• KCI Concrete Journal
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.102-110
• /
• 2002

Results of an experimental study on the pullout behavior of the headed reinforcement are presented. A total of 48 pullout tests was performed to evaluate pullout strengths and load-displacement behaviors in pullout of the headed bars. The square steel heads had gross area of 4 $A_{b}$ and thickness of $d_{b}$ The test program consisted of three pullout test groups: Simple and Edge pullout tests using plain concrete slabs, comparison of pullout performances between the standard hooks and the headed reinforcement, and pullout tests of headed reinforcement using reinforced concrete columns. Test variables included concrete strengths ( $f_{c}$' = 27.1MPa, 39.1MPa), reinforcing bar diameters (D16~D29), embedment depths (6 $d_{b}$~12 $d_{b}$), edge conditions, column reinforcement, and single-vs.-multiple bar pullout. Test results revealed that the heads effectively provided the pullout resistances of the deformed bars in tension. The load-displacement behaviors were similar between the 90-degree hooks and the headed reinforcement. When a multiple number of headed bars installed with small head-to-head spacings was pulled out, reinforcement designed to run across the concrete failure surface in a direction parallel to the headed bars helped improve the pullout performances of the headed reinforcement.t.ement.t.

• Proceedings of the Korea Concrete Institute Conference
• /
• 2003.11a
• /
• pp.234-237
• /
• 2003

Previous researches about headed reinforcement have not been concerned about bond failure which is quite important is some cases. In this paper, failure mechanism including bond failure was presented in order to define the contribution of bond stress at the time failure occurs. Examined with design codes and test results, it is proved to be rational to consider the contribution of bond stress in determining the ultimate pull-out capacity of headed reinforcement. Direct adaptation of design code for anchor bolt without modification for the contribution of bond stress will lead to underestimate the capacity of headed reinforcement.

• Proceedings of the Korea Concrete Institute Conference
• /
• 2001.11a
• /
• pp.203-208
• /
• 2001

Objectives of this study included design of head and evaluation of the pullout performance of the headed reinforcement that can be used to replace standard hooks in the building exterior beam-column joints. Results of 36 pullout tests are presented. Test variables included reinforcing bar diameters (16-25mm), embedment depth (6-7db), transverse reinforcement, and single-vs.-group pullout behavior. The square head designed had gross area of 4Ab and thickness of db. The headed reinforcement made of Dl6 bars developed pullout strengths close to the bar yield strength, but larger bars developed strengths smaller than the yield strengths. The pullout resistance increased with decreasing spacing of the transverse reinforcement. Use of column ties with 6.0-db spacing improved the pullout performance of the headed bars without causing difficulties in fabricating the specimens. The comparison of the pullout performances between the headed bars and the standard hooks revealed that strengths, stiffnesses, and ductile behaviors are about the same.

• International Journal of Concrete Structures and Materials
• /
• v.18 no.3E
• /
• pp.151-159
• /
• 2006

A total of 32 pullout tests were performed for the multiple headed bars relatively deeply embedded in reinforced concrete column-like members. The objective was to determine the minimum embedment depth that was necessary to safely design exterior beam-column joints using headed bars. The variables for the experiment were embedment depth of headed bar, center-to-center distance between adjacent heads, and amount of supplementary reinforcement. Regular strength concrete and grade SD420 reinforcing steel were used. The results of the test the indicated that a headed bar embedment depth of $10d_b$ was not sufficient to have relatively closely installed headed bars develop the pullout strength corresponding to the yield strength. All the experimental variables, influenced the pullout strength. The pullout strength increased with increasing embedment depth and head-to-head distance. It also increased with increasing amount of supplementary reinforcement. For a group of closely-spaced headed bars installed in a beam-column joint, it is recommended to use column ties at least 0.6% by volume, 1% or greater amount of column main bars, and an embedment depth of $13d_b$ or greater simultaneously, to guarantee the pullout strength of individual headed bars over 125% of $f_y$ and ductile load-displacement behavior.

• Proceedings of the Korea Concrete Institute Conference
• /
• 2002.05a
• /
• pp.929-934
• /
• 2002

Eight full-scale columns were constructed and tested under monotonic axial compression loading to investigate the influence of headed bars on the confinement of the concrete. One column represented a column with no transverse reinforcement and another column had poor detailing and little confinement. A third column contained seismic hoops and crossties, which represented current detailing practice for significant confinement. A fourth column test is conducted to investigate the response with the seismic crossties replaced by headed bars. Two column specimens were constructed and tested with all of the transverse reinforcement provided by headed bars. These six specimens enabled an assesment of the effectiveness of headed bars in confining the concrete. It was found that the use of headed bars improved the confinement of the columns. Two additional specimens were constructed without any transverse reinforcement. These columns were later retrofitted, by drilling horizontal holes in the columns, adding special headed bars (one head fixed and the other head threaded) and then filling the drilled holes with epoxy. These retrofitted specimens with these added headed bars provided insight into the rehabilitation of older structures containing poorly detailed columns. All of the test specimens were instrumented to determine strain localization during failure and to monitor the strain in the longitudinal and transverse reinforcement.

