TECHNICAL FIELD
[0001] The present invention relates to a reinforcing bar joint to be applied when joining
reinforcing bars together.
BACKGROUND ART
[0002] Reinforcing bars are main components of reinforced concrete structures (RC structures)
and steel-reinforced concrete structures (SRC structures), and are cut in predetermined
lengths so as to be arranged easily during configuration on-site. The operation for
joining the reinforcing bars on-site is thus indispensable.
[0003] There are various types of methods for joining reinforcing bars, including a lap
joint, a mechanical coupler, and a gas-pressure welding joint. These joints are selected
and used as appropriate depending on the quality required of a structure, working
conditions, the diameters of the reinforcing bars being used, and the like.
[0004] In this instance, the joining methods mentioned above have respective drawbacks and
advantages. For example, a lap joint can join reinforcing bars easily by utilizing
the bar's adhesion to concrete. Since two reinforcing bars must be overlapped, it
becomes harder to perform various bar arrangements or secure overlapping lengths of
such as the bar diameter increases. Furthermore, a mechanical coupler requires management
on such details as the insert length of the reinforcing bars being inserted into the
coupler and the fastening torque being applied. A gas-pressure welding joint requires
the welder to hold a particular qualification for executing of the gas-pressure welding.
[0005] For this reason, bar joining methods that are capable of joining reinforcing bars
easily, without requiring a lapping length, have also been developed. Among those
methods, one method for joining pairs of mutually parallel reinforcing bars is applicable
only to reinforcing bars having fixed spacings, and thus is not sufficiently versatile
in terms of bar pitch (see Patent Document 5).
[0006] Under the circumstances, a joint has been developed that is composed of an elliptic-sectioned
steel sleeve and a wedge member. According to such a joint, the end portions of two
reinforcing bars are inserted into the sleeve from respective opposite directions,
and then the wedge member can be driven into the space between the two reinforcing
bars through a wedge insertion hole formed in the sleeve to join the reinforcing bars
together (see Patent Document 1, Patent Document 2, and Non-Patent Document 1)
[0007]
[Patent Document 1] Japanese Utility Model Publication No. Sho 58-32498
[Patent Document 2] Japanese Utility Model Publication No. Sho 58-53880
[Patent Document 3] Japanese Utility Model Application Laid-Open No. Hei 04-122111
[Patent Document 4] Japanese Utility Model Publication No. Sho 60-3858
[Patent Document 5] Japanese Patent No. 3197079
[Non-Patent Document 1]ERICO International Corporation, [searched on August 2, 2006],
the Internet <URL: http://www.erico.com/products/QuickWedge.asp>).
DISCLOSURE OF THE INVENTION
PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED BY THE INVENTION
[0008] In this configuration, however, the axes of the two reinforcing bars are displaced
from each other. Consequently, when the reinforcing bars undergo tensile forces in
opposite directions, a bending moment acts on the sleeve, and the sleeve is also rotated
such that the lines of action of the respective tensile forces come into alignment
on the same line.
As a result, the reinforcing bars may suffer a bending moment which does not occur
when undergoing tensile forces alone. The sleeve rotation can also subject the opening
edges of the sleeve to some of the tensile forces acting on the reinforcing bars,
thereby causing a split in the sleeve.
[0009] Reaction forces from the sleeve against the forces for acting to widen the opening
edges of the sleeve can also act on the reinforcing bars to break them. The rotation
of the sleeve may also loosen the engagement between the reinforcing bars and the
wedge member, so that the reinforcing bars are sometimes drawn out from the sleeve.
[0010] There has thus been the problem that while the foregoing joint structure can be applied
to shear reinforcing bars of a reinforced concrete structure or steel-reinforced concrete
structure which are under relatively small tensile loads, it is not suitable for main
reinforcing bars under relatively large tensile loads.
[0011] It should be noted that some proposals have been made to notch the opening edges
obliquely so as to avoid concentration of stress on the reinforcing bars (Patent Document
3), and to form a wedge of X-shaped section to avoid wedge rotation (Patent Document
4).
[0012] Nevertheless, even if the opening edges of the sleeve would be notched obliquely
as in Patent Document 3, the sleeve rotation cannot be prevented under the condition
that the reinforcing bars undergo tensile forces. The foregoing sleeve rotation similarly
cannot be prevented by the wedge having an X-shaped section as in Patent Document
4.
[0013] Thus, while there have been proposed several joints comprising an elliptic-sectioned
steel sleeve and a wedge member, these conventional techniques have not provided a
solution to the problem of a decrease in the tensile strength of two reinforcing bars
resulting from sleeve rotation when tensile forces act on the reinforcing bars.
