6 views

Uploaded by afrian_arie

bond stress

- PSA STUDY.pdf
- TAE BITCH
- 5 Design of Steel Truss Footbridge
- Reinforced Concrete I
- Concrete vs Steel Construction
- Arakawa Inv 09
- vsvds
- Reinforced Concrete I_2013-2014(2)
- Sample.pdf
- Lessons Learned From Structures Damaged by Delayed Ettringite Formation and the French Prevention Strategy
- IQSK Issue 27
- Sample Pow
- LRFD Pipe
- Research on Coir Fiber Reinforced Cement Concrete
- Report 1
- An Experimental Work on Alkaline Resistance Glass Fiber Reinforced concrete
- Adsorption of Acid Blue 193 From Aqueous Solutions Onto BTMA-bentonite
- Langmuir Lecture
- Bambooppt Copy 140215114604 Phpapp02
- ASAP 2020 micrometrics

You are on page 1of 8

(eds)

2010 Korea Concrete Institute, Seoul, ISBN 978-89-5708-181-5

concrete

P. Desnerck, G. De Schutter & L. Taerwe

Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

ABSTRACT: The force transfer in reinforced concrete is provided by the concrete-to-steel bond. This phenomenon has widely been studied for conventional vibrated concrete (CVC). For self-compacting concrete

(SCC) however less test results are available. To fill in this lack and to develop adapted standards for predicting the bond of reinforcement in SCC, an experimental program has been set up. The bond strength of reinforcement bars with different diameters has been tested by means of beam-test specimens. During testing

the bond stress-slip response was recorded. From the test results it can be seen that the maximum bond

strength of SCC is slightly higher than for CVC when small bar diameters are studied. For larger bar diameters the difference becomes smaller. Comparison of the test data with bond models indicated that the bond

clauses underestimated the bond strength for SCC as well as for CVC. Therefore an adjustment of the bond

model has been made.

1 INTRODUCTION

Reinforced concrete is far from homogeneous. It is

built up of steel and concrete and the concrete itself is not homogeneous neither. Reinforced concrete elements are basically designed so that the

concrete can carry the compressive stresses and

the steel can resist the tensile stresses. Therefore a

good force transfer between the two materials is

necessary which can only be achieved by an interaction between both materials, which is provided

by bond between the reinforcement bars and the

concrete.

The bond has an important influence on the behaviour of reinforced elements in the cracked stage.

Crack widths and deflections are influenced by the

distribution of bond stresses along the reinforcement

bars and by the slip between the bar and the surrounding concrete.

Due to the importance of the interaction between

steel and concrete a lot of research has been done

in the past. In all these projects the main focus

was on the reinforcement bar, its geometrical

characteristics and how these characteristics influence the bond strength. With the appearance of

new concrete types, such as steel-fibre reinforced

concrete and high strength concrete, questions

arose about the bond strength achieved with these

concrete types, and the main focus of the research

on bond shifted to the concrete and its composition (Martin 2002).

The same questions can be formulated for selfcompacting concrete. A concrete type which, in

fresh state, has the ability to flow under its own

weight, fill the required space or formwork completely and produce a dense and adequately homogeneous material without a need for compaction (De

Schutter et al. 2007). The advantages are clear: no

need for vibration of the concrete, a higher quality of

the finished element, reduced construction times,

. The self-compactability is achieved by adding a

superplasticizer to the mixture and by reducing the

amount of coarse aggregates. Although selfcompacting concrete (SCC) is a relatively new material, already a lot of research has been done on the

durability and the workability of the concrete type

(De Schutter et al. 2008). Less studies have been focussing on the mechanical properties and more in

particular the bond aspects.

Some programs have been carried out to determine the force transfer between concrete and reinforcement in self-compacting concrete. These studies show that the bond strength of steel in SCC is not

lower than for conventional vibrated concrete

(CVC), and may be even higher in some cases

(Almeida et al. 2008, Chan et al. 2003, Zhu et al.

2004, Dehn et al. 2004). Nevertheless there is a great

scatter in the results.

To get a better insight in the difference in bond

strength between conventional vibrated concrete and

self-compacting concrete and to develop modified

models describing the bond stress-slip behaviour,

this research program has been set up.

Materials (kg/m)

SCC1

SCC2

CVC1

w I52,5

w

w

CEM

N

360

360

300

h + ( D h ) = e

e853

w

Sande0/4 mm

853

c

s

n 640 (3)

h

h t

Gravel 2/8 mm

462

c 263 s263

Gravel 8/16 mm

434

434

762

Limestone filler

240

300

the sorption/desorption

where

we/h is the slope of

Water

165

165

165

isotherm

(also

called

moisture

capacity).

The

Superplasticizer

3.6

3.0

governing

equation

(Equation

3)

must

be

completed

fccub (N/mm)

71.7

62.1

58.4

by

appropriate boundary and63.7

initial conditions.

fc (N/mm)

57.5

51.8

fct,flThe

(N/mm)

7.2 amount

6.8 of evaporable

6.2

relation between the

(N/mm)

5.0

4.4

4.1

f

ct,sp

water and relative humidity is called adsorption

&+

&+ &

The self-compacting

concrete

SCC2inhas

compahumidity

and desorption

isotherm

theaopposite

rable

compressivetheir

anddifference

tensile strength

as 1994),

the concase. Neglecting

(Xi et al.

in

ventional

vibrated

concrete

CVC1,

as

was

intended.

the following, sorption isotherm will be used with

The

first self-compacting

concrete

SCC1,conditions.

with the

reference

to both sorption and

desorption

same

W/C

ratio,

has

a

significantly

higher

strength.

By the way, if the hysteresis of the moisture

Besideswould

the concrete

steel two

bar diameter

isotherm

be takentype,

into the

account,

different

has

been

varied.

In

this

research

program,

5 different

relation, evaporable water vs relative humidity,

must

nominal

diameters toofthe

thesign

embedded

reinforcement

be used according

of the variation

of the

bars

were chosen:

12, 20,

32 andof40 the

mm. sorption

relativity

humidity.

The25,shape

isotherm for HPC is influenced by many parameters,

especially

thosedetails

that influence extent and rate of the

2.2

Specimen

chemical reactions and, in turn, determine pore

To

test the

of reinforcing

bars in the

structure

andbond

porestrength

size distribution

(water-to-cement

different

concrete

types, composition,

the standard SF

beam-test

ratio, cement

chemical

content,

geometry,

as

described

in

the

RILEM

recommendacuring time and method, temperature, mix additives,

tion,

The specimen

depend

etc.). isInused.

the literature

variousdimensions

formulations

can on

be

the

bar

size.

Three

types

of

specimen

are

used

found to describe the sorption isotherm of normal

depening

on the

bar 1994).

diameter.

A type in

I specimen

is

concrete (Xi

et al.

