The building codes such as American Concrete Institute (ACI) 318M-14 and Standard National Indonesia (SNI) 2847:2013 require that the ratio of tensile strength (TS) and yield strength (YS) should not less than 1.25. The requirement is based on the assumption that a capability of a structural member to develop inelastic rotation capacity is a function of the length of the yield region. This paper reports an investigation on various steel grades, namely Grades 420, 550, 650, and 700 MPa, to examine the impact of different TS/YS ratios if it is less or greater than the required value. Grades 550, 650, and 700 MPa were purposely selected with the intention to examine if these higher grades are still promising to be implemented in special structural systems since they are prohibited by the building codes for longitudinal reinforcement, whereas Grade 420 MPa bars are the maximum limit of yield strength of reinforcing bars that is allowable for longitudinal reinforcement of special structural systems. Tensile tests of these steel samples were conducted under displacement controlled mode to capture the complete stress-strain curves and particularly the post-yield response of the steel bars. From the study, it can be concluded that Grade 420 performed higher TS/YS ratios and they were able to reach up to more than 1.25. However, the High Strength Still (HSS) bars (Grades 550, 600, and 700 MPa) resulted in lower TS/YS ratios (less than 1.25) compared with those of Grade 420 MPa.

1.
ACI 318-14
“Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary on Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete”,
American Concrete Institute
,
Farmington Hills, MI
.(
2014
)
2.
Gong
Deping
,
Zhang
Kaijian
,
Yan
Jiaqi
,
International Symposium on the Research and Application of High Strength Reinforcing Bar
, (
2003
)
3.
Muhammad N.S.
Hadi
*
Bond of High Strength Concrete with High Strength Reinforcing Steel The Open Civil Engineering Journal
,
2
,
143
147
Faculty of Engineering, University of Wollongong, Wollongong 2522, Australia (
2008
)
4.
Prabir C.
Basu
,
Shylamoni
P.
and
Roshan A. D.
January
, “
Characterization of steel reinforcement for RC structure The Indian Concrete Journal An overview and related issues
”,
The Indian Concrete Journal
,
78
(
1
), pp.
19
30
, Jan, (
2004
)
5.
Tavio
,
Suprobo.
P
, and
Kusuma.
B.
, “
Strength and Ductility Enhancement of reinforced HSC Columns Confined with High strength Transverse Steel
,”
Proceeding of the eleventh East Asia Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering & Construction (EASEC-11), 19-21 Nov 2008
,
Taipei International Convention Cetre
, pp
350
351
6.
ACI 352 R-02 “
Recommendation for Design of Beam-Column Connection in Monolithic Reinforced Concrete Structure
”:
American Concrete Institute
,
Farmington Hills
, (
2002
).
7.
ASTMA615/A615M-06, “
Standard Specification for Deformed and Plain Carbon-Steel for Concrete Reinforcement
,”
American Standard Testing Material, International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
, (
2004
),
6
pp.
8.
ASTMA706/A706M, “
Standard Specification for Low – Alloy Steel Deformed and Plain Bars for concrete Reinforcement
”,
American Standard Testing Material, International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
, (
2007
)
9.
(ASTM A370-16, “
Standard Test Methods and Definitions for Mechanical Testing of steel Products
,
American Standard Testing Material, International
,
West Conshohocken, PA
, (
2016
)
This content is only available via PDF.