrete specimens of 300
mm per side. The specimens were reinforced with four bars in their corner; two bars
in the top part of the specimen with reference to casting of the concrete, and two bars
in the bottom. The loading condition was a pullout force applied in turn to each bar,
thus each specimen was used for four bond tests. Each specimen was constrained
within a reactive frame, reproducing part of a beam subjected to constant shear force.
The yield strength of the rebar and the compressive strength of concrete were 590
MPa and 40 MPa respectively. The corrosion level of rebar was reported in terms of
the depth of attack penetration. The average bond strengths have been reported for
different corrosion levels, cover to diameter ratios, amount of stirrups and the bar
positioning viz. top or bottom cast.
PT3 [3] : The pullout tests were carried out on 150 mm concrete cubes with 12 mm
diameter reinforcing bar centrally embedded in the cubes. The embedment length to
bar diameter ratio was chosen as 4.0. The concrete mixtures consisted of 1:2.3:3.5
proportions of cement, sand and gravel respectively by weight. The cement content
was 325 kg/m
3
and the water cement ratio was chosen as 0.55. High strength
deformed bars of grade 460 were used for the experimental work. The amount of
rebar corrosion was reported as the loss of metal relative to the original rebar weight.
The bond strengths have been reported as a function of percent corrosion.
PT4 [4] : The cantilever bond tests were carried out on concrete specimens of size
152 mm 254 mm 279 mm. 12 mm diameter reinforcing bar with an embedment
length of 102 mm was embedded in the concrete specimen. In order to avoid possible
shear and compression failures of concrete, compression reinforcement and inverted
open stirrups were provided. The concrete with 28 day compressive strength of 30
MPa and high strength deformed bars of grade 60 steel were used for the
experimental work. The corrosion was measured as gravimetric loss in weight of the
reinforcing bars. The ultimate bond strengths have been reported as a function of
percent corrosion.
PT5 [7] : The tension tests were performed on 100 mm diameter and 1000 mm long
concrete specimens. Each specimen was reinforced with a reinforcing bar of 19.5 mm
diameter. The embedment length of the reinforcing bar was 1000 mm. The concrete
specimens were cast from a 0.45 water-cement ratio with a 28 day compressive
strength of 25 MPa. The steel used had specified yield strength of 400 MPa and
average experimental yield strength of 432 MPa. Corrosion of rebar was reported as
the percent loss of metal relative to the original rebar weight. Bond strengths have
been reported as percent of bond strength in uncorroded specimens and as a function
of percent corrosion.
PT6 [9] : Pullout tests were conducted on concrete specimens of size 175 mm 175
mm 350 mm. Each specimen was reinforced with 19 mm mild steel bars. Long and
th
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m

a
s
c
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
.
o
r
g

b
y

Q
u
e
e
n
'
s

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

L
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s

o
n

1
1
/
1
9
/
1
3
.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

A
S
C
E
.

F
o
r

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

u
s
e

o
n
l
y
;

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.
short bars were separated by 50 mm such that when the two bars are pulled in the
opposite direction, the short bar pulled out of the concrete. The embedment lengths
for the long bar and the short bar were 175 mm and 125 mm respectively. The
average compressive strength of concrete was 28 MPa. The corrosion was measured
as percent mass loss relative to the original rebar mass. Bond strengths and
normalized bond strengths have been reported as a function of percent mass loss.
PT7 [10] : Pullout tests were performed on cubic concrete specimens of 8D per side
wherein D is the diameter of reinforcing bar. The clear cover to the reinforcing bar
has been varied from 1.5D to 3.5D. The compressive strength of the concrete has
been varied from 24.7 MPa to 42.1 MPa; which was arrived due to different water
cement ratios and different mix proportions of cement, sand and gravel. The D13 type
reinforcing bar was used for the experimental work that had yield strength of 315
MPa. The amount of rebar corrosion was reported as the percent loss of metal relative
to the original rebar weight. Maximum bond strengths have been reported as a
function of percent corrosion for different concrete strengths.
PT8 [13] : Pullout tests were performed on concrete specimens of size 140 mm 140
mm 180 mm. Specimens were reinforced with a centrally placed reinforcing bar of
20 mm diameter. Both smooth and deformed bars were used as reinforcing steels for
experimental program. Specimens were tested with and without stirrups. The
embedment length to bar diameter ratio was chosen as 4.0. The yield strengths for
smooth and deformed bars were 289.6 MPa and 350.9 MPa respectively. The 28 day
average compressive strength for concrete was 52.1 MPa. The amount of corrosion
was measured as loss in weight of reinforcing bar. The bond strengths have been
reported as a function of percent corrosion for both smooth and deformed bars, with
and without stirrups.