[0014] The present invention has been achieved in view of the foregoing circumstances. It
is thus an object thereof to provide a reinforcing bar joint applicable to main reinforcing
bars of an RC structure or SRC structure, capable of avoiding a decrease in the tensile
strength of two reinforcing bars resulting from sleeve rotation when tensile forces
act on the reinforcing bars.
[0015] The applicant have conducted research and development on whether or not it is possible
to make a sleeve-based reinforcing bar joint applicable to not only shear reinforcing
bars but main reinforcing bars as well, by reducing the amount of sleeve rotation,
if not eliminating the sleeve rotation completely, when joining reinforcing bars with
this reinforcing bar joint. As a result, the applicant has succeeded in reducing the
amount of sleeve rotation, and consequently the bending deformation of the reinforcing
bars can be suppressed and the pulling out of the reinforcing bars from the sleeve
can be prevented, with a new configuration using a plurality of wedge members and
pressing the same into place at well-spaced positions.
[0016] That is, according to the present invention, a first wedge member and a second wedge
member bite into a first reinforcing bar and a second reinforcing bar under reaction
forces from the inner periphery of a sleeve when they are pressed into and between
the first and second reinforcing bars. That is, by biting in of the two wedge members
and the binding effect of the sleeve, the sleeve becomes to one body with the first
and second reinforcing bars, and the first and second wedge members at the area from
the vicinity of the press-in position of the first wedge member to the vicinity of
the press-in position of the second wedge member. Therefore, the sleeve rotates with
the first and second reinforcing bars and the first and second wedge members as a
body when the sleeve is rotated by tensile forces acting on the first and second reinforcing
bars.
[0017] In other words, when the sleeve rotates due to tensile forces acting on the first
and second reinforcing bars, then the first and second reinforcing bars, the first
and second wedge members, and the sleeve make an integral rotation in the area between
the press-in position of the first wedge member and the press-in position of the second
wedge member. The points of action of the tensile forces acting on the respective
reinforcing bars are therefore transferred to outside the integral area.
[0018] Consequently, as compared to the conventional configuration with a single wedge member,
the distance between the points of action of the tensile forces acting on the reinforcing
bars increases significantly, and the amount of sleeve rotation under certain tensile
forces on the reinforcing bars accordingly decreases significantly.
[0019] This reduces bending deformation in the reinforcing bars, and also decreases the
forces acting to widen the sleeve openings from the reinforcing bars. It is therefore
possible to avoid a splitting fracture of the sleeve, and pulling out of the reinforcing
bars from the sleeve and a wedge break of the reinforcing bars, which would allow
base-material fracture of the reinforcing bars.
[0020] Here, pulling out refers to a shear fracture of a reinforcing bar at a position where
a wedge member bites into (an area of chipped section). A sleeve split refers to a
splitting fracture of a sleeve edge in contact with a reinforcing bar. A wedge break
refers to breakage of a reinforcing bar at a position where a wedge member bites in
(an area of chipped section). The term "base-material fracture" refers to fracture
of a reinforcing bar at a location other than where the wedge members are driven in.
[0021] It should be noted that the present invention is characterized in that the points
of action of tensile forces can be shifted outward by providing of two press-in positions
of wedge members so that the increased distance between the points of action reduces
the amount of sleeve rotation. The wedge members are therefore not limited to two
in number. That is, in the case of three wedge members, the distance between the points
of action refers to the distance between two outermost wedge insertion holes among
three wedge insertion holes. In this case, two of the three wedge members to be driven
into the outermost wedge insertion holes correspond to the first and second wedge
members according to the present invention.
[0022] The sleeve may have any specific configuration as long as it is configured so that
the first reinforcing bar and the second reinforcing bar can be inserted into openings
in both ends with a predetermined overlapping length, and the first wedge member and
the second wedge member can be driven into two wedge insertion holes therein.
[0023] For example, sleeve specifications such as the sectional shape, length, and hardness
of the sleeve may be determined arbitrarily. When the sleeve is given a hardness relatively
lower than those of the first and second reinforcing bars, it is possible to avoid
a splitting fracture of the sleeve, a pulling out of the reinforcing bars from the
sleeve and a wedge break of the reinforcing bars, thereby allowing base-material fracture
of the reinforcing bars without fail.
[0024] In order to provide a sleeve hardness relatively lower than the hardness of the first
and second reinforcing bars, the sleeve may be annealed during the manufacturing process,
for example.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0025]
Figs. 1A and 1B are diagrams showing a reinforcing bar joint according to one embodiment,
Fig. 1A being a front view, Fig. 1B being a sectional view taken along line A-A.