However,

the present

used

for

tested

reinforcing

bars

with

a

diameter

paper the semi-empirical expression proposed by

smaller

16 mm.(1997)

A typeisII adopted

is used for

bars be-it

Norling than

Mjornell

because

tween 16 mm en 32 mm, and a third type is used for

Proceedings of FraMCoS-7, May 23-28, 2010

180

180

100 30

12

c )h

60

130

50

650

800

28

26

100

20

10

10

10

180

10

60

185

50

physically bound (adsorbed) water and the second

term (capillary isotherm) represents the capillary

water. This expression is valid only for low content

of SF. The coefficient G1 represents the amount of

water per unit volume held in the gel pores at 100%

relative humidity, and it can be expressed (Norling

Mjornell 1997) as

120

(chemically

2.1

Materials bound) water wn (Mills 1966,

Pantazopoulo & Mills 1995). It is reasonable to

Three

havewater

been used:

2 powderassumetypes

that oftheconcrete

evaporable

is a function

of

type

self-compacting

concretes

and

one

conventional

relative humidity, h, degree of hydration, c, and

vibrated

details

i.e. we=the

we(h,mixing

c,s)

degree ofconcrete.

silica fumeMore

reaction,

s, about

procedure

and

the

used

materials

can

be

in

= age-dependent sorption/desorption found

isotherm

(Desnerck

2008).

The

mix

proportions

and

concrete

(Norling Mjonell 1997). Under this assumption and

strengths

are summarized

by substituting

Equationin1Table

into 1.Equation 2 one

obtains

Table 1. Mix design for SCC and CVC mixes.

10(g

K1 ( c , s )e 1 c

plastic tubes

150

50

TheThe

common

way to testcoefficient

the bond strength

proportionality

D(h,T) of

is rebars

called

in

concrete

is

by

means

of

pull-out

tests

moisture permeability and it is a nonlinear (RILEM

function

1973).

The behaviour

types of specimens

is

of the relative

humidityofhthese

and temperature

T (Baant

quite

different

from

that

in

reinforced

elements

sub& Najjar 1972). The moisture mass balance requires

jected

bending. in time of the water mass per unit

that theto variation

The

beam

test specimen

suggested

RILEM

volume of concrete

(water content

w) be by

equal

to the

recommendation

part 1flux

(RILEM

1973) is more

divergence of theRC6

moisture

J

suitable to evaluate the bond strength of reinforced

elements

subjected to bending. The specimen, con(2)

w = of 2J half-beams, is loaded on top introducing

sisting

t

bending moments in the beam. In this way a more

realistic

stresscontent

distribution

and around

the sum

bar

The water

w caninside

be expressed

as the

is

created.

of the evaporable water w (capillary water, water

explicitly

for than

the 32

evolution

hydration

bars

equal accounts

to or larger

mm. Anofexample

is

reaction

content. (Fig.

This1).sorption isotherm

given

for aand

typeSF

I specimen

reads

The prescribed bond length is 10 times the bar diameter . However this leads to yielding, and in

some cases even rupture,

bar

of the reinforcement

bond 1strength. There

we (h,most

c , s ) = G ( c , s )1

+

a bond

fore

of the

specimens 10are

cast

with

1

(g

c )h

length of 5 times .

e 1 c

(4)

160

(1)

180

D ( h , T ) h

2J =EXPERIMENTAL

PROGRAM

6 x 50

335

100

of beam test specimen type I

c reinforcement

s

G1 ( c , s ) in

= kmm).

(5)

(dimensions

vg c c + k vg s s

where

k vg and

2.3

Testing

procedure

c

During

the tests,

the specimens

weregelloaded

fill all pores

(both capillary

pores and

pores),atonea

constant

rate

corresponding

to

an

increase

in steel

can calculate K1 as one obtains

stress of 30 N/mm per minute.

K ( c s ) =

g c c h

10

1

1

Frame

anchored on test floor

s + 0.22 s G

0.188

10

g c c h

(6)

be calibrated by fitting experimental data relevant to

free (evaporable) water content in concrete at

various ages (Di Luzio & Cusatis 2009b).

Hydraulic jack

Note that, at early age, since the chemical reactions

associated with cement hydration and SF reaction

are exothermic, the temperature field is not uniform

for non-adiabatic systems even if the environmental

temperature is constant. Heat conduction can be

described in concrete, at least for temperature not

exceeding 100C (Baant & Kaplan 1996), by

Fouriers law, which reads

Load cell

Support

= T

(7)

temperature,

and istypes,

the heat

this

For all specimen

the conductivity;

actuator wasinposi-

profile to each half-beam (Fig. 2). A load cell measured the load applied to the specimen during the test.

The slip of the bar, at its free end, was recorded

using 3 linear variable differential transducers (LVDT)

on both sides of the specimen.

Loading continued until the slip at one end of the

specimen reached 3 mm. For the half-beam with

3 mm slip the bar was fixed in a clamping device so

that the test could be continued without further slip

at this side of the specimen. Loading continued until

the slip at the second half of the specimen exceeded

3 mm as well.

2.4 Test results

From the obtained test results, values of the bond

stress along the surface of the bonded reinforcing

bar can be derived. The formulas to calculate the total force acting in the reinforcing bar depends on the

geometry of the specimen used.

The mean bond stress can be calculated by assuming the force Fs in the reinforcing bar to be transferred to the concrete in the cylindrical zone of the

embedment length ld:

P

As

32.0

28.0

24.0

(1)

reinforcing bar. This stress is, as mentioned earlier, a

function of the applied total load P and the geometry

of the specimen.

s = .

for beam tests

with bond(water

length of

5.

of concrete

content

w) be eq

M divergence

DEV of the

R moisture

DEVflux J

[N/mm] [N/mm]

[N/mm] [N/mm]

SCC1-12

18.13

0.99

27.82

3.17

SCC1-20

14.94 w =0.77

24.07

1.84

J

SCC1-25

12.80 t 0.81

19.39

1.27

SCC1-32

11.24

0.59

20.49

1.07

SCC1-40

9.71

0.55

19.86

0.93

The1.47

water content

w can

be expressed a

SCC2-12

15.77

25.70

2.93

of

the

evaporable

water

w

e (capillary wa

SCC2-20

13.31

0.25

21.54

1.56

and adsorbed

SCC2-25

12.10vapor,0.29

18.60 water)

2.03and the non-e

bound)

water

wn (Mil

SCC2-32

10.65(chemically

0.28

19.77

0.85

SCC2-40

8.81 Pantazopoulo

0.29

0.44

&17.48

Mills 1995).

It is reas

CVC1-12

13.45assume

0.73that the 19.88

0.75water is a fu

evaporable

CVC1-20

12.96relative

0.53humidity,

19.46

0.82 of hydration

h, degree

CVC1-25

11.14

0.94

16.28

1.50

of silica fume

CVC1-32

9.67 degree0.28

18.10 reaction,

1.00 s, i.e. we=w

=

age-dependent

sorption/desorption

CVC1-40

8.13

1.22

16.61

2.09

(2)

The factor can be determined from the specimens dimensions and has a value of 1.25 for specimen type I (diameter 12 mm), 1.50 for specimen

type II (diameters 20 and 25 mm) and 1.75 for

specimen type III (diameters 32 and 40 mm).

