臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究主要在透過握裹試驗，探討混凝土與各號鋼筋間之握裹力學行為；並對混凝土保護層與有裂縫產生之混凝土間之力學行為進行研析。同時，本研究試驗中並輔以音射法進行力學行為監測，且利用有限元素法ANSYS之數值模擬分析。
由試驗發現，在相同混凝土強度中，鋼筋直徑越大，愈小，且鋼筋的極限握裹應力也著鋼筋的直徑增加而降低。在本研究中，每側保護層10 cm之軸拉試體與一邊保護層減少5cm之偏心拉拔試體之混凝土握裹強度接近，對鋼筋應力的發展，影響不大。預裂偏心試體應力皆明顯小於偏心拉拔試體，顯示混凝土保護層出現裂縫時，其混凝土與鋼筋間的握裹力變差。由有限元素法之應力分析，可知最大主應力及最大剪應力會隨著保護層與鋼筋直徑比(c/d)而遞減，此趨勢與實驗所得之平均握裹強度，完全一致。由趨勢迴歸分析可得知，偏心試體之握裹強度隨鋼筋直徑增大之折減率，較軸拉試驗為大。

This research attempts to investigate the bond behavior between concrete and rebar in various sizes through the pull-out test. In addition, bond behavior between the rebar and pre-cracked concrete is also investigated. Meanwhile, the acoustic emission (AE) was employed during the test for monitoring the cracking of concrete and of a finite element analysis via ANSYS was conducted in this research. From the test results, it showed that for the same concrete strength, the ultimate pullout force increases, but the ultimate bond strength decreases as bar diameter increases. The concrete cover reduced from 10 cm to 5 cm in one side of the concrete cube made little difference in bond strength as well as the stress in rebar as de-bonding. Pre-cracked eccentric pullout concrete shows less than bond strength than those without pre-cracking. It implies that the existence of crack decay in the bond between rebar and concrete. From the finite element analysis, it showed the maximum principal stress and the maximum shear stress decreases with the increase of the ratio of cover-to-bar diameter (c/d), which consisted with the nominal bond strength observed from the test results. From a regression analysis, it showed that the deduction of bond strength for the eccentric specimen is larger than those axial as the rebar diameter increase.

目錄
摘要 I
Abstract II
致謝 III
目錄 IV
符號說明 VII
表目錄 VIII
圖目錄 IX
照片目錄 XII
第一章 緒論 1
1-1 研究動機 1
1-2 研究目的 2
第二章文獻回顧 3
2-1 鋼筋混凝土握裹行為 3
2-2握裹力定義與力學性質 4
2-2-1握裹力定義 4
2-2-2握裹力學性質 4
2-3 破壞力學之實驗及分析 5
2-4 音射檢測技術與實驗力學 6
2-5鋼筋混凝土握裹力國外相關文獻 9
2-6 有限元素法模擬分析 11
2-6-1模擬分析 11
第三章 試驗計畫 17
3-1 試體規劃 17
3-2 試驗材料 18
3-3 試驗儀器 19
3-4 試驗步驟及方法 21
3-4-1 配比設計 21
3-4-2 混凝土基本力學性質試驗 22
3-4-3 混凝土拉拔試驗 22
第四章試驗結果與討論 34
4-1 鋼筋混凝土握裹力學行為 34
4-2鋼筋混凝土握裹試驗之鋼筋應力分析 35
4-2-1鋼筋應力之比較 35
4-2-2混凝土鋼筋握裹應力發展與鋼筋直徑之比較 35
4-3 握裹力試驗之音射監測 35
4-4鋼筋標稱握裹應力 36
4-5 有限元素模擬分析 37
4-5-1假設條件 37
4-5-2混凝土握裹應力分析 38
4-6拉拔試體裂縫發展 40
第五章結論與建議 67
5-1 結論 67
參考文獻 68











符號說明
Pc 初裂載重
Pu 極限載重
Uc 初裂握裹應力
Uu 極限握裹應力
a 鋼筋竹節高度
c 小寫c是鋼筋竹節的間距
σmax 最大主應力
τmax 最大剪應力
C 大寫C是混凝土保護層
d 鋼筋直徑











表目錄
表3-1 混凝土配比 23
表3-2骨材基本性質 23
表3-3 鋼筋規格表 24
表3-4 鋼筋竹節高度與間距比值 24
表4-1 鋼筋混凝土握裹試體之力學性質 42
表4-2 鋼筋握裹之力學性質 43
表4-3 鋼筋混凝土握裹強度之比較 44
表4-4 應力與保護層鋼筋之比較 45


