Experimental Studies of Flexural Testing

FT1 [1] : Flexural tests were carried out on beam specimens 150 mm 150 mm in
cross-section and 1000 mm in length. Beam specimens were cast from a 0.45 water-
cement ratio concrete having an average compressive strength of 40 MPa. Each beam
was reinforced with one 12 mm bottom bar, two 10 mm top bars and 6 mm closed
stirrups at 50 mm spacing. The average yield strength of the reinforcement was 450
MPa. The 12 mm bottom test bar was isolated from the rest of the reinforcement cage
to enable it to undergo independent corrosion. In one set of experiments, the 12 mm
flexural reinforcement in the beams was detailed with an embedment length of 144
mm; therefore allowing the beams to fail in bond. In another set of experiments, the
12 mm flexural reinforcement in the beams was detailed with an embedment length
of 300 mm; therefore allowing the beams to fail in flexure. Corrosion was measured
as the loss of metal relative to original rebar weight. The bond breakdown strengths
and the ultimate bond strengths have been reported as a function of percent corrosion.
FT2 [8] : Flexural tests were performed on one-way slab specimens having a cross-
section of 350 mm (width) 150 mm (thickness) and a span of 1300 mm. Specimens
were divided into two groups; namely normal concrete and silica fume concrete.
Each specimen was reinforced with three 10 mm diameter reinforcing bars with 125
mm spacing and 20 mm clear cover. The 28 day compressive strengths were 35 MPa
th
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m

a
s
c
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
.
o
r
g

b
y

Q
u
e
e
n
'
s

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

L
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s

o
n

1
1
/
1
9
/
1
3
.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

A
S
C
E
.

F
o
r

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

u
s
e

o
n
l
y
;

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.
and 43 MPa for normal concrete and silica fume concrete respectively. The
reinforcing steel had nominal yield strength of 400 MPa and actual yield strength of
450 MPa. Corrosion was measured as total mass loss of steel relative to the original
rebar mass. Normalized bond strengths have been reported as a function of percent
mass loss. In the present study, the results pertaining to normal concrete only have
been used.
FT3 [12] : Flexural tests were performed on slab specimens having a cross-section of
500 mm (width) 90 mm (thickness) and a span of 1000 mm. Each specimen was
reinforced with five bars of 10 mm diameter reinforcing bars with 100 mm spacing
and 20 mm clear cover. The 28 day compressive strength of concrete was 18.8 MPa.
The yield strength of the steel was 422.8 MPa. Corrosion was measured as percentage
of mass loss of steel in comparison to the control bar. The bond strengths have been
reported as percent of bond strength in uncorroded specimens and as a function of
percent corrosion.

SUGGESTED EMPIRICAL BOND DEGRADATION MODELS

To assess the progressive degradation of bond between the concrete and the reinforcing
steel due to rebar corrosion, normalized values of the bond strength are plotted against
the corrosion level for the entire available experimental data due to different researchers.
Figs. 1 and 2 show the plot of normalized bond strength (R) as a function of corrosion
level (X) for experimental studies pertaining to pullout testing and flexural testing
respectively as briefly explained in the earlier section. Here X is the loss of weight of
reinforcing bar due to corrosion expressed as a percentage of original rebar weight and
R is the ratio of bond strength at any corrosion level to the original bond strength for
uncorroded specimen. The present approach of normalizing the bond strength has been
mainly adopted to take care of the different material strengths for concrete and steel,
different testing procedures and the imposed corrosion current in the experiments due to
the different researchers.
Figs. 1 and 2 also show the increase in bond strength with corrosion up to about 1 to 4
% of corrosion level [1,3,4,9,12]. This can be attributed to an increase in the reactionary
confinement and the mechanical interlocking of concrete around the rebar due to the
exertion of internal pressure on the surrounding concrete caused by the developments of
expansive corrosion products [1,3,4]. Also, the roughness of the rebar is increased in the
initial stages of the corrosion resulting in the enhancement of the friction between the
rebar and the surrounding concrete, thereby increasing the holding capacity of the rebar
[1,4]. Further corrosion would result in the significant reduction of bond strength [1-4,7-
10,12,13]. Because at higher corrosion levels, the hoop tensile stress in the surrounding
concrete due to internal pressure caused by the accumulated corrosion products exceeds
its tensile strength thereby resulting in the development of cracks and eventual loss of
adhesion and friction mechanism between the concrete and the rebar [1,4,7]. No
substantial influence on the bond strength for deformed bars with stirrups and
considerable increase in the bond strength for smooth bars with stirrups due to corrosion
has been observed by Fang et al. [13].