Two values are of major interest: the ultimate

bond strength R and the so-called characteristic

bond strength M. The ultimate bond strength is defined as the bond stress corresponding to the ultimate load recorded during testing. The characteristic

bond strength is calculated as the mean value of the

bond stresses corresponding to a slip of 0.01 mm,

0.10 mm and 1.00 mm. Both values differ for the

two halves of the specimen.

2.4.1 Influence of the concrete type

The main goal of the study is to compare bond

strengths for self-compacting concrete with those for

conventional vibrated concrete. In figure 3 one of

Fs

d =

= s

l d . . 4.k

D (h, T )slip

h curves (mean of 4

the recorded bondJ =stress

measurements) is plotted for bar diameter 20 mm

and different concrete

In coefficient

table 2 the D(h,T)

Thecompositions.

proportionality

values of the characteristic

bond

strength

andit the

moisture permeability and

is aul-nonlinea

timate bond strength

arerelative

given for

all specimen

of the

humidity

h and types

temperature

as well as the standard

deviation

(DEV).

& Najjar 1972). The moisture mass balanc

20.0

by substituting Equation 1 into Equati

Diam. 20 mm

obtains

w h

e + ( D h) = we

h

h t

w

&c + e &s + w

c

s

isotherm (also called moisture capac

governing equation (Equation 3) must be

12.0

by appropriate boundary and initial conditi

The relation between the amount of e

8.0

water and relative humidity

is called

SCC1

SCC2

isotherm

if

measured

with

increasing

4.0

humidity and desorptionCVC1

isotherm in th

case. Neglecting their difference (Xi et al.

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

the following,

sorption

isotherm

will be

Slip [mm]

reference to both sorption and desorption c

Figure 3. Bond stress slip diagram for bar diameters 20 mm.

By the way, if the hysteresis of the

isotherm

would

be taken intoforaccount,

two

Comparing therelation,

differentevaporable

types of concrete

the humi

water

vs

relative

same bar diameter,

CVC1

and SCC2

(which

have

be used

according

to the

sign

of

the varia

almost the same compressive

strength)

have

comparelativity

humidity.

The

shape

of the

rable values for the

characteristic

bond

stress

M, exisotherm

for HPC

is influenced

by many p

cept for bar diameters

12 mm

for which

a significant

especially

those

that

influence

extent

and

difference between

the 2 concretes

isand,

noticed.

The determ

chemical

reactions

in

turn,

difference for thestructure

ultimateand

bond

R is some- (waterporestress

size

distribution

what larger. For ratio,

all tests

on

SCC2,

is

above

the

R

cement chemical

composition,

SF

ultimate bond stress

of

CVC1.

curing

time

and

method,

temperature,

mix

When the bond

stress-slip

ofvarious

the differetc.).

In the relations

literature

formulatio

ent concrete typesfound

are plotted

for

tests

on

specimen

to

describe

the

sorption

isotherm

with a reinforcingconcrete

bar of the

same

diameter,

it

can

be in th

(XiofetSCC1

al. 1994).

However,

seen that the bond

strength

is

larger

than

paper

the (as

semi-empirical

expression

pro

those of SCC2 and

CVC1Mjornell

was expected

dueadopted

to

Norling

(1997)

is

b

the higher compressive strength) at all stress levels,

16.0

resulting

of

40 mm the curves for SCC2 and CVC1 are almost

identical

for small slip values,

whileD(h,T)

the bond

stress

The proportionality

coefficient

is called

level

for

SCC1

for

the

same

slip

is

higher.

For

all

moisture permeability and it is a nonlinear function

other

the bond

for the

SCC2

of the diameters,

relative humidity

h andstresses

temperature

T (Baant

specimens

are

higher

for

the

same

slip

as

recorded

& Najjar 1972). The moisture mass balance requires

for

specimens.

In the

some

casesmass

the per

stresses

thatthe

theCVC1

variation

in time of

water

unit

even

approach

the

values

for

SCC1.

volume of concrete (water content w) be equal to the

divergence of the moisture flux J

2.4.2 Influence of the bar diameter

When

the results of all test are compared, it can be

(2)a

w that

= an

J increase in the bar diameter results in

seen

t

decrease of M and R. As the concrete strength influences

the content

bond properties

of the concrete,

the

The water

w can be expressed

as the sum

bond

stress

is

normalised

by

the

root

of

the

compresof the evaporable water we (capillary water, water

sive

strength:

vapor,

and adsorbed water) and the non-evaporable

Pantazopoulo

& Mills 1995). It is reasonable to

R ,n = R

assume that

the

evaporable water is a function of

fc

(3)

relative humidity, h, degree of hydration, c, and

degree of silica fume reaction, s, i.e. we=we(h,c,s)

Figure 4, R,n is sorption/desorption

plotted for all concrete

mixes

= Inage-dependent

isotherm

and

tested

bar

diameters.

(Norling Mjonell 1997). Under this assumption and

differences

in the normalized

ultimate2bond

by The

substituting

Equation

1 into Equation

one

strength

obtains for the conventional vibrated concrete and

the self-compacting concrete is largest for bar diameters of 12 mm. The difference becomes smaller

w

w

w h

e but

e + bar

for

the e results

&

&s + w&nfor self ( Ddiameters,

h ) =

higher

(3)

c +

h

h

t

compacting concrete are chigher ins all cases. There

are no significant differences between the normalized

ultimate

SCC1

and SCC2, exisa 40

thestrength

slope

ofofthe

sorption/desorption

wherein

we/hbond

cept

case

of

mm

reinforcement

bar.

isotherm

(also

called

moisture

capacity).

The

By increasing

the(Equation

bar diameter,

thebeslip

at ultigoverning

equation

3)

must

completed

mate

bond stress

su is increasing

in all

cases. No sigby appropriate

boundary

andnoticed

initial

conditions.

nificant

difference

can

be

between

the reThe

relation

between concrete

the amount

of evaporable

sults

for

self-compacting

and

the

results

for

water

and

relative

humidity

is

called

adsorption

conventional

concrete.

isotherm if vibrated

measured

with increasing relativity

case. Neglecting their difference (Xi et al. 1994), in

the following, sorption isotherm will be used with

reference to both sorption and desorption conditions.

By the way, if the hysteresis of the moisture

isotherm would be taken into account, two different

relation, evaporable water vs relative humidity, must

be used according to the sign of the variation of the

relativity humidity. The shape of the sorption

isotherm for HPC is influenced by many parameters,

especially those that influence extent and rate of the

chemical reactions and, in turn, determine pore

structure and pore size distribution (water-to-cement

ratio, cement chemical composition, SF content,

curing time and method, temperature, mix additives,

etc.). In the literature various formulations can be

Figure

bond strength

for different

difound 4.toNormalized

describe ultimate

the sorption

isotherm

of normal

ameters

and

concrete

compositions.

concrete (Xi et al. 1994). However, in the present

paper the semi-empirical expression proposed by

Norling Mjornell (1997) is adopted because it

Proceedings of FraMCoS-7, May 23-28, 2010

explicitly

accounts

2.4.3

Crack

pattern for the evolution of hydration

reaction

andtheSFcrack

content.

