1 1(b) 1(a) 3.5 mm 36% 1(b) 6 mm 29% 1(c) 1(d) 2 40 17%

1(a)

·
50

/ /

Vol. 41, No. 2 April 2014

1

(a)

(b)

(c) (d)

1 (a) (c) 40 (d)

(b)

N-15 1 2 [1] D16(#5) N-14 N-15 2a 2c 2b 2d 2 3 29% 37.8% 38.5% 2a 2c 2b 2d 38% 40% 43% 13% 5%

2

Vol. 41, No. 2 April 2014

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4) βfy βE βfu βeu

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

2

N-14 (a) N-15 (c)

(d)

(b)

(1) (2) (3) (4) 4 1 18 D13 (#4) D16 (#5) D19 (#6) (1) (4)

3

N-15 2
1 x (%) N-14 N-15 D16 (#5) 37.8 38.5 Pysc 30.2 27.6 Pusc (kN ) (kN) εusc Pysc Pys0 Pusc Pus0 εusc εus0

2

52.4 0.050 0.60 0.66 0.45 43.8 0.109 0.55 0.55 0.98

Pys0 = 50.1 kN; Pus0 = 80 kN; and εus0 = 0.11 [1]

3

[2-4] [5-6]
Vol. 41, No. 2 April 2014

3

[1]

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

(i)

(j)

(k)

(l)

4

D13 (#4) (a) fysc / fys0 (b) Esc / Es0 (c) fusc / fus0 (d) εusc / εus0 D16 (#5) (e) fysc / fys0 (f) Esc / Es0 (g) fusc / fus0 (h) εusc / εus0 D16 (#5) (i) fysc / fys0 (j) Esc / Es0 (k) fusc / fus0 (l) εusc / εus0

2 x (%) D13 (#4) [1] Zhang et al. [7] Kashiwabara et al. [8] Palsson and Mirza [9] D16 (#5) D19 (#6) D6 (#2) D16 (#5) D16 (#5) 27.4 ~ 82.4 5.9 ~ 38.5 23.2 ~ 50.7 15.6 ~ 31.2 0 ~ 21 0 ~ 80 bfy 0.0122 0.0111 0.0151 0.014 0.0119 0.0166 bE 0.0129 0.0144 0.0129 bfu 0.0112 0.0103 0.0144 0.0138 beu 0.0121 0.0082 0.0197

4

Vol. 41, No. 2 April 2014

3 x (%) D13 (#4) D29 (#9) D16 (#5) D10; D13 (#3; #4) D8; D16; D32 (#3; #5; #10) N/S N/S D10 (#3) D10 (#3) D13 (#4) D10 (#3) 0 ~ 31.4 0 ~ 19.9 0~3 0 ~ 35 0 ~ 25 0 ~ 18 0 ~ 11 0 ~ 18 0 ~ 25 0 ~ 46 0 ~ 10.4 0 ~ 8.5 bfy 0.0123 0.0162 0.012 0.0124 0.5 ~ 2 1 1 0.5 13 0.0198 0.014 0.015 0.015 0.012 0.013 0.012 0.017 0.0087 0.0139 0.0158 0.0068 0.0124 0.0206 0.0292 0.0592 0.0075 0.0115 bE 0.0179 0.0185 bfu 0.0107 0.0146 0.011 0.0107 0.0157 0.014 0.015 0.013 0.014 0.017 beu 0.0265 0.0371 0.03 0.0195 0.0259 0.029 0.039 0.017

(mA/cm2) 0.6 0.01 ~ 5

[1] Cairns et al. [6] Lee and Cho [10]

Du [11] Andrade et al. [12] Clark & Saifullah [13] Lee et al. [14] Apostolopoulos [16] Apostolopoulos [17] Apostolopoulos & Papadopoulos [18]

5 0.0125 4 5a 10% 11.5% 5c 0.0123 0.0115 12.3% bfy 0.0123 4 bE 0.0130 bfu 0.0115 beu

0.013 10% 13% 12.5%

0.0125

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

5

(a) fysc / fys0 (b) Esc / Es0 (c) fusc / fus0 (d) εusc / εus0

Vol. 41, No. 2 April 2014

5

1.