th
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m

a
s
c
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
.
o
r
g

b
y

Q
u
e
e
n
'
s

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

L
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s

o
n

1
1
/
1
9
/
1
3
.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

A
S
C
E
.

F
o
r

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

u
s
e

o
n
l
y
;

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

FIGURE 1
NORMALIZED BOND STRENGTH AS A FUNCTION OF CORROSION LEVEL FOR
EXPERIMENTAL DATA OF PULLOUT TESTING

FIGURE 2
NORMALIZED BOND STRENGTH AS A FUNCTION OF CORROSION LEVEL FOR
EXPERIMENTAL DATA OF FLEXURAL TESTING
th
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m

a
s
c
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
.
o
r
g

b
y

Q
u
e
e
n
'
s

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

L
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s

o
n

1
1
/
1
9
/
1
3
.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

A
S
C
E
.

F
o
r

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

u
s
e

o
n
l
y
;

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.
A regression analysis has been performed with the available experimental data points
due to various researchers and as shown in Figs. 1 and 2; to arrive at the best fit
relationship between the normalized bond strength R and the corrosion level X. Based
on the results of the regression analysis, following empirical models are proposed to
numerically evaluate the progressive bond degradation between the concrete and the
reinforcing steel.
Based on Pullout Testing Experimental Data :
X 039 . 0
e R

= (Model MP) (1)

Based on Flexural Testing Experimental Data :
X 049 . 0
e R

= (Model MF) (2)

Figs 1 and 2 also present the plot of the normalized bond strength (R) as a function
of corrosion level (X) due to (1) and (2) respectively. Goodness of the fit of (1) and (2)
have been tested by estimating the correlation between the predicted and actual
experimental values of the normalized bond strength. The coefficient of correlation r
and the root mean square error s associated with the (1) are 0.7646 and 0.2596
respectively; while for (2), they are 0.7799 and 0.2792. The variability in the predicted
values with reference to the actual experimental values may be attributed to the fact that
the available experimental data has been taken from different sources and unfortunately
there is no statistical treatment that can fully compensate for the non-random bias when
working with the corrosion of rebar in the concrete. Complications are also due to the
variability in the materials used, testing procedures and the impressed corrosion current
in the experiments pertaining to different sources. Therefore, in view of this the (1) and
(2) should be considered at present as very good estimates for the normalized bond
strength R as a function of corrosion level X considering the significant difference in
the reported values of bond strength among the experiments of the different researchers.

FIGURE 3
NORMALIZED BOND STRENGTH AS A FUNCTION OF CORROSION LEVEL DUE TO VARIOUS
ANALYTICAL FORMULATIONS
th
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m

a
s
c
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
.
o
r
g

b
y

Q
u
e
e
n
'
s

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

L
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s

o
n

1
1
/
1
9
/
1
3
.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

A
S
C
E
.