Figs. 2A and 2B are diagrams showing a state where two reinforcing bars are joined
with the reinforcing bar joint according to the present embodiment, Fig. 2A being
a front view, Fig. 2B being a sectional view taken along line B-B.
Figs. 3A and 3B are diagrams for explaining the operation of the reinforcing bar joint
according to the present embodiment.
Figs. 4A and 4B are diagrams for explaining the same operation of the reinforcing
bar joint according to the present embodiment.
Fig. 5 is a photograph showing the result of a tensile test on a test piece with two
wedge members.
Fig. 6 is a photograph showing the result of a tensile test on a test piece with one
wedge member.
Fig. 7 is a front view of a reinforcing bar joint according to a modification.
DESCRIPTION OF REFERENCE NUMERALS
[0026]
- 1
- reinforcing bar joint
- 2
- sleeve
- 4
- wedging means
- 4a
- wedge member (first wedge member)
- 4b
- wedge member (second wedge member)
- 5a
- reinforcing bar (first reinforcing bar)
- 5b
- reinforcing bar (second reinforcing bar)
- 6a, 6b
- opening
- 9a, 9b
- insertion hole
BEST MODE FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION
[0027] Hereinafter, a reinforcing bar joint according to the present invention will be described
with reference to the accompanying drawings. It should be noted that components and
the like substantially identical to those of conventional technology will be designated
by the same reference numerals, and a description thereof will be omitted.
[0028] Fig. 1A is a front view of the reinforcing bar joint according to the present embodiment.
Fig. 1B is a sectional view taken along the line A-A of Fig. 1A. As can be seen from
the diagrams, the reinforcing bar joint 1 according to the present embodiment comprises
a sleeve 2 having an elliptic section, and a wedging means 4. The sleeve 2 is configured
so that the end of a reinforcing bar 5a, or a first reinforcing bar, and the end of
a reinforcing bar 5b, or a second reinforcing bar, can be inserted into openings 6a,
6b in respective ends with a predetermined length of overlap. The wedging means 4
comprises a wedge member 4a, or a first wedge member, and a wedge member 4b, or a
second wedge member, to be pressed into between the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b.
[0029] The sleeve 2 is composed of a pair of semicylindrical wall portions 7, 7 which are
arranged with their curved inner surfaces opposite each other, and a pair of flat
wall portions 8, 8 which extend to the corresponding edges of the pair of semicylindrical
wall portions. The pair of flat wall portions 8, 8 are provided with wedge insertion
holes 9a, 9a for the wedge member 4a to be inserted through and wedge insertion holes
9b, 9b for the wedge member 4b to be inserted through. The wedge insertion holes 9a,
9a and the wedge insertion holes 9b, 9b are spaced from each other by a distance L
along the axes of the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b.
The sleeve 2 may be formed, for example, by inserting a die into a cylindrical pipe,
and applying pressure to the outer periphery at given areas so as to make the flat
wall portions.
[0030] The wedge insertion holes 9a, 9a are formed in the flat wall portions 8, 8 respectively
so as to be disposed face to face with each other near the end of the reinforcing
bar 5b. The wedge insertion holes 9b, 9b are formed in the flat wall portions 8, 8
respectively so as to be disposed face to face with each other near the end of the
reinforcing bar 5a.
The wedge insertion holes 9a, 9a are desirably positioned to avoid the vicinities
of the opening edges of the sleeve 2 where the reinforcing bar 5a would be deformed
extremely. Similarly, the wedge insertion holes 9b, 9b are desirably positioned to
avoid the vicinities of the opening edges of the sleeve 2 where the reinforcing bar
5b would be deformed extremely. More specifically, it is desirable that the wedge
insertion holes 9a,9a are positioned somewhat away from the edges of the sleeve 2,
for example, a distance equal to or greater than the diameter of the reinforcing bars.
The same thing can be said of the wedge insertion holes 9b, 9b.
[0031] It should be appreciated that the reinforcing bar joint 1 according to the present
embodiment is intended to join main reinforcing bars of an RC or SRC structure to
each other. The types of steel of the sleeve 2 and the wedge members 4a, 4b may be
determined as appropriate in consideration of the hardness and tensile strength of
the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b to be joined.
[0032] When joining the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b with the reinforcing bar joint 1 according
to the present embodiment, the end of the reinforcing bar 5a is initially inserted
into one opening 6a of the sleeve 2, and the end of the reinforcing bar 5b is inserted
into the other opening 6b of the sleeve 2. Here, the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b are inserted
through the sleeve 2 so that their ends overlap each other by a predetermined length.