圖目錄
圖2-1 鋼筋與混凝土的作用力[1] 12
圖2-2 側邊保護層不足時產生的劈裂破壞[2] 12
圖2-3 鋼筋被拔出的破壞型態(pullout)[1] 13
圖2-4 混凝土劈裂的破裂型態(splittung)[3] 13
圖2-5握裹力各組成因素百分比關係圖[29] 14
圖2-6 音射法基本原理[8] 14
圖2-7 AE訊號特點[8] 15
圖2-8 鋼筋混凝土拉拔試驗應力分佈圖[25] 15
圖2-9 模擬拉拔試體模型圖[30] 16
圖3-1 拉拔試體鋼筋配置上視示意圖 24
圖3-2 試驗計畫流程圖 25
圖3-3 骨材篩分析曲線 26
圖3-4試驗配置圖 27
圖3-5 AE音射監測探頭配置圖 28
圖4-2混凝土初裂時鋼筋直徑與混凝土及握裹應力之關係 46
圖4-3混凝土極限時鋼筋直徑與混凝土及握裹應力之關係 47
圖4-4初裂點鋼筋應力與鋼筋降伏強度比 47
圖4-5 極限點鋼筋應力與鋼筋降伏度比 48
圖4-7 偏心試體混凝土初裂時鋼筋直徑與混凝土及鋼筋應力之關係 49
圖4-8 預裂偏心試體混凝土初裂時鋼筋直徑與混凝土及鋼筋應力之關係 49
圖4-9 軸拉試體混凝土極限時鋼筋直徑與混凝土及鋼筋應力之關係 50
圖4-10 偏心試體混凝土極限時鋼筋直徑與混凝土及鋼筋應力之關係 50
圖4-11 預裂偏心試體混凝土極限時鋼筋直徑與混凝土及鋼筋應力之關係 51
圖4-12 音射監測試體之訊號密度歷時與載重關係圖 51
圖4-15 軸拉、偏心、預裂偏心試體之極限握裹力 53
圖4-16 偏心與預裂偏心試體之極限握裹力 53
圖4-17 軸拉試體混凝土極限握裹強度與鋼筋直徑之關係 54
圖4-18 偏心試體混凝土極限握裹強度與鋼筋直徑之關係 54
圖4-19 預裂偏心試體混凝土極限握裹強度與鋼筋直徑之關係 55
圖4-20 混凝土極限握裹強度與鋼筋直徑之關係 55
圖4-21 軸拉試體D57 ANSYS分析模型 56
圖4-22 偏心試體D57 ANSYS分析模型 56
圖4-23 軸拉試體 D57 ANSYS網格分佈 57
圖4-24 軸拉試體D57 ANSYS網格內部剖面 57
圖4-25 偏心試體D57 ANSYS網格分佈 58
圖4-26 偏心試體D57 ANSYS網格內部剖面 58
圖4-27 軸拉試體之最大主應力 59
圖4-28 偏心試體之最大主應力 60
圖4-29 軸拉試體之最大剪應力 61
圖4-30偏心試體之最大剪應力 62
圖4-31最大主應力與保護層／鋼筋直徑之關係 63
圖4-32 最大剪應力與保護層／鋼筋直徑之關係 63
圖4-33 混凝土極限握裹應力時保護層／鋼筋直徑之關係 64



















照片目錄
照片3-1 試驗材料-鋼筋(a) 29
照片3-2 試驗材料-鋼筋(b) 29
照片3-3 50噸材料試驗系統 MTS 30
照片3-5全自動抗壓試驗機 30
照片3-7 音射訊號之判讀分析及密度劑量軟體視窗 31
照片3-8 試驗配置圖 32
照片3-9 探頭配置圖(1) 照片3-10 探頭配置圖(3) 33
照片3-11 探頭配置圖(2,4) 33
照片4-1 D19試體之裂縫延伸 65
照片4-2 D32試體之裂縫延伸 65
照片4-3 D43試體之裂縫延伸 66
照片4-4 D57試體之裂縫延伸 66