This

sorptiononisotherm

After

testing

pattern

appearing

the surreadsof the specimen was recorded. No big differface

ences between the crack pattern for CVC1 and the

self-compacting concretes

no SCC1 and SCC2 were

lim

( , ) 1

we (hto, the

+

the rec , zone

s ) = Gin

c s actual

ited

bond

between

1 which

10(g

c c )h so along

inforcing bar and the concrete

e was1 possible,

(4)

the bonding length.

)h

(g crack

patterns

An example of one of 10

the

c

1 c

K1 (inc ,Figure

) e 5.

1 of the

specimen is given

s

physically bound (adsorbed) water and the second

term (capillary isotherm) represents the capillary

water. This expression is valid only for low content

of SF. The coefficient G1 represents the amount of

water per unit volume held in the gel pores at 100%

relative humidity, and it can be expressed (Norling

Mjornell 1997) as

Figure 5. Crack cpattern forsone of the specimen of CVC1 with

G (12 ,mm

)diameter.

=k c+k s

(5)

bars

1

c s

vg c

vg s

k vg and k vgMODELS

3where

PREDICTION

c

fillliterature

all pores (both

capillary

and gelthe

pores),

one

In

a lot of

modelspores

to predict

ultimate

as

one

obtains

can

calculate

K

1

bond strength, corresponding slip and equations to

describe the bond stress-slip behaviour can be found.

g c as

bar

h di such

e

w cover,

s + concrete

s G compressive

ameter, concrete

strength,

c

s

are incorporated.

(6)

K ( c s ) =

All equations have been

by

linear

or

established

g h

c

c

non-linear regression eon test results with varying parameters, but mostly for conventional vibrated concretes

compressive

strengths

beg1 can

Thewith

material

parameters

kcvg andinksvgtheandrange

tween

20 and by

50 fitting

MPa. Few

tests havedata

been

done on

be calibrated

experimental

relevant

to

high

concretes

compressive

strengths

free strength

(evaporable)

waterwithcontent

in concrete

at

above

MPa.

The compressive

strengths of the

various60ages

(Di Luzio

& Cusatis 2009b).

concretes used in this research project are all around

60 MPa or higher for the SCC1 mixture.

10

0.188

0.22

10

Note that, at early age, since the chemical reactions

3.1 Bond stress slip relation

associated with cement hydration and SF reaction

A

for thethe

bond

stress- slip

is rearemodel

exothermic,

temperature

fieldbehaviour

is not uniform

quired

to be able systems

to make even

calculations

of the crack

for non-adiabatic

if the environmental

pattern,

crackiswidths,

.Heat

Therefore

a relationship

temperature

constant.

conduction

can be

has

been proposed

in theatCeb-Fib

Code 1990

described

in concrete,

least forModel

temperature

not

(Fig.

6). It consists

of an increasing

first 1996),

branch up

exceeding

100C (Baant

& Kaplan

by

to

the ultimate

bond reads

stress. This branch is followed

Fouriers

law, which

by a plateau during which slip is increasing for constant

to

q = bond

T stress, after which bond stress starts(7)

decrease for increasing slip values. Finally a constant

residual

strength

is reached

whichabsolute

is due

where

q is bond

the

heat

flux,

T is the

to

pure friction

reinforcing

bar with

the

temperature,

andbetween

is thetheheat

conductivity;

in this

cracked concrete lugs and the surrounding concrete:

J = D ( h, T values

) h

the range of the measured

for larger bar diameters.

The bar diameter The

has also

an influencecoefficient

on the slip D(h,T)

proportionality

corresponding with

the

ultimate

bond

strength

moisture permeability and it as

is can

a nonlinea

be seen on the graphs.

Both models

however

have

of the relative

humidity

h and temperature

fixed values of this

slip value

regardless

the barmass

di- balanc

& Najjar

1972).

The moisture

ameter.

that the variation in time of the water mas

divergence of the moisture flux

J

SCC1

32.0

28.0

Figure 6. Prediction model for the bond stress slip relationship according to MC90 and Huang et al.

= 1

0 s s1

s1 < s s 2

s s2

= 1 ( 1 3 ).

s3 s 2

=3

(4)

(5)

s 2 < s s3

s3 < s

(6)

(7)

Ceb-Fip MC90 (1999) for good bond conditions.

Confined concrete

Unconfined concrete

s1

1.0 mm

0.6 mm

s2

3.0 mm

0.6 mm

s3

distance betw. ribs

1.0 mm

0.4

0.4

1

2.5 f c

2.0 f c

3

0.4 1

0.15 1

Table 4. Values for the prediction equations according to

Huang et al. (1996) for good bond conditions.

High strength concrete Normal strength concrete

0.5 mm

1.5 mm

distance betw. ribs

0.3

0.4. fcm

0.4 1

16.0

12.0

Ceb-Fip MC90

Huang

12 mm

20 mm

25 mm

32 mm

40 mm

8.0

4.0

The parameters in this model have been prescribed in the code for confined and unconfined

normal strength concrete with good or other bond

conditions. Huang et al. (1993) proposed values for

the parameters for normal and high strength concrete

under good bond conditions (Table 3 and 4).

s1

s2

s3

1

3

20.0

of the evaporable water we (capillary wa

vapor, and adsorbed water) and the non-e

(chemically bound) water wn (Mil

Pantazopoulo & Mills 1995). It is reas

assume that the evaporable water is a fu

relative humidity, h, degree of hydration

degree of silica fume reaction, s, i.e. we=w

= of measured

age-dependent

Figure 7. Comparison

bond stresssorption/desorption

slip behaviour

(Norling

Mjonell

1997). Under this assum

for SCC1 with prediction models.

by substituting Equation 1 into Equati

obtains

0.6 mm

0.6 mm

1.0 mm

0.4

0.4. fcm

0.4 1

Huang high strength concrete) are compared with

the measured bond stress-slip behaviour of the

specimen (Figs. 7 to 9). It can be seen that the predicted values calculated with the Huang-model for

high strength concrete overestimate the bond

strength in all cases. For the MC90-model, the values are underestimated for small diameters and in

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

Slip [mm]

32.0

SCC2

28.0

24.0

Bond Strength [N/mm]

for

w h

e + ( D h) = we

h

h t

w

&c + e &s + w

c

s

20.0

isotherm (also called moisture capac

governing equation (Equation 3) must be

by appropriate boundary and initial conditi

The relation between the amount of e

water and relative humidity is called

isotherm if measured with increasing

humidity and desorption isotherm in th

Figure 8. Comparison

of measured

bond stress

behaviour

case.