F
o
r

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

u
s
e

o
n
l
y
;

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.
Fig. 3 presents the normalized bond strength R as a function of corrosion level X
due to the empirical formulations of the other researchers including the present work
[3,8,10,12]. The empirical formulations of Cabrera [3] and Lee et al. [10] have been
derived based on the experimental data of pullout testing, while that of Stanish et al. [8]
and Chung et al. [12] have been derived based on experimental data of flexural testing.
This figure is presented basically to compare the predictions of bond strength as a
function of corrosion due to various researchers including the present work. It is clear
from the figure that, the present empirical formulations given in (1) and (2) provide very
good estimates for R as a function of X and the same are also in line with the
predicted results of other researchers.
Table 1 presents r and s associated with the empirical formulations presented by
Cabrera [3] and Lee et al. [10] along with the formulation presented in (1) for the
experimental data of pullout testing. It is clear from the Table that, the present
formulation in (1) provides better correlation between the predicted and actual
experimental values as compared to the other available empirical formulations because of
the highest r and the lowest s associated with it. Similarly, Table 2 presents r and s
associated with the empirical formulations presented by Stanish et al. [8] and Chung et al.
[12] along with the formulation presented in (2) for the experimental data of flexural
testing. It is clear from the Table that the formulation in (2) also provides better
correlation between predicted and actual experimental values which is in line with the
aforementioned available empirical formulations based on experimental data of flexure
testing. Although, r associated with the formulation by Chung et al. [12] is the highest;
s associated with the formulation in (2) is the lowest. Therefore, Tables 1 and 2 also
confirm the goodness of the fit for the present empirical formulations as defined in (1)
and (2) with respect to the empirical formulations of the other researchers.

Empirical
Model
r s
Model MP
(present work)
0.7646 0.2596
Cabrera [3] 0.7359 0.2601
Lee et al. [10] 0.7434 0.2722

Empirical
Model
r s
Model MF
(present work)
0.7799 0.2792
Stanish et al. [8] 0.7300 0.3064
Chung et al. [12] 0.8087 0.3119

TABLE 1
ESTIMATED r AND s FOR VARIOUS
PULLOUT TEST BASED FORMULATIONS

TABLE 2
ESTIMATED r AND s FOR VARIOUS
FLEXURE TEST BASED FORMULATIONS

FORMULATION FOR FLEXURAL STRENGTH OF RC BEAMS
FAILING IN BOND

The flexural strength of the RC beams designed to fail in bond has been calculated after
evaluating the residual bond strength using Eqs. (1) and (2) corresponding to the given
corrosion level of the tensile reinforcing steel bars. Consider a simply supported
reinforced concrete (RC) beam subjected to flexure under loads. Fig. 4(a) shows the
th
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m

a
s
c
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
.
o
r
g

b
y

Q
u
e
e
n
'
s

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

L
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s

o
n

1
1
/
1
9
/
1
3
.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

A
S
C
E
.

F
o
r

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

u
s
e

o
n
l
y
;

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.
beam section in which the beam is reinforced with bottom tensile reinforcing steel bars
having initial area A
st
and top compressive reinforcing steel bars having initial area
A
sc
. B and D are the width and depth of the beam. The distance between the centroid
of tensile steel and the edge of the compression zone is d.
Longitudinal tensile reinforcements are corroded only and uniformly distributed
corrosion over the whole surface of the bar is assumed. The tensile reinforcement in the
beam is designed to fail in bond and is provided with a development length L
d
. The
tensile force F
tx
generated in the corroded tensile reinforcement at any stage of
corrosion level X is given as follows.

(a) (b) (c)

FIGURE 4
FORMULATION OF FLEXURAL STRENGTH OF RC BEAMS [22] : (a) TYPICAL RC BEAM
SECTION; (b) STRAIN DISTRIBUTION; (c) STRESS DISTRIBUTION

cx d stx st tx
L d n F = (3)

Where, n
st
is the number of bottom tensile steel bars; d
stx
and
cx
are the diameter of
bottom tensile steel bars and the bond strength at the corrosion level X respectively.
The corresponding strain
tx
in the tensile steel is given as follows.

s stx
tx
tx
E A
F
= (4)

Where, A
stx
is the area of tensile steel corresponding to corrosion level X and E
s

is the modulus of elasticity for the steel.
Considering the simple bending theory, the strains
cc
and
sc
in concrete and
compressive steel as shown in Fig. 4(b) are given as follows [22].
f
cc
sc
d
c
x
c
tx
cc
d
A
sc
D
B
A
st
F
tx
F
cc
F
sc
Y
c
th
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m

a
s
c
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
.
o
r
g

b
y

Q
u
e
e
n
'
s

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

L
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s

o
n

1
1
/
1
9
/
1
3
.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

A
S
C
E
.