2. Stewart, M. G., “Mechanical Behaviour of Pitting Corrosion of Flexural and Shear Reinforcement and Its Effect on Structural Reliability of Corroding RC Beams,” Structural Safety, V. 31, 2009, pp. 19-30. 3. Du, Y., Clark, L. A., and Chan, A. H. C., “Residual Capacity of Corroded Reinforcing Bars,” Magazine of Concrete Research, V. 57, No. 3, 2005, pp. 135–147. 4. Kallias, M. I., and Rafiq, M. I., “Performance Assessment of Corroding RC Beams Using Response Surface Methodology,” Engineering Structures, V. 49, 2013, pp. 671-685. 5. Ou, Y.-C., Tsai, L.-L., and Chen, H.-H., “Cyclic
Es0 Esc Pus0 Pusc Pys0 Pysc fus0 fusc fys0 fysc x(%) = = = = = = = = = = = x =10 βE bfu bfy beu εus0 εusc = = = = = = % 10%

Performance of Large-Scale Corroded Reinforced Concrete Beams,” Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, V. 41, No. 4, April 2012, pp. 593-604. 6. Cairns, J., Plizzari, G. A., Du, Y., Law, D. W., and Franzoni, C., “Mechanical Properties of CorrosionDamaged Reinforcement,” ACI Materials Journal, V. 102, No. 4, July-August 2005, pp. 256-264. 7. Zhang, W.; Song, X.; Gu, X.; and Li, S., “Tensile and Fatigue Behavior of Corroded Rebars,” Construction & Building Materials, V. 34, 2012, pp. 409-417. 8. Kashiwabara, S., Tanimura, Y., Izuminami, R., and Kimura, M., “A Study on Evaluation Method of the Tensile Yield Strength of Corroded Reinforcing Bar Cut Out from Structure,” Proc. Of the 55th Annual Conference of the Japan Society of Civil Engineers, V. 357, 2000, pp. 716-717. (in Japanese) 9. Palsson, R., and Mirza, M. S., “Mechanical Response of Corroded Steel Reinforcement of Abandoned Concrete Bridge,” ACI Structural Journal, V. 99, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 2002, pp. 157-162. 10. Lee, H. S., and Cho, Y. S., “Evaluation of the Mechanical Properties of Steel Reinforcement Embedded in Concrete Specimen as a Function of the

6

Vol. 41, No. 2 April 2014

Degree of Reinforcement Corrosion,” International Journal of Fracture, V. 157, 2009, pp. 81-88. 11. Du, Y., “Effect of Reinforcement Corrosion on Structural Concrete Ductility,” PhD thesis, University of Birmingham, UK, Mar. 2001, 320 pp. 12. Andrade, C., Alonso, C., Garcia, D., and Rodriguez, J., “Remaining Lifetime of Reinforced Concrete Structures: Effect of Corrosion in the Mechanical Properties of the Steel,” Life Prediction of Corrodible Structures, NACE, Cambridge, UK, Sept. 1991, pp. 12/1-12/11. 13. Clark, L. A., and Saifullah, M., “Effect of Corrosion Rate on the Bond Strength of Corroded Reinforcement,” Corrosion and Corrosion Protection of Steel in Concrete, R. N. Swamy, ed., Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield, 1994, pp. 591-602. 14. Lee, H. S., Tomosawa, F., and Noguchi, T., “Effect of Rebar Corrosion on the Structural Performance of Singly Reinforced Beams,” Durability of Building

Materials and Components, V. 7., C. Sjostrom, ed., E&FN Spon, London, 1996, pp. 571-580. 15. Lee, H. S., Tomosawa, F., and Noguchi, T., “Effect of Rebar Corrosion on the Structural Performance of Singly Reinforced Beams,” Durability of Building Materials and Components, V. 7., C. Sjostrom, ed., E&FN Spon, London, 1996, pp. 571-580. 16. Apostolopoulos, C. A., Papadopoulos, M. P., and Pantelakis, S. G., “Tensile Behavior of Corroded Reinforcing Steel Bars BSt 500s,” Construction & Building Materials, V. 20, 2006, pp. 782-789. 17. Apostolopoulos, C. A., “Mechanical Behavior of Corroded Reinforcing Steel Bars S500s Tempcore under Low Cycle Fatigue,” Construction & Building Materials, V. 21, 2007, pp. 1447-1456. 18. Apostolopoulos, C. A., and Papadopoulos, M. P., “Tensile and Low Cycle Fatigue Behavior of Corroded Reinforcing Steel Bars S400,” Construction & Building Materials, V. 21, 2007, pp. 855-864.

Vol. 41, No. 2 April 2014

7