Neglecting

their slip

difference

(Xi et al.

for SCC2 with prediction models.

the following, sorption isotherm will be

reference to both sorption and desorption c

By the way, if the hysteresis

of the

CVC1

isotherm would be taken into account, two

relation, evaporable water vs relative humi

be used according to the sign of the varia

relativity humidity. The shape of the

isotherm for HPC is influenced by many p

especially those that influence extent and

chemical reactions and, in turn, determ

structure and pore size distribution (waterratio, cement chemical composition, SF

curing time and method, temperature, mix

etc.). In the literature various formulatio

found to describe the sorption isotherm

concrete

(Xibond

et al.

1994).

However, in th

Figure 9. Comparison

of measured

stress

slip behaviour

for CVC1 with prediction

papermodels.

the semi-empirical expression pro

Norling Mjornell (1997) is adopted b

16.0

12.0

Ceb-Fip MC90

Huang

12 mm

20 mm

25 mm

32 mm

40 mm

8.0

4.0

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

Slip [mm]

32.0

28.0

24.0

s

= 1.

s1

= J

24.0

20.0

16.0

12.0

Ceb-Fip MC90

Huang

12 mm

20 mm

25 mm

32 mm

40 mm

8.0

4.0

0.00

0.25

0.50

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

Slip [mm]

of theMaximum

relative humidity

h and temperature T (Baant

3.2

bond strength

& Najjar 1972). The moisture mass balance requires

To

a better in

prediction

of water

the ultimate

that get

the variation

time of the

mass perbond

unit

strength

more

sophisticated

models

are

necessary.

volume of concrete (water content w) be equal

to the

Some

of the

to predict

divergence

of models

the moisture

flux J the ultimate bond

Key parameters in these equations are the ratio

w

(2)

the

= J

of

t concrete cover c to the bar diameter , the ratio of the bar diameter to the bond length ld and the

rootThe

of the

compressive

fc.

water

content w strength

can be expressed

as the sum

vapor, and adsorbed water) and the non-evaporable

Table 5. Prediction models for bond strength.

(chemically

bound) water wn (Mills 1966,

Author

Equation

Units

Pantazopoulo

& Mills 1995). fIt is reasonable

to

Eligehausen

R = 0.75. c .

SI

assume

that

the

evaporable

water

is

a

function

of

Esfahani*

R = 4.73.[ (c ) +0.5]/[ (c ) +5.5]. f

SI

relative

h, degree

of hydration,

Psi

Harajli humidity,

R = [1.2+3.

(c ) +50.

( l d ) ]. f c, and

Huang**of silicaRfume

=0.45.freaction,

s)

degree

s, i.e. we=we(h,c,SI

cm

(c ) +53. ( l d ) ].isotherm

f

R = [1.22+3.23.

Psi

=Orangun

age-dependent

sorption/desorption

f

SI

MC 90

R =2.5.

(Norling

Mjonell

1997).

Under this assumption and

* Equation is valid for fc > 50 MPa

by

substituting

1 60into

Equation

2 one

** Equation

is valid Equation

for fc between

and 120

MPa

obtains

c

ck

w

thewobtained

andwthe

for the

e &predicted

e & +ones

e h + values

&

w

+

( D h ) =

(3)

c

s

n

different

h mixesin a bond

stress versus bar

h t concrete

c

s

diameter diagram. It shows an underestimation of

the ultimate bond strength in all cases, except for

is the(1996)

slope ofwhich

the sorption/desorption

where

we/h

the

Huang

model

is developed for

isotherm

(also

called

moisture

capacity).

high strength concrete. The predicted

valueThe

is

governing

equation

(Equation

3)

must

be

completed

sometimes only 40% of the recorded one. Some

by appropriate

boundary

and initial

conditions. from

models

give bond

strengths

independently

relation between

the amount

of evaporable

the The

bar diameter,

others seems

to predict

the trend

water

and

relative

humidity

is

called

adsorption

quite good but give values that are too low, e.g.

isotherm

with

increasing

relativity

the

models if

by measured

(Orangun et

al. 1977;

Harajli

1994).

humidity

and

desorption

isotherm

in

the

opposite

Therefore the coefficients out of the Oranguncase. Neglecting

difference (Xi

al. 1994),

in

model

have beentheir

re-determined

by et

linear

regresthe

following,

sorption

isotherm

will

be

used

with

sion based on the obtained results.

R [N/mm]

By the way, if the hysteresis of the moisture

isotherm

would be taken into account, two different

30,0

relation,

evaporable water vs relative humidity,

SCC1 must

Eligehausen

25,0 according to the sign of the variation

be used

of the

Esfahani

relativity

humidity.

The

shape

of

the

sorption

20,0

Harajli

isotherm for HPC is influenced by many parameters,

Huang

15,0

especially

those that influence extent and rateOrangun

of the

MC90 pore

chemical

reactions

and,

in

turn,

determine

10,0

structure and pore size distribution (water-to-cement

ratio,5,0cement chemical composition, SF content,

curing0,0time and method, temperature, mix additives,

etc.). In 5 the literature

can be

15

25various

35 formulations

45

found to describe the [mm]

sorption isotherm of normal

Figure

10. Bond

versus bar

diameter in

comparison

of

concrete

(Xi etstrength

al. 1994).

However,

the present

models

and

test

results

for

SCC1.

paper the semi-empirical expression proposed by

Norling Mjornell (1997) is adopted because it

Proceedings of FraMCoS-7, May 23-28, 2010

20,0

Harajli

15,0

we (h10,0

c s ) =

,

5,0

0,0

G1 ( c , s )1

(g

c

e

)h

(g

c

c

K15 ( c 25s ) e 35

45

[mm]

10

Huang

Orangun

+

MC90

c )h

10

(4)

models and test results for SCC2.

physically bound (adsorbed) water and the second

term30,0(capillary isotherm) represents the capillary

CVC1

water.

content

25,0This expression is valid only for lowEligehausen

Esfahani

of SF. The coefficient G1 represents the amount of

Harajli

water20,0per unit volume held in the gel pores at

100%

Huang

15,0 humidity, and it can be expressed (Norling

relative

Orangun

Mjornell

1997) as

MC90

10,0

5,0

c c+ ks s

G ( c s ) = k vg

c vg s

0,0

(5)

15

25

35

45

where kcvg and ksvg are [mm]

Figure

12.

Bond

strength

versus

comparison

of

maximum amount of water bar

perdiameter

unit volume

that can

models and test results for CVC1.

fill all pores (both capillary pores and gel pores), one

onethe

obtains

canDue

calculate

K1 asthat

to the fact

bond length has been kept

constant in these test, the term with ld becomes con

both

h self gfor

stant. The determined coefficients

w

s + s G e c

c weres almost

compacting concretes

identical,

but

the

(6)

coefficients

for

the

conventional

vibrated

concrete

K ( c s ) =

differed.

The new equations

hgiven in Table 6.

g are

c

c

predicted and the

measured bond strengths can cbe noticed

in Figure 13

parameters k vg and ksvg and g1 can

(forThe

SCCmaterial

mixtures).