F
o
r

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

u
s
e

o
n
l
y
;

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.
( )
c
c tx
cc
x d
x

= ;
( )
( )
c
c c tx
sc
x d
d x

= (5)

Where, x
c
is the height of compression zone and d
c
is the distance between the
centroid of the compressive steel and the edge of the compression zone.
The total force of compression F
c
at any corrosion level X is given as follows.
sc cc c
F F F + = (6)
Where, F
cc
is the force of compression in concrete and F
sc
is the force of
compression in compressive steel. As shown in Fig. 4(c), the extreme fibre compressive
stress in concrete is f
cc
due to
cc
; which is used to evaluate F
cc
. Considering a
parabolic stress-strain relationship for concrete and the stress distribution across the
cross-section of beam as shown in Fig. 4(c) [22], F
cc
and its point of application Y
c

from x
c
are given as follows [22].

(a) For
cc
0.002 :

(

|
.
|
\
|
=
2
cc cc c ck cc
3
250000
500 Bx f F (7a)
(
(
(
(
|
.
|
\
|

|
.
|
\
|
=
cc
cc
c c
3
250000
500
62500
3
1000
x Y (7b)

(b) For 0.002<
cc
0.0035

(

=
cc
cc
c ck cc
3
002 . 0 3
Bx f F (8a)
(
(
(
(
(

|
|
.
|
\
|

=
008 . 0 12
000004 . 0
6
x Y
cc
cc
cc
c c
(8b)

Where, f
ck
is the uniaxial cube compressive strength of concrete [22].
The force of compression in compressive steel F
sc
is given as follows.

(a) For
sc
(f
y
/E
s
) :

sc s sc sc
A E F = (9a)
(b) For
sc
> (f
y
/E
s
) :
th
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m

a
s
c
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
.
o
r
g

b
y

Q
u
e
e
n
'
s

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

L
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s

o
n

1
1
/
1
9
/
1
3
.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

A
S
C
E
.

F
o
r

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

u
s
e

o
n
l
y
;

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

sc y sc
A f F = (9b)

Where, f
y
is the yield strength of the steel. In the present study, and have
been taken as 1.0. As per BIS [22], they account for partial safety factors associated with
material strength for concrete and steel. If the compressive steel is also corroding, then
the reduced area of the compressive steel should be used in place of A
sc
.
By equating the force of tension given by Eq. (3) and the force of compression
given by Eq. (6), the height of compression zone x
c
can be evaluated. The flexural
moment of resistance of the beam corresponding to any corrosion level X is then
determined as follows.

) d d ( F ) x d Y ( F M
c sc c c cc x
+ + = (10)

COMPARISON OF PREDICTED AND EXPERIMENTALLY
OBSERVED FLEXURAL STRENGTH OF RC BEAMS FAILING IN
BOND

RC beam specimens were subjected to accelerated corrosion damage and tested under
four point loading to ascertain the ultimate flexural strength and Fig. 5 shows the typical
RC beam specimens [20]. The under-reinforced concrete beam specimens were 910 mm
long and had a rectangular cross-section of 100 mm width and 150 mm depth. Each beam
specimen was singly reinforced with two deformed steel bars of 10 mm or 8 mm. The
bars were 1100 mm long, including the anchorage length in the form of U-shaped hooks
at the ends. The reinforcing bars were positioned symmetrically in the cross-section at a
spacing of 50 mm and the cover to the centre of the tensile reinforcement was 25 mm. No
stirrups and no top steel were provided in the beam specimens, instead shear
reinforcement was provided by means of external tubular collars so as to prevent shear
failure and to ensure the development of full flexural resistance and typical flexural
failure in the middle-third of beam span. The yield strength and modulus of elasticity of
the reinforcement were 520 MPa and 206000 MPa respectively. The average compressive
strength of the concrete cubes after 28 days was 40 MPa with a standard deviation of 1
MPa. The details of the input data in reported experimental study considered for the
validation of proposed empirical bond degradation models are given in Table 3 and Fig. 6
shows the typical mode of flexural failure observed in the beams with corroded
reinforcement [20]. As per the reference work [20], the failure of the corroded beams was
initiated by the bond failure at the longitudinal reinforcement interface.
The analytical predictions of the present study for the experimental program as given
in Table 3 are presented in Tables 4 and 5. For comparison, experimentally observed and
empirically predicted values of the reference work [20] are also presented in the same
tables. In the present study, the initial bond strength for the uncorroded reinforcement has
been evaluated using the reference CEB-FIP [23] and then for a given degree of
corrosion, the residual bond strength has been evaluated using (1) and (2). Then the
flexural moment of resistance for the corroded beams has been evaluated making use of
th
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m

