Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
NATIONAL
NCHRP REPORT 621
COOPERATIVE
HIGHWAY
RESEARCH
PROGRAM
Acceptance Tests for Surface
Characteristics of Steel Strands
in Prestressed Concrete
OCR for page R2
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2008 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE*
OFFICERS
CHAIR: Debra L. Miller, Secretary, Kansas DOT, Topeka
VICE CHAIR: Adib K. Kanafani, Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board
MEMBERS
J. Barry Barker, Executive Director, Transit Authority of River City, Louisville, KY
Allen D. Biehler, Secretary, Pennsylvania DOT, Harrisburg
John D. Bowe, President, Americas Region, APL Limited, Oakland, CA
Larry L. Brown, Sr., Executive Director, Mississippi DOT, Jackson
Deborah H. Butler, Executive Vice President, Planning, and CIO, Norfolk Southern Corporation, Norfolk, VA
William A.V. Clark, Professor, Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles
David S. Ekern, Commissioner, Virginia DOT, Richmond
Nicholas J. Garber, Henry L. Kinnier Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville
Jeffrey W. Hamiel, Executive Director, Metropolitan Airports Commission, Minneapolis, MN
Edward A. (Ned) Helme, President, Center for Clean Air Policy, Washington, DC
Will Kempton, Director, California DOT, Sacramento
Susan Martinovich, Director, Nevada DOT, Carson City
Michael D. Meyer, Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
Michael R. Morris, Director of Transportation, North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington
Neil J. Pedersen, Administrator, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore
Pete K. Rahn, Director, Missouri DOT, Jefferson City
Sandra Rosenbloom, Professor of Planning, University of Arizona, Tucson
Tracy L. Rosser, Vice President, Corporate Traffic, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Bentonville, AR
Rosa Clausell Rountree, Executive Director, Georgia State Road and Tollway Authority, Atlanta
Henry G. (Gerry) Schwartz, Jr., Chairman (retired), Jacobs/Sverdrup Civil, Inc., St. Louis, MO
C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin
Linda S. Watson, CEO, LYNXCentral Florida Regional Transportation Authority, Orlando
Steve Williams, Chairman and CEO, Maverick Transportation, Inc., Little Rock, AR
EX OFFICIO MEMBERS
Thad Allen (Adm., U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington, DC
Joseph H. Boardman, Federal Railroad Administrator, U.S.DOT
Rebecca M. Brewster, President and COO, American Transportation Research Institute, Smyrna, GA
Paul R. Brubaker, Research and Innovative Technology Administrator, U.S.DOT
George Bugliarello, Chancellor, Polytechnic University of New York, Brooklyn, and Foreign Secretary, National Academy of Engineering,
Washington, DC
Sean T. Connaughton, Maritime Administrator, U.S.DOT
LeRoy Gishi, Chief, Division of Transportation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC
Edward R. Hamberger, President and CEO, Association of American Railroads, Washington, DC
John H. Hill, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT
John C. Horsley, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC
Carl T. Johnson, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT
J. Edward Johnson, Director, Applied Science Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, John C. Stennis Space Center, MS
David Kelly, Acting Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S.DOT
Thomas J. Madison, Jr., Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, U.S.DOT
William W. Millar, President, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DC
James S. Simpson, Federal Transit Administrator, U.S.DOT
Robert A. Sturgell, Acting Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S.DOT
Robert L. Van Antwerp (Lt. Gen., U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC
*Membership as of October 2008.
OCR for page R3
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM
NCHRP REPORT 621
Acceptance Tests for Surface
Characteristics of Steel Strands
in Prestressed Concrete
Andrew E. N. Osborn
WISS JANNEY ELSTNER ASSOCIATES INC.
New York, NY
John S. Lawler
James D. Connolly
WISS JANNEY ELSTNER ASSOCIATES INC.
Northbrook, IL
Subject Areas
Bridges, Other Structures, and Hydraulics and Hydrology · Materials and Construction
Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD
WASHINGTON, D.C.
2008
www.TRB.org
OCR for page R4
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY NCHRP REPORT 621
RESEARCH PROGRAM
Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective Project 10-62
approach to the solution of many problems facing highway ISSN 0077-5614
administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local ISBN: 978-0-309-11761-6
interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually Library of Congress Control Number 2008910409
or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the © 2008 Transportation Research Board
accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly
complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These
problems are best studied through a coordinated program of COPYRIGHT PERMISSION
cooperative research.
Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining
In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials published or copyrighted material used herein.
initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this
employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the
understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA,
a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the
FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product,
Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for
Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of
any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission
Transportation.
from CRP.
The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was
requested by the Association to administer the research program
because of the Board's recognized objectivity and understanding of
NOTICE
modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this
purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway
Research Program conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of
authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Such approval reflects the
possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, Governing Board's judgment that the program concerned is of national importance and
state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its appropriate with respect to both the purposes and resources of the National Research
Council.
relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of
The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and to review this
objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of
report were chosen for recognized scholarly competence and with due consideration for the
specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of balance of disciplines appropriate to the project. The opinions and conclusions expressed
research directly to those who are in a position to use them. or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research, and, while they have
been accepted as appropriate by the technical committee, they are not necessarily those of
The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified
the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, the American
by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, or the Federal Highway
and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation.
needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National Each report is reviewed and accepted for publication by the technical committee according
Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State to procedures established and monitored by the Transportation Research Board Executive
Committee and the Governing Board of the National Research Council.
Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these
needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research
Council, the Federal Highway Administration, the American Association of State Highway
selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and and Transportation Officials, and the individual states participating in the National
surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade
Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the
object of this report.
The needs for highway research are many, and the National
Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant
contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of
mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is
intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other
highway research programs.
Published reports of the
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM
are available from:
Transportation Research Board
Business Office
500 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
and can be ordered through the Internet at:
http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore
Printed in the United States of America
OCR for page R5
OCR for page R6
COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS
CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 621
Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs
Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs
Edward T. Harrigan, Senior Program Officer
Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications
Hilary Freer, Senior Editor
NCHRP PROJECT 10-62 PANEL
Field of Materials and Construction--Area of Specifications, Procedures, and Practices
William N. Nickas, Corven Engineering, Inc, Tallahassee, FL (Chair)
Gary DeWitt, Colorado DOT, Evans, CO
Ahmad M. Itani, University of Nevada - Reno, Reno, NV
Jose A. Lopez, Plainsboro, NJ
Mohsen Shahawy, SDR Engineering Consultants, Inc., Tallahassee, FL
Thomas C. Stout, Texas DOT, Austin, TX
Paul Virmani, FHWA Liaison
Frederick Hejl, TRB Liaison
AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The research reported herein was performed under NCHRP Project 10-62 by Wiss Janney Elstner Asso-
ciates Inc. (WJE), Kansas State University (KSU), StressCon Corporation Inc. (SC), Lehigh University
(LU), and Northwestern University (NU).
At WJE, the principal investigator was Andrew Osborn. The co-principal investigators were James Con-
nolly and John Lawler. Major assistance to the project was provided by Sunyoung Hong, Richard Cechner,
John Fraczek, Mark Moore, and Donald Pfeifer. The hard work of Leo Zegler, Ryan Keesbury, Susanne
Papas, Kim Steiner, Dave Dunkman, and the rest of the staff of WJE is also gratefully acknowledged.
At KSU, the research work was performed under the direction of Robert Peterman. At SC, the research
work was performed under the direction of Donald Logan. At LU, the research was performed under the
direction of Eric Kaufman. At NU, the research work was carried out by Bruce Ankenman. The assistance
of all these individuals is gratefully acknowledged.
OCR for page R7
FOREWORD
By Edward T. Harrigan
Staff Officer
Transportation Research Board
This report provides practical tests to identify and measure residues on the surface of
steel pre-stressing strands and to establish thresholds for residue types found to affect
the strength of the strand's bond to concrete. Key products presented here are four test
methods suitable for use in a quality assurance program for the manufacture of steel pre-
stressing strand. The report will be of particular interest to bridge engineers in state high-
way agencies and industry and to suppliers of steel pre-stressing strand.
In the 1980s, tests conducted on uncoated and epoxy-coated steel pre-stressing strands
found that the measured transfer and development lengths of the uncoated strands were in
excess of lengths computed using the equation in the AASHTO standard specifications.
These results raised concerns that the AASHTO equation was not conservative enough
for modern strands with larger diameter and higher ultimate tensile strength. As a result, a
60% increase in the development length over the length computed using the AASHTO
equation was implemented.