10

0.188

0.22

10

free 6.(evaporable)

watermodels

content

concrete at

Table

Modified prediction

for bondinstrength.

various type

ages (DiEquation

Luzio & Cusatis 2009b). Units

Concrete

SCC

CVC

2.2

R = [1.77+0.49. (c ) ]. f cm

SI

fcm

SI

= [1.87+0.35. (c ) ].

TemperatureR evolution

at early age, since the chemical reactions

associated with cement hydration and SFSCC1reaction

are exothermic, the temperature field is notSCC2uniform

for non-adiabatic

systems even if the environmental

25,0

temperature is constant. Heat conduction can be

described in concrete, at least for temperature not

exceeding 20,0100C (Baant & Kaplan 1996), by

Fouriers law, which reads

R,meas [N/mm]

the The

bar diameter.

proportionality coefficient D(h,T) is called

explicitly

accounts for the evolution of hydration

30,0

SCC2

reaction and SF content. This sorption isotherm

Eligehausen

25,0

reads

Esfahani

R [N/mm]

=Out

D (of

h, Tthis

)h it can be concluded that the models

(1)

R [N/mm]

= T

15,0

15,0

where

20,0

25,0

30,0

R,pred [N/mm]

(7)

temperature,

andthe modified

is the heat

conductivity; in this

values

for SCC with

equations.

the moment of maximum bond strength is influenced

by the reinforcing bar diameter. For smaller diameters the maximum bond strength is larger but the slip

is smaller.

In the bond model out of MC90, no influence of

the bar diameter on the value of s1 is noticed, although it is clearly present in the experimental results. Most authors suggest a fixed value for s1,

while others suggest values that depend on the clear

rib spacing c0. Some of the values for confined reinforcing bars are summarized in Table 7.

Table 7. Prediction models for bond strength.

Author

Equation

Harajli

s1 = 0.15 c0

Huang

s1 = 1.0 mm (normal strength concrete)

s1 = 0.6 mm (high strength concrete)

MC 90

s1 = 1.0 mm

Oh

s1 = 1.04 mm

Units

SI

SI

SI

SI

SI

SCC1

2,5

SCC2

CVC1

s1 [mm]

2,0

Harajli

1,5

Huang (HSC)

Oh

1,0

MC90

0,5

0,0

5,000

10,000

15,000 20,000

c 0 [mm]

(8)

Theequation

proportionality

coefficient

The new proposed

is plotted

in Fig- D(h,T)

moisture

permeability

and

it

ure 14 together with the obtained test results. is a nonlinea

3,0

2,5

2,0

1,5

1,0

& Najjar 1972). The moisture mass balanc

that the variation in time ofSCC1the water mas

SCC2

volume of concrete (water content

w) be eq

divergence of the moisture CVC1

flux

J

Prop. model

= J

w

t

0,5

of the evaporable water we (capillary wa

5,000

10,000vapor,

15,000and20,000

25,000water) and the non-e

adsorbed

c [mm]

(chemically bound) water wn (Mil

Figure 14. Clear rib spacing versus slip s1 Comparison of test

Pantazopoulo & Mills 1995). It is reas

results with new proposed model.

assume that the evaporable water is a fu

h, degree(8)ofcan

hydration

The equations relative

of Tablehumidity,

6 and the equation

,

i.e. we=w

degree

of

silica

fume

reaction,

s

now be used in the MC90 model (equation 4 till 7)

=

age-dependent

sorption/desorption

to replace the expressions for 1 and s1.

(Norling Mjonell 1997). Under this assum

by substituting Equation 1 into Equati

obtains

4 CONCLUSIONS

0,0

and the experimental determined values is given in

Figure 13.

None of the models gives a good prediction of the

slip corresponding with the maximum bond strength.

The clear rib spacing, which is increasing for increasing bar diameters, is influencing the slip values.

No big differences are noticed between selfcompacting and conventional concrete (except for

bars diameter 40 mm), as well as no significant difference can be seen between the values for SCC1

compared to the values of SCC2 and CVC1. So it

can be concluded that the concrete type (SCC or

CVC) and the compressive strength of the concrete

does not have an influence on s1.

3,0

= D ( h , T ) h

s1 = c 0 .(0.0035c 0 + J0.006)

s1 [mm]

25,000

models and test results.

A regression analysis has been performed to determine a good relationship between the clear rib

spacing c0 of the tested reinforcing bar and the observed slip corresponding to the maximum bond

strength:

w concluw results,

Based on the obtained

the following

h

e & + we & + w

+ ( D h ) =

e

c

s

sions can be made: h t

h

c

s

a. The bond strength of self-compacting concrete

is as high as the bond strength for conventional vithe slope are

of the

sorption/

wherelarge

we/h

brated concrete when

barisdiameters

studisotherm

(also

called

moisture

ied. For smaller bar diameters, the bond strength of capac

governing

equation

(Equation

3) must be

SCC is slightly higher,

with

the largest

difference

by

appropriate

boundary

and

initial

conditi

occuring for the smallest bar diameters.

Theto relation

amount of e

b. For equal water

cement between

ratio the the

compreswater

and

relative

humidity

is called

sive strength of the powder-type self-compacting

isotherm

if

measured

with

increasing

concrete is higher (due to the limestone filler conhumidity

and

desorption

isotherm

tent), and so are the maximum and characteristic in th

bond strengths. case. Neglecting their difference (Xi et al.

the following,tosorption

isotherm

c. The slip corresponding

the maximum

bondwill be

reference

to

both

sorption

and

desorption c

strength is increasing for increasing bar diameters.

isotherm

would bethetaken

into account,

two

Considering the

bond models,

following

can

relation,

evaporable

water

vs

relative

humi

be concluded:

be used according

sign of

the varia

a. The bond stress-slip

model outtooftheMC90

does

relativity

humidity.

The

shape

not implement the influence of the bar diameter, re- of the

isotherm

for HPC is influenced

by many p

sulting in a model

that underestimates

the ultimate

especially

those

that

influence

extent

bond strength for small bar diameters and ap- and

chemical

reactions

in turn, determ

proaches the values

for R for

large barand,

diameters.

structure

and

pore

size

distribution

b. The bond stress slip model does not take into (waterratio,ofcement

composition,

SF

account the influence

the bar chemical

diameter on

the slip

curing

time

and

method,

temperature,

mix

corresponding with the ultimate bond strength.

In models

the literature

various formulatio

c. Almost all etc.).

existing

for predicting

the

found

to

describe

the

sorption

isotherm

ultimate bond strength underestimate the actual

(XiCVC

et al. 1994). However, in th

value for SCC as concrete

well as for

paper the semi-empirical expression pro

Norling Mjornell (1997) is adopted b

Proceedings of FraMCoS-7, May 23-28, 2010

=d. DAlmost

( h, T )hall models neglect the influence of the

(1)

ultimate

bond strength. coefficient D(h,T) is called

The proportionality

e.