a
s
c
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
.
o
r
g

b
y

Q
u
e
e
n
'
s

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

L
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s

o
n

1
1
/
1
9
/
1
3
.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

A
S
C
E
.

F
o
r

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

u
s
e

o
n
l
y
;

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.
(3) to (10). Good agreement between the analytical predictions of the present study and
the experimentally observed values of the reference work can be seen from Tables 4 and
5. For a degree of corrosion of 5 % or more, both experimentally observed values and the
analytical predictions show significant decrease in flexural load carrying capacity of the
beams. The difference between the experimentally observed values and the analytical
predictions may be attributed to the effect of corrosion rate on the flexural load carrying
capacity of the beams damaged by different degrees of corrosion induced in the
reinforcement at four different corrosion rates of 1, 2, 3 and 4 mA/cm
2
as has been
prominently observed in the experimental program of reference work [20]. It is also clear
from the same tables that the analytical predictions of the present study are also in line
with the empirical predictions of the reference work.

FIGURE 5
TYPICAL RC BEAM SPECIMENS FOR THE EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM [20]

FIGURE 6
TYPICAL BOND FAILURE IN THE BEAMS WITH CORRODED REINFORCEMENT [20]
910 mm
860 mm
A
A
2 nos. 10 mm or 8 mm H.Y. bars
50 mm
100 mm
150 mm
Section A-A
th
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m

a
s
c
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
.
o
r
g

b
y

Q
u
e
e
n
'
s

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

L
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s

o
n

1
1
/
1
9
/
1
3
.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

A
S
C
E
.

F
o
r

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

u
s
e

o
n
l
y
;

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.
Group
No.
Reinforcement
Details
No. of
Specimens
Degree of
Corrosion
*
(%)
Corrosion
Rate
(mA/cm
2
)
Precorrosion
Curing
Period
Corrosion
Duration
(hrs)
6, 8, 9 2-10 mm
reinforcing
bars, no
stirrups, both
bars corroding
simultaneously
2-3 1.25 10.0 1 4 10 days 1
year
12 384
7 2-8 mm
reinforcing
bars, no
stirrups, both
bars corroding
simultaneously
2 2.5 10.0 2 15 days 17
days
32 - 128
*
% reduction in reinforcing bar diameter

TABLE 3
INPUT DATA IN REPORTED EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM FOR FLEXURAL STRENGTH OF
CONCRETE BEAMS FAILING IN BOND WITH CORRODING REINFORCEMENT (MANGAT AND
ELGARF, 149-158]

CONCLUSIONS

Following conclusions are drawn from the present study :
Simple empirical models MP and MF have been proposed to predict the residual
bond strength in the concrete members with corroding reinforcement. These models have
been derived based on the experimental data pertaining to pullout testing and flexural
testing of RC members damaged by rebar corrosion [1-4,7-10,12,13]. To take care of the
different material strengths for concrete and steel, different testing procedures and the
imposed corrosion current in the experiments due to different researchers, the models
have been presented in the normalized form. Correlation with the aforementioned
experimental data shows that the presented models are capable of providing very good
estimates of the normalized/residual bond strength for the concrete member with
corroding reinforcement; which is also in line with and in some cases even better than the
analytical predictions of other researchers [3,8,10,12].
A methodology has been presented to evaluate the flexural strength of RC beams
failing in bond. Correlation with the experimental program of reference study [20] shows
that the analytical predictions for flexural strength of concrete beams with corroding bars
due to present work are in line with the experimentally observed values and empirical
predictions of the reference study. This also confirms that the proposed empirical models
MP and MF provide very good estimates of normalized/residual bond strength for
concrete member damaged by rebar corrosion. The present study also confirms that,
reinforcement corrosion has a marked effect on the flexural strength of the concrete
beams failing in bond as has been prominently observed in the reference study.

th
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m

a
s
c
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
.
o
r
g

b
y

Q
u
e
e
n
'
s

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

L
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s

o
n

1
1
/
1
9
/
1
3
.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

A
S
C
E
.