• Proceedings of the Korea Concrete Institute Conference
• /
• 2004.05a
• /
• pp.506-509
• /
• 2004

This paper proposes Headed bar as reinforcement of beam-column joint, and proves seismic performance and reduction of reinforcement congestion. In these case, the use of Headed bars have obvious advantages. The greatest benefit of using Headed bars is not only improved structural performance of beam-column joints, but also the ease of fabrication, construction, and placement. Three-dimensional finite element analysis model is compared with test program which was fulfilled by the proposed model with Headed bar. Also, the plastic hinge region is relocated to the center of the longitudinal beam length according to the strong column-weak beam design philosophy, so Headed bar is used as the joint reinforcement. Therefore, this paper presents results of a computer analysis of a practical solution for relocating potential beam plastic hinge regions by the placing of straight - Headed bar.

• Proceedings of the Korea Concrete Institute Conference
• /
• 2003.05a
• /
• pp.1091-1096
• /
• 2003

Pullout tests of single headed bars using plain concrete blocks indicate that the embedment depth of $10d_b$ is in general required for the headed bars to develop pullout strength equivalent to 125% of bar yield strength. In this experimental study, test results of multiple headed bars installed in reinforced concrete column sections are presented. Test variables included embedment depth, column main reinforcement ratio, and spacing of column ties. 2D29 bars were pulled out at one time from normal strength concrete. Test results indicated that the embedment depths, column tie spacings, and column main reinforcement ratios all influenced the pullout strengths of the headed bars. When the embedment depth was not sufficient, narrow tie spacings especially resulted in increased pullout strengths of the headed bars. Test results also indicated that the embedment depth of 15㏈ was sufficient for the closely spaced two headed bars (head-to-head spacing =$6d_b$) to develop pullout strength equivalent to 125% of the bar yield strength.

• Proceedings of the Korea Concrete Institute Conference
• /
• 2002.05a
• /
• pp.233-238
• /
• 2002

This study presents failure mechanisms for the pull-out strength of headed reinforcement for upper bound solution based on the limit theorem. The failure mechanisms to be presented follow the failure surface pattern of punching shear failure found in the joints of slab with a column. Several failure surfaces of the mechanisms have different characteristics for dissipation works and these mechanisms are able to interpret the role of bar details surrounding headed reinforcement.

• Architectural research
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.33-39
• /
• 2020

In this study, side-face blowout failure strength of high strength headed reinforcing bar, which is vertically anchoring between RC or SFRC members, is evaluated throughout pullout test. The major test parameters are content ratio of high strength steel fibers, strength of rebar, length of anchorage, presence of shear reinforcement, and the side concrete cover thickness planned to be 1.3 times of the rebar. In pullout test, tensile force was applied to the headed reinforcing bar with the hinged supports positioned 1.5 and 0.7 times the anchorage length on both sides of the headed reinforcing bar. As a result, the cone-shaped crack occurred where the headed reinforcing bar embedded and finally side-face blowout failure caused by bearing pressure of the headed reinforcing bar. The tensile strength of specimens increased by 13.0 ~26.2% with shear reinforcement. The pullout strength of the specimens increased by 3.6 ~15.4% according to steel fiber reinforcement. Increasing the anchoring length and shear reinforcement were evaluated to reduce the stress bearing ration of the total stress.

• Proceedings of the Korea Concrete Institute Conference
• /
• 2003.05a
• /
• pp.512-517
• /
• 2003

The repeated loading responses of four shear-critical reinforced concrete beams, with two different shear span-to-depth ratios, were studied. One series of beams was reinforced using pairs of bundled stirrups with $90^{\circ}C$ standard hooks, having free end extensions of $6d_b$. The companion beams contained shear reinforcement made with larger diameter headed bars anchored with 50mm diameter circular heads. A single headed bar had the same area as a pair of bundled stirrups and hence the two series were comparable. The test results indicate that beams containing headed bar stirrups have a superior performance to companion beams containing bundled standard stirrups, with improved ductility, larger energy adsorption and enhanced post-peak load carrying capability. Due to splitting of the concrete cover and local crushing, the hooks of the standard stirrups opened, resulting in loss of anchorage. In contrast, the headed bar stirrups did not lose their anchorage and hence were able to develop strain hardening and also served to delay buckling of the flexural compression steel. Excellent load-deflection predictions were obtained by reducing the tension stiffening to account for repeated load effects.