A

modification

to the models

to

moisture permeabilitycan

andbeit made

is a nonlinear

function

get

a better

prediction

bondTstrength,

of the

relative

humidityofhthe

andultimate

temperature

(Baant

as

discussed.

& Najjar 1972). The moisture mass balance requires

volume of concrete (water content w) be equal to the

REFERENCES

divergence of the moisture flux J

CEB-FIP. 1990. Model Code 1990. Comit Euro-International

w

(2)

du

=Bton,

J Lausane, France

t Y. & Chen Y. & Liu Y. 2003. Development of bond

Chan,

strength of reinforcement steel in self-consolidating concrete,

ACI Structural

(4)

The water

contentJournal,

w can 100

be expressed

as the sum

De

Schutter,

G. and Boel,

V. w

(eds)(capillary

2007, Proceedings

of the

water,

water

of 5th

theInternational

evaporable

water

e

RILEM Symposium on Self-Compacting

vapor,

and adsorbed water) and the non-evaporable

Concrete, RILEM Proceedings PRO54, RILEM Publica(chemically

bound) water wn (Mills 1966,

tions

Pantazopoulo

MillsP. &1995).

It P.is&reasonable

to

De

Schutter, G. &&Bartos,

Donome

Gibbs, J. 2008.

Self-Compacting

Caithness,

Publishingof

assume

that the Concrete,

evaporable

waterWhittles

is a function

Dehn,

& Holschemacher,

K. &of Weie

D. 2000.

and

relativeF. humidity,

h, degree

hydration,

c, SelfCompacting

Concrete

(SCC)

Time

Development

of

the Madegree

of

silica

fume

reaction,

s, i.e. we=we(h,c,s)

Properties and the Bond Behaviour, LACER, 5

= terial

age-dependent

sorption/desorption

isotherm

Desnerck,

P. & De Schutter,

G. & Taerwe, L. 2008.

Bond

(Norling

Mjonell

1997).

Under

this

assumption

and

Strength of Reinforcing Bars in Self-Compacting Concrete:

by Experimental

substitutingDetermination,

Equation 13rdinto

2 one

NorthEquation

American Conference on the Design and Use of Self-Consolidating Concrete

obtains

(SCC2008), Chicago, USA

Harajli, MH. 1994. Development/splice strength of reinforcing

w fiber reinforced

bars

we embedded

and

ACI

h + ( Dinplain

e we concrete,

wn

) =

Structural

h

(3)

c

s

Journal,

91

(5),

511-520

h

h t

&+

&+ &

isotherm (also called moisture capacity). The

governing equation (Equation 3) must be completed

by appropriate boundary and initial conditions.

The relation between the amount of evaporable

water and relative humidity is called adsorption

isotherm if measured with increasing relativity

humidity and desorption isotherm in the opposite

case. Neglecting their difference (Xi et al. 1994), in

the following, sorption isotherm will be used with

reference to both sorption and desorption conditions.

By the way, if the hysteresis of the moisture

isotherm would be taken into account, two different

relation, evaporable water vs relative humidity, must

be used according to the sign of the variation of the

relativity humidity. The shape of the sorption

isotherm for HPC is influenced by many parameters,

especially those that influence extent and rate of the

chemical reactions and, in turn, determine pore

structure and pore size distribution (water-to-cement

ratio, cement chemical composition, SF content,

curing time and method, temperature, mix additives,

etc.). In the literature various formulations can be

found to describe the sorption isotherm of normal

concrete (Xi et al. 1994). However, in the present

paper the semi-empirical expression proposed by

Norling Mjornell (1997) is adopted because it

Proceedings of FraMCoS-7, May 23-28, 2010

Harajli,

MH. accounts

2007. Numerical

bondevolution

analysis using

explicitly

for the

of experimenhydration

tally

derived

local

bond

laws:

A

powerful

method

for

reaction and SF content. This sorption isotherm

evaluating

the

bond

strength

of

steel

bars.

Journal

of

Strucreads

tural Engineering. 133 (5). 695-705

Huang, Z. & Engstrm, B. & Magnusson, J. 1996. Experimental investigation of the bond

of

and anchorage behaviour

Report

94:4,

1

(h, , University

) 1

weChalmers

+

Chalmers

c s ) = G1 ( c ,of sTechnology,

h (Pull-Out10(g

Martin, H. 2002. Bond Performance

of 1Ribbed

c Bars

c )and

e Composition

Consis(4)

Tests) Influence of Concrete

tency, Proceedings of the 3rd International

)h Symposium:

10(g

Bond in Concrete

from

Research

c

1 cto Standards,

K1 ( c , s ) e

1289-295,

Budapest

of Self-Compacting Concrete and Vibrated Concrete using

Pull-out

and represents

Structures, 41,.

where

theand

firstBeam

termTests,

(gelMaterials

isotherm)

the

1073-1089.

physically

bound

(adsorbed)

water

and

the

second

Orangun, CO. & Jirsa, JO & Breen, JE. 1977. A reevaluation

term

(capillary

isotherm) length

represents

the ACI

capillary

of test

data on development

and splices.

Jourwater.

This 114-122.

expression is valid only for low content

nal. 74(3),

Oh,

B.H.The

& Kim,

S.H. 2007.GRealistic

Modelsthe

for amount

Local Bond

of

of SF.

coefficient

1 represents

Stress-slip

of

Reinforced

Concrete

under

Repeated

Loadwater

per

unit

volume

held

in

the

gel

pores

at

100%

ing. Journal of Structural Engineering. 133(2), 216-224.

relative

humidity, and it can be expressed (Norling

RILEM. 1973. Technical recommendations for the Testing and

Mjornell

1997) as Materials: RC6, Bond Test for ReinUse of Construction

forcing Steel: 2. Pull-out Test, Materials and Structures.

RILEM. 1973. Technical

recommendations

for the Testing and

c

s

( , ) = k c + k s

G1Use

(5)

c ofs Construction

vg c Materials:

vg s RC6, Bond Test for Reinforcing Steel: 1. Beam Test, Materials and Structures,

96-105.

c

and ksM.

material

parameters.

the

where

vg are

Zhu,

W.k&vgSonebi,

& Bartos,

P.J.M.

2004. BondFrom

and interfacial

properties

of

reinforcement

in

self-compacting

conmaximum amount of water per unit volume that can

Materials

andcapillary

structures,pores

37, 442-448

fillcrete,

all pores

(both

and gel pores), one

w

K ( c s ) =

,

1

1

s + 0.22 s G

0.188

10

10

g c c h

g c c h

1

(6)

be calibrated by fitting experimental data relevant to

free (evaporable) water content in concrete at

various ages (Di Luzio & Cusatis 2009b).

