Four beam-column joint tests were undertaken to assess the accuracy

of New Zealand design rules relating to bond strength in beamcolumn

joints when applied to large diameter, high-strength
reinforcement. The ratio of longitudinal beam reinforcement
diameter to column depth intentionally did not meet the
requirements of the New Zealand design standard for any of the
units. The units were subjected to cyclic displacements up to interstory
drift angles of 5%. Bond failure occurred in two of the four
test units, at drift levels exceeding those allowed by international
codes. It is believed that the unexpectedly good bond performance
of the remaining two units was due to the large excess of vertical
joint shear and column moment capacity.
Keywords: beam-column joints; bond; high-strength reinforcement; load;
reinforced concrete; slippage.

INTRODUCTION
There have traditionally been two grades of steel reinforcement
available in New Zealand. Over time, the yield strength
of these materials has increased. Most recently, the yield
strength of the higher-strength reinforcement was increased
from 430 to 500 MPa (62.4 to 72.5 ksi), known as Grade 500E.
This resulted in changes to the way reinforced concrete
structures must be designed. The research presented here
investigated the impact of the new Grade 500E reinforcement on
the occurrence of bond failure in beam-column joints.
For reinforced concrete structures to function correctly, it
is vital that forces can be transferred between the concrete
and reinforcement. One mechanism by which this occurs is
the bond that forms at the interface between the reinforcement
and the concrete. This bond mechanism is particularly important
in interior beam-column joints, where reinforcement must
transition from being at yield in tension on one side of the
joint to being close to yield in compression on the other side,
and where there are few alternate options for anchoring
reinforcement. If the maximum bond stress is exceeded and
the bond between the beam longitudinal reinforcement and
the concrete in the joint is broken, the reinforcement can slip
freely through the concrete, reducing the stiffness of the
beam-column joint significantly. This is unlikely to cause a
catastrophic failure, but will increase the deflection of the
building if it is subjected to further loading. In addition, bond
failure alters the mechanism by which an interior beamcolumn
joint resists shear. The failure of the bond mechanism is
dependent on concrete strength and confinement, reinforcement
strength and diameter, and the length over which the force
transfer can occur (column depth in beam-column joints).
Previous research at the University of Auckland1,2
indicated that the New Zealand concrete design standard,
NZS 3101:1995,3 did not provide sufficient protection
against bond failure when high-strength reinforcement is
used in beam-column joints. In order to rectify this situation,
a database of interior beam-column joint test results was
assembled and analyzed to determine appropriate design
criteria.4 Based on this research, an amendment to the
New Zealand design rules for structural concrete was
released in late 2003. Beam-column joint tests, however, that
used beam longitudinal reinforcement with a yield strength of
500 MPa (72.5 ksi) or greater and a bar diameter larger than

20 mm were not available for inclusion in this database. The

experimental program described herein provided information
on this combination of reinforcement strength and diameter,
and gave an opportunity to assess the amended design rules.
RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
Although there is a history of interior beam-column joint
testing dating back over 30 years, few test specimens have
had high-strength beam longitudinal reinforcement of large
diameters. The use of large diameter bars and high-strength
reinforcement reduces reinforcement congestion compared