As part of the investigation of possible causes for the discrepancy between measured and
computed development lengths, attention was drawn to variations in the surface condition
of strands used throughout the United States. The presence of surface residues--e.g., rust,
lubricants used in manufacturing processes, or corrosion inhibitors--suggested a possible
source for the wide scatter that was observed in bond test data.
There is a need for (1) practical tests to quantify the surface condition of steel pre-
stressing strands and (2) quality assurance criteria based on these tests to control the effect
of strand surface condition on bond strength. Under NCHRP Project 10-62, "Accept-
ance Tests for Surface Characteristics of Steel Strands in Pre-Stressed Concrete," Wiss,
Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. was assigned the tasks of (1) identifying the common types
of residues on steel pre-stressing strands, (2) developing practical tests to measure
deleterious strand residues and estimate their effect on the performance of the strand-
concrete bond, and (3) preparing a practical quality assurance procedure for strand
acceptance.
The research team designed and conducted a program of laboratory experiments to
accomplish these tasks. Residues commonly found on pre-stressing strands after manufac-
ture and as a result of the strand exposure to the elements during storage and transport were
identified. A wide variety of chemical and physical test methods for measuring the levels of
such residues were evaluated for accuracy, speed, and ease of use. The results of promising
methods were correlated to the results of transfer length testing and limited mechanical pull
out testing to establish performance thresholds.
OCR for page R8
Four test methods showed satisfactory correlation with bond in concrete or mortar or
both and are recommended for inclusion in a quality assurance program for steel pre-
stressing strand:
1. Weight Loss on Ignition,
2. Contact Angle Measurement After Lime Dip,
3. Change in Corrosion Potential, and
4. Organic Residue Extraction with Fourier Transform Infrared Analysis.
Further, the following combinations of the methods above provided better correlation
with bond in concrete or mortar or both than the methods used individually:
1. Weight Loss on Ignition combined with Contact Angle Measurement After Lime Dip
and Change in Corrosion Potential,
2. Contact Angle Measurement After Lime Dip combined with Change in Corrosion
Potential, and
3. Contact Angle Measurement After Lime Dip combined with Organic Residue Extrac-
tion (100% stearate only).
This report presents the main text of the contractor's final report of the project and two
appendices: (1) Evaluation of Mechanical and Chemical Test Methods (Appendix B) and
(2) Specifications for Standard Surface Test Methods (Appendix C). The following three
appendices are available upon request to NCHRP:
1. Appendix A: Review of Strand Bond Literature;
2. Appendix D: Supplemental Investigations of Strand Bond; and
3. Appendix E: Bibliography of Strand Bond.
OCR for page R9
CONTENTS
1 Summary
3 Chapter 1 Introduction
3 Background to Strand Bond Uncertainty
4 Manufacture and Surface Condition of Prestressing Strand
4 Pretreatment and Lubrication
7 Residual Film
8 Research Objectives
8 Organization of Document
9 Chapter 2 Research Approach
9 Overview
9 Industry Survey
9 Quality Control Program Development
10 Quality Control Program Overview
10 Evaluation of Proposed Surface and Chemical Test Methods
13 Proposed Quality Control Test Methods
17 Statistical Evaluation of Results
19 Supplemental Investigations of Strand Bond
20 Chapter 3 Findings and Applications
20 Findings of Industry Survey
20 Lubricant Manufacturers
20 Strand Manufacturers
21 Findings of Supplemental Investigations
21 Findings of Evaluation of Test Methods
21 Mechanical Testing
22 Chemical and Surface Testing
25 Test Methods and Precision Testing
25 Development of Thresholds
29 Interpretation of Elemental Analyses Relative to Manufacturing Processes
31 Interpretation and Applications
31 Development of Quality Control Program for Strand Bond
32 Thresholds
33 Computational Tool
35 Chapter 4 Conclusions and Recommendations
36 Future Work
37 References
OCR for page R10
38 Appendix A Review of Strand Bond Literature
39 Appendix B Evaluation of Mechanical
and Chemical Test Methods
123 Appendix C Specifications for Standard Surface Test Methods
129 Appendix D Supplemental Investigations of Strand Bond
130 Appendix E Bibliography of Strand Bond