2.2 Temperature evolution

Note that, at early age, since the chemical reactions

associated with cement hydration and SF reaction

are exothermic, the temperature field is not uniform

for non-adiabatic systems even if the environmental

temperature is constant. Heat conduction can be

described in concrete, at least for temperature not

exceeding 100C (Baant & Kaplan 1996), by

Fouriers law, which reads

q

= T

(7)

temperature, and is the heat conductivity; in this

- PSA STUDY.pdfUploaded bypalluravi
- TAE BITCHUploaded bygagoness ka
- 5 Design of Steel Truss FootbridgeUploaded byPAYANGDO
- Reinforced Concrete IUploaded byCesar Andres Peralta Vidal
- Concrete vs Steel ConstructionUploaded bycarol jane
- Arakawa Inv 09Uploaded byHuỳnh Thị Thủy Tiên
- vsvdsUploaded bydsureshcivil
- Reinforced Concrete I_2013-2014(2)Uploaded byalaa4altaie
- Sample.pdfUploaded bySandeshMahadevappa
- Lessons Learned From Structures Damaged by Delayed Ettringite Formation and the French Prevention StrategyUploaded byMee Noi
- IQSK Issue 27Uploaded byRustono R
- Sample PowUploaded bymario rufino jr.
- LRFD PipeUploaded byLe Van Huu
- Research on Coir Fiber Reinforced Cement ConcreteUploaded byIRJET Journal
- Report 1Uploaded byKamarul Nizam
- An Experimental Work on Alkaline Resistance Glass Fiber Reinforced concreteUploaded byIjaems Journal
- Adsorption of Acid Blue 193 From Aqueous Solutions Onto BTMA-bentoniteUploaded byLindsey Smith
- Langmuir LectureUploaded byaaaa
- Bambooppt Copy 140215114604 Phpapp02Uploaded byJuan Carlos Restrepo Restrepo
- ASAP 2020 micrometricsUploaded byYu Shi
- 1A Novel Agricultural Waste Adsorbent for the Removal of CationicUploaded byshardulkavi
- Adsorption.pdfUploaded byMira Fazzira
- ijsrp-apr-2012-115Uploaded byAnthony Au Zian Liang
- Dissociative Adsorption.docxUploaded byNaufal Fasa
- Adsorption Isotherm for the Blechin of Sunflower Seed OilUploaded byOvo Ojas
- EmasUploaded bywandadwilestari
- 6Uploaded byandronic_lumi2268
- Adsorption of Hg2+ and Cd2+ by ethylenediamine modified peanut shellsUploaded byEndah Ayuningtyas
- 71.Nanotechnology for Environmental Engineering_2018!3!17Uploaded bySathyabama University Biotechnology
- Durable Design of Reinforced Concrete Elements Against CorrosionUploaded byLucky Zozagalla

- Toyo Pumps 02 - DP Catalog.pdfUploaded byafrian_arie
- Ace Cbc Fee Guide 14Uploaded byafrian_arie
- Anchor BoltUploaded byAbu Farah
- Budget GuidelinesUploaded byLauro Barbosa
- Indirect Cost Rate Determination.pdfUploaded byAshok Subramaniyan
- 28-56-1-SMUploaded byafrian_arie
- Billing Rate INKINDO 2015Uploaded byNur Rokhman
- TID12721A HproTmodel DsUploaded byafrian_arie
- Metode Pemasangan GeotextileUploaded byAnna Mathofani
- Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 37 TAHUN 2010 tENTANG BENDUNGANUploaded byPUSTAKA Virtual Tata Ruang dan Pertanahan (Pusvir TRP)
- Spesifikasi Umum 2010 revisi (1) 2011Uploaded byYudi Susanto
- 203-438-1-PBUploaded byafrian_arie
- 1384_SNI 2415-2016.pdfUploaded byyudi iskandar
- 5629-13658-1-PB_2.pdfUploaded byafrian_arie
- Step by Step Auto CAD Land Desktop 2009Uploaded byWelly Pradipta bin Maryulis
- Spesifikasi Campuran Aspal PanasUploaded byAsis
- Spesifikasi Campuran Aspal PanasUploaded byAsis
- Beberapa Fungsi Geotekstil Atau GeosintetikUploaded byafrian_arie
- Penguard PrimerUploaded byPutroedidoh
- Katalog Produk PrinterUploaded byafrian_arie
- 07 PerMen No-05-1996-SMK3.docUploaded byafrian_arie
- Pekerjaan persiapanUploaded byTrader Toliz
- SNI Tata Cara Rencana Campuran Beton NormalUploaded byihsan_saroni
- Technical Date Sheel Jotun Hard Top as. AluminiumUploaded byafrian_arie
- Katalog 1Uploaded byafrian_arie
- Spesifikasi Umum 2010 revisi (1) 2011Uploaded byYudi Susanto
- 203-438-1-PBUploaded byafrian_arie
- 203-438-1-PBUploaded byafrian_arie
- Mechanical Separations 2011b PDFUploaded byafrian_arie
- 5629-13658-1-PB_2.pdfUploaded byafrian_arie

- The History of Nursing Education in Modern GreeceUploaded byAnthi Markou
- LKR05Uploaded byAmbrose Davies
- Application Security Guide SRM4.0Uploaded byoshkosh2553
- Cell Mol Life Sci 2004 FisoneUploaded byRia Devi
- Thesis 2010Uploaded byMarcia Edwards
- ttgenUploaded byPrasad Pol
- Ubong Professional Engineer Summary Statement-1Uploaded byHappiness Imuetinyan
- 268975333-Huawei-LTE-ENodeB-Site-Solution-Installation-Key-Point.pdfUploaded byKandasami Seerangan
- Literature Test Revision NotesUploaded bybryan6920
- Labs and DiagnosticsUploaded byJae Kim
- Chitin y chitosanUploaded byBoladeNieve
- Raymond Plant 1Uploaded byVanessa Costa da Rosa
- 2013 Jhpiego Mini-University AgendaUploaded byJhpiego_2013
- Goldcorp Hollinger Mine Closure PlanUploaded bycbcSudbury
- Physics AssignmentUploaded byRana Ahmed
- BookUploaded byMuhammadAbdullah59
- Readme SoftTH2Uploaded byktmleu
- (www.entrance-exam.net)-ICFAI University, MBA Human resource Management- I (MB2D3) Sample Paper 1.pdfUploaded bySharath Poojary Sp
- How to Deal With Cockroach InvasionUploaded bypest control
- 16 Detailed Design Drawings NASAUploaded byRandolf Rodriguez
- Coagulopathy of Chronic Liver DiseaseUploaded byHarish Puttagunta
- 202,2bUploaded bynkwanele
- SMARTECH-DSL50Uploaded byalyaxandr
- Of the Delicacy of Taste and PassionUploaded byAthar Khan
- graphic organizer concept mapUploaded byapi-334995045
- 11-18-13 HIST133 LECTUREUploaded byHarjay Lazo Tamayo
- Add Adhd SmallUploaded byNikiEnDanieTolken
- The Gyula Farkas memorial competition in the context of the Hungarian scientific competitionsUploaded byAmanda Car
- Tunable Patch Antenna Using a Liquid Crystal SubstrateUploaded byhwjice
- 333_926201145351.pdfUploaded bychaitanya