1.L. A. Lutz and P. Gergely, ”Mechanics of Bond and Slip of Deformed Bars in Concrete,” J. ACI, vol.64, no.11, 1967, pp.711-721.
2.ACI Committee 408, Bond and Development of Straight Reinforcement in Tension, ACI 408R-03, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills,MI,2003.
3.P. M. Ferguson, ”Small Bar Spacing or Cover-A Bond Problem for the Designer,” J. ACI, vol.74, no.9, 1977, pp.435-439.
4.Nico Herrmann, Lutz Gerlach, Harald Muller, Christoph Niklasch,Daniela Kiefer, Yann Le Pape, Christophe Bento, “PACE-1450 - Experimental investigation of the crack behaviour of prestressed concrete containment walls considering the prestressing loss due to aging,” Paper No. 1671, SMiRT 20, Espoo, Finland, Aug. 9~14, 2009.
5.Laura Lemnitzer, Steffen Schroder, Manfred Curbach, “Bond behavior between reinforcing steel and concrete under multiaxial loading conditions in concrete containments” Paper No. 1734, SMiRT 20, Espoo, Finland, Aug. 9~14, 2009.
6.Briffaut Matthieu, Benboudjema Farid, Torrenti Jean-Michel, Nahas Georges, “A new device for the study of early-age cracking in massive concrete structures,” Paper No. 3140, SMiRT 20, Espoo, Finland, Aug. 9~14, 2009.
7.Yu-Cheng Kan, Kuang-Chih Pei, Dong-Wei Lin, “A Model to Monitoring Real-time Fracture of Concrete Subjected to the Load from Tendons by AE Technique,” Paper No. 2603, SMiRT 20, Espoo, Finland, Aug. 9~14, 2009.
8.陳通，中國大百科全書。
9.“Nondestructive Testing Handbook Vol. 5, Acoustic Emission Testing,” 2nd Ed., American Society for Nondestructive Testing (ASNT), 1987.
10.American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) E569, E610, E650, E749, E750, E751, E976, E1067, E1106, E1118, E1139, E1430, F914, F1797.
11.Nielsen, J. and Griffin, D.F. “Acoustic Emission of Pain Concrete,” Journal of Testing and Evaluation, USA, 5, No.6, Nov., 1977.
12.Mindess, S. “Acoustic Emission and Ultrasonic Pulse Velocity of Concrete,” Int. Journal of Cement Composites and Lightweight Concrete, 4, No.3, Construction Press, Aug., 1982.
13.Hawkins, N.M., Kobayashi, A.S. and Fourney, M.E. “Use of Holographic and Acoustic Emission Techniques to Detect Structural Damage in Concrete Members,” Experimental Methods in Concrete Structures for Practitioners, ACI, Detroit, 1979.
14.Lim, M.K., Koo, T.K., “Acoustic Emission from Reinforced Concrete Beams,” Magazine of Concrete Research, 41, No.149, Dec., 1989.
15.Grosse, C.U., Reinhardt, H. and Dahm T. “Localization and Classification of Fracture Types in Concrete with Quantitative Acoustic Emission Measurement Techniques,” NDT&E International, 30, No.4, 1997.
16.Grosse, C.U. and Finck, F. “Quantitative Evaluation of Fracture Processes in Concrete Using Signal-based Acoustic Emission Techniques,” Cement & Concrete Composites, 28, 2006
17.Minemura O., Sakata, N., Yuyama, S., Okamoto, T. and Maruyama, K. “Acoustic Emission Evaluation of an Arch Dam during Construction Cooling and Grouting,”Construction and Building Materials, 12, 1998.
18.Ohtsu M., Okamoto T. and Yuyama, S. “Moment Tensor Analysis of Acoustic Emission for Cracking Mechanisms in Concrete,” ACI Structural Journal, 95, No.2, March-April, 1998.
19.Mirmiran A. and Philip S. “Comparison of Acoustic Emission Activity in Steel-reinforced and FRP-reinforced Concrete Beams,” Construction and Building Materials, 14, 2000.
20.Yuyama, S., Li Z.W., Yoshizawa M., Tomokiyo, T. and Uomoto T., “Evaluation of Fatigue Damage in Reinforced Concrete Slab by Acoustic Emission,” NDT&E International, 34, 2001.
21.Paulson P.O., Tozser O. and Wit M. “The Use of Acoustic Monitoring to Manage Concrete Structures in the Nuclear Industry,” Transactions of the 17th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology (SMiRT 17), Czech Republic, Aug.17-22, 2003.
22.Chinn, J.; Ferguson, P. M.; and Thompson, J. N., "Lapped Splices in Reinforced Concrete Beams," Journal of the American Concrete Institute, Vol. 27, No. 2,ctober 1955, pp. 201-213.
23.ACI Committee 408, "A Guide for Determination of Bond Strengthin Beam Specimens," ACI Journal, Vol. 61, No. 2, February 1964,pp. 129-135.
24.”Bond stresses-The state of the art”Reported by ACI Committee 408,journal ACI Vol.63,No11，November 1966,pp.1161-1190.
25.Ferguson, P. M.; Breen, J. E.; and Thompson, J. N., "Pullout Test on High strength Reinforcing Bar," Part 1, ACI Journal, Vol. 62, No. 8, August 1965, pp. 933-950.
26.Kennth M.Leet; Dionisio Bernal,"Renforced Concrete Design" ,McGraw-Hill International Editions,pp.209-211,1997.
27.林家群，「音射法監測混凝土修補前後之開裂行為研究」，碩士論文，朝陽營建工程系所，裴廣智，干裕成教授指導(2006)。
28.吳泓叡，「大尺寸鋼筋(D43、D57)與混凝土握裹行為分析」，碩士論文，朝陽科技大學營建工程系所，干裕成教授指導(2010)。
29.吳銘遠，「施工震動對低強度混凝土結構物鋼筋握裹強度之影響試驗及研究」，碩士論文，國立台北科技大學土木與防災研究所，彭添富教授指導(2007)。
30.A. Torre-Casanova a, L. Jason, L. Davenne , X. Pinelli., “Confinement effects on the steel–concrete bond strength and pull-out failure” Engineering Fracture Mechanics 97 (2013) 92–104.
31.ANSYS，結構力學，http://www.ansys.com/zh_cn/%E4%BA%A7%E5%93%81/ANSYS+14.5%E5%8A%9F%E8%83%BD%E4%BA%AE%E7%82%B9