Compatibility of ultra high performance concrete as repair material : bond characterization with concrete under different loading scenarios

The rehabilitation of concrete structures, especially concrete bridge decks, is a major challenge for transportation agencies in the United States. Often, the most appropriate strategy to preserve or rehabilitate these structures is to provide some form of a protective coating or barrier. These surface treatments have typically been some form of polymer, asphalt, or low-permeability concrete, but the application of UHPC has shown promise for this application mainly due to its negligible permeability, but also as a result of its excellent mechanical properties, self-consolidating nature, rapid gain strength, and minimal creep and shrinkage characteristics. However, for widespread acceptance, durability and performance of the composite system must be fully understood, specifically the bond between UHPC and NSC often used in bridge decks. It is essential that the bond offers enough strength to resist the stress due to mechanical loading or thermal effects, while also maintaining an extended service-life performance. This report attempts to assess the bond strength between UHPC and NSC under different loading configurations. Different variables, such as roughness degree of the concrete substrates, age of bond, exposure to freeze-thaw cycles and wetting conditions of the concrete substrate, were included in this study. The combination of splitting tensile test with 0, 300, 600 and 900 freeze-thaw cycles was carried out to assess the bond performance under severe ambient conditions. The slant-shear test was utilized with different interface angles to provide a wide understanding of the bond performance under different combinations of compression and shear stresses. The pull-off test is the most accepted method to evaluate the bond strength in the field. This test which studies the direct tensile strength of the bond, the most severe loading condition, was used to provide data that can be correlated with the other tests that only can be used in the laboratory. The experimental program showed that the bond performance between UHPC and NSC is successful, as the strength regardless the different degree of roughness of the concrete substrate, the age of the composite specimens, the exposure to freeze-thaw cycles and the different loading configurations, is greater than that of concrete substrate and largely satisfies with ACI 546.3R-06.

Comparative study of anchorage strengths of epoxy coated hooked bars

Hooked reinforcing bars (rebar) are used frequently to carry the tension forces developed in beams and transferred to columns. Research into epoxy coated hooked bars has only been minimally performed and no research has been carried out incorporating the coating process found in ASTM A934. This research program compares hooked rebar that are uncoated, coated by ASTM A775, and coated by ASTM A934. In total, forty-two full size beam-column specimens were created, instrumented and tested to failure. The program was carried out in three phases. The first phase was used to refine the test setup and procedures. Phase two explored the spacing of column ties within the joint region. Phase three explored the three coating types found above. Each specimen included two hooked rebar which were loaded and measured independently for relative rebar slip. The load and displacement of the hooked rebar were analyzed, focusing on behavior at the levels of 30 ksi, 42 ksi and 60 ksi of rebar stress. Statistical and general comparisons were made using the coating types, tie spacing, and rebar stress level. Many of the parameters composing the rebar and concrete were also tested to characterize the components and specimens. All rebar tested met ASTM standards for tensile strength, but the newer ASTM A934 method seemed to produce slightly lower yield strengths. The A934 method also produced coating thicknesses that were very inconsistent and were higher than ASTM maximum limits in many locations. Continuity of coating surfaces was found to be less than 100% for both A775 and A934 rebar, but for different reasons. The many comparisons made did not always produce clear conclusions. The data suggests that the ACI Code (318-05) parameter of 1.2 for including epoxy coating on hooked rebar may need to be raised, possibly to 2.5, but more testing needs to be performed before such a large value change is set forth. This is particularly important as variables were identified which may have a larger influence on rebar capacity than the Development Length, of which the current 1.2 factor modifies. Many suggestions for future work are included throughout the thesis to help guide other researchers in carrying out successful and productive programs which will further the highly understudied topic of hooked rebar.