F
o
r

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

u
s
e

o
n
l
y
;

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

Degree of Corrosion
(%)
1.25 2.50 3.75 5.00 7.50 10.0
i
cor
= 1

96.0 89.5 81.5 76.0 60.0 42.5
i
cor
= 2

95.0 90.5 81.0 72.5 52.5 39.0
i
cor
= 3

94.5 89.0 78.5 67.5 47.0 24.5

Experimental
Results
*

i
cor
= 4

94.0 85.0 76.0 63.0 44.0 22.0
i
cor
= 1

97.685 90.955 80.433 67.094 37.048 11.688
i
cor
= 2

97.202 89.121 76.662 61.219 28.435 5.035
i
cor
= 3

96.899 87.980 74.349 57.699 23.716 2.371
Empirical
Predictions
(Mangat and
Elgarf 1999)
i
cor
= 4

96.674 87.144 72.665 55.176 20.549 1.071
Model MP 97.735 95.494 82.165 67.612 45.986 31.497

Residual
Flexural
Strength
(% of
Original
Flexural
Strength)
Analytical
Predictions
(Present
Work)
Model MF 97.735 90.749 71.120 55.777 34.525 21.574
Note : i
cor
is the corrosion current density in mA/cm
2

*
Experimental results are scaled from the Fig. in the reference [Mangat and Elgarf, 149-
158]

TABLE 4
RESIDUAL FLEXURAL STRENGTH FOR GROUP 6, 8 AND 9 BEAMS (AS GIVEN IN TABLE 3)

Degree of Corrosion
(%)
2.50 5.00 7.50 10.00
Experimental
Results
*

i
cor
= 2 90.5 72.5 52.5 39.0
Empirical
Predictions
(Mangat and
Elgarf 1999)

i
cor
= 2

92.357

71.766

44.520

18.949
Model MP 95.326 83.499 56.701 38.801

Residual
Flexural
Strength
(% of
Original
Flexural
Strength)
Analytical
Predictions
(Present
Work)
Model MF 95.326 68.847 42.549 26.567
Note : i
cor
is the corrosion current density in mA/cm
2

*
Experimental results are scaled from the Fig. in the reference [Mangat and Elgarf, 149-
158]

TABLE 5
RESIDUAL FLEXURAL STRENGTH FOR GROUP 7 BEAMS (AS GIVEN IN TABLE 3)

th
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m

a
s
c
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
.
o
r
g

b
y

Q
u
e
e
n
'
s

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

L
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s

o
n

1
1
/
1
9
/
1
3
.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

A
S
C
E
.

F
o
r

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

u
s
e

o
n
l
y
;

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.
REFERENCES

[1] Al-Sulaimani, G.J., Kaleemullah, M., Basunbul, I.A. and Rasheeduzzafar, Influence of corrosion and
cracking on bond behaviour and strength of reinforced concrete members, ACI Structural Journal, Vol.
87, No. 2, 1990, pp. 220-231.
[2] Rodriguez, J., Ortega, L. and Garcia, A., Corrosion of Reinforcing Bars and Service Life of R/C
Structures : Corrosion and Bond Deterioration, Concrete across Borders, Proceedings, Odense, Denmark,
Vol. II, 1994, pp. 315-326.
[3] Cabrera, J.G., Deterioration of Concrete due to Reinforcement Steel Corrosion, Cement and Concrete
Composites, Vol. 18, No. 1, 1996, pp. 47-59.
[4] Almusallam, A.A., Al-gahtani, A.S., Aziz, A.R. and Rasheeduzzafar, Effect of reinforcement
corrosion on bond strength, Construction and Building materials, Vol. 10, No. 2, 1996, pp. 123-129.
[5] Ihekwaba, N.M., Hope, B.B. and Hansson, C.M., Pull-out and Bond Degradation of Steel Rebars in
ECE Concrete, Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 26, No. 2, 1996, pp. 267-282.
[6] Fu, X. and Chung, D.D.L., Effect of Corrosion on the Bond Between Concrete and Steel Rebar,
Cement and Concrete Research, Vol. 27, No. 12, 1997, pp. 1811-1815.
[7] Amleh, L. and Mirza, S., Corrosion Influence on Bond between Steel and Concrete, ACI Structural
Journal, Vol. 96, No. 3, 1999, pp. 415-423.
[8] Stanish, K., Hooton, R.D. and Pantazopoulou, S.J., Corrosion Effects on Bond Strength in Reinforced
Concrete, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 96, No. 6, 1999, pp. 915-921.
[9] Auyeung, Y., Balaguru, P. and Chung L., Bond Behavior of Corroded Reinforcement Bars, ACI
Material Journal, Vol. 97, No. 2, 2000, pp. 214-220.
[10] Lee, H.S., Noguchi, T. and Tomosawa, F., Evaluation of the Bond Properties between Concrete and
Reinforcement as a Function of the Degree of Reinforcement Corrosion, Cement and Concrete Research,
Vol. 32, No. 8, 2002, pp. 1313-1318.
[11] Chang, J.J., A Study of the Bond Degradation of Rebar Due to Cathodic Protection Current, Cement
and Concrete Research, Vol. 32, No. 4, 2002, pp. 657-663.
[12] Chung, L., Cho, S.H., Kim, J.H.J. and Yi, S.T., Correction Factor Suggestion for ACI Development
Length Provisions Based on Flexural Testing of RC Slabs with Various Levels of Corroded Reinforcing
Bars, Engineering Structures, Vol. 26, No. 8, 2004, pp. 1013-1026.
[13] Feng. C., Lundgren, K., Chen, L. and Zhu C., Corrosion Influence on Bond in Reinforced Concrete,
[14] Lundgren, K., Modelling the Effect of Corrosion on Bond in Reinforced Concrete, Magazine of
Concrete Research, Vol. 54, No. 3, 2002, pp. 165-173.
[15] Coronelli, D., Corrosion Cracking and Bond Strength Modeling for Corroded Bars in Reinforced
Concrete, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 99, No. 3, 2002, pp. 267-276.
[16] Wang, X. and Liu, X., Modeling Bond Strength of Corroded Reinforcement without Stirrups,
[17] Almusallam, A.A., Al-Gahtani, A.S., Aziz, A.R., Dakhil, F.H. and Rasheeduzzafar, Effect of
Reinforcement Corrosion on Flexural Behavior of Concrete Slabs, Journal of Materials in Civil
Engineering, Vol. 8, No. 3, 1996, pp. 123-127.
[18] Rodriguez, J., Ortega, L.M. and Casal J., Load Carrying Capacity of Concrete Structures with
Corroded Reinforcement, Construction and Building Materials, Vol. 11, No. 4, 1997, pp. 239-248.
[19] Huang, R., Yang, C.C., Condition assessment of reinforcement concrete beams relative to
reinforcement corrosion., Cement and Concrete Composites, Vol. 19, No. 2, 1997, pp. 131-137.
[20] Mangat, P.S. and Elgarf, M.S., Flexural Strength of Concrete Beams with Corroding Reinforcement,
ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 96, No. 1, 1999, pp. 149-158.
[21] Ferguson, P.M., Reinforced Concrete Fundamental, 4
th
Edition, John Wiley, New York, USA,
1988, pp. 169-210.
[22] BIS, IS:456, Indian Standard Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced Concrete, 4
th
Revision,
Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India, 2000, pp. 67-76.
[23] CEB-FIP, Comite Euro-International du Beton-Federation International de la Precontrainte
Design Code, Thomas Telford, London, UK, 1990, pp. 82-87.
th
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m

a
s
c
e
l
i
b
r
a
r
y
.
o
r
g

b
y

Q
u
e
e
n
'
s

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

L
i
b
r
a
r
i
e
s

o
n

1
1
/
1
9
/
1
3
.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

A
S
C
E
.

F
o
r

p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l

u
s
e

o
n
l
y
;

a
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

A Proposed Model For Corrosion-Induced Bond Degradation in Reinforced Concrete

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Proposed Model For Corrosion-Induced Bond Degradation in Reinforced Concrete

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Proposed Model for Corrosion-Induced Bond Degradation

You might also like