[0033] Next, the wedge member 4a is inserted through and pressed into the wedge insertion
holes 9a, 9a. The wedge member 4b is also inserted through and pressed into the wedge
insertion holes 9b, 9b. For press-in, a conventionally known wedge driver may be selected
and used as appropriate.
[0034] Figs. 2A and 2B are diagrams showing the state when the wedge driving operation is
completed to finish joining the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b.
[0035] In the reinforcing bar joint 1 according to the present embodiment, the wedge members
4a, 4b bite into the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b under reaction forces from the inner
periphery of the sleeve 2 when they are pressed into between the reinforcing bars
5a, and 5b. This biting in of the two wedge members 4a, 4b and the binding effect
of the sleeve 2 for binding the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b make the reinforcing bars
5a, 5b, the wedge members 4a, 4b, and the sleeve 2 generally integral as a whole within
the range of an area P from the vicinity of the press-in position of the wedge member
4a to the vicinity of the press-in position of the wedge member 4b as shown in Fig.
3A, as far as the rotation of the sleeve 2 ascribable to tensile forces acting on
the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b is concerned.
[0036] In conventional cases with only a single wedge member, on the other hand, the integration
is established only within the range of an area P' across the press-in position of
a wedge member 31 as shown in Fig. 3B.
[0037] In other words, the conventional integral area is no more than the area P', while
the integral area in the present embodiment is as wide as the area P. The points of
action of the tensile forces acting on the reinforcing bars thus shift from points
P
1', which fall on the boundaries of the area P', to points P
1, which fall on the boundaries of the area P.
[0038] Consequently, the distance between the points of action increases significantly from
M' to M, whereas the distance N between the reinforcing bars remains unchanged. It
should be appreciated that the location of the boundaries of the area P for integrating
the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b, the sleeve 2, and the wedge members 4a, 4b depends on
the length of the sleeve 2. More specifically, if the sleeve 2 is long, the boundaries
of the area P shift toward the ends of the sleeve 2 because of the binding effect.
If the sleeve 2 is short, the boundaries of the area P shift toward the center of
the sleeve since not much binding effect is expected. The boundaries of the area P
also depend on the strength of the sleeve 2. If the sleeve 2 has a high strength,
the boundaries of the area P shift toward the ends of the sleeve 2 due to the binding
effect. If the sleeve 2 has a low strength, the boundaries of the area P shift toward
the center of the sleeve since not much binding effect is expected.
[0039] Figs. 4A and 4B are diagrams showing how the sleeve rotates when tensile forces act
on the reinforcing bars. Fig. 4A shows a case of the present embodiment where the
distance between the points of action is M. Fig. 4B shows a case of conventional technology
where the distance between the points of action is M'.
[0040] As can be seen from these diagrams, according to the conventional technology, the
amount of rotation of the sleeve when the reinforcing bars undergo tensile forces
is θ' (Fig. 4B). In the present embodiment, the amount of rotation greatly decreases
to as low as θ (Fig. 4A).
[0041] As has been described, according to the reinforcing bar joint 1 of the present embodiment,
the wedge insertion holes 9a, 9a for the wedge member 4a to be inserted through and
the wedge insertion holes 9b, 9b for the wedge member 4b to be inserted through are
spaced apart from each other by a distance L along the axes of the reinforcing bars
5a, 5b. Since the wedge members 4a, 4b are pressed into these wedge insertion holes
9a, 9b, it is possible to reduce the amount of rotation of the sleeve 2 significantly
when tensile forces act on the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b.
[0042] Consequently, bending deformation occurring in the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b decreases
and the forces acting to widen the openings of the sleeve 2 from the reinforcing bars
5a, 5b decreases as well. This precludes a splitting fracture of the sleeve 2, pulling
out of the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b from the sleeve 2, and a wedge break of the reinforcing
bars 5a, 5b, thereby allowing base-material fracture of the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b.
[0043] Moreover, according to the reinforcing bar joint 1 of the present embodiment, the
sleeve 2 is naturally longer since the two wedge members 4a, 4b are spaced apart from
each other when pressed into between the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b.
[0044] This significantly reduces the force components acting on the openings of the sleeve
2 from the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b. The rotation of the sleeve 2 can thus also be
suppressed in this respect.
[0045] Figs. 5 and 6 are photographs showing the results of tensile tests. Fig. 5 shows
a test piece corresponding to the present embodiment, having two wedge members. The
reinforcing bars were US #8 reinforcing bars (GRADE 60; #8 is equivalent to Japanese
Industrial Standards (JIS) D25). Fig. 6 shows a test piece corresponding to conventional
technology, having one wedge member. The reinforcing bars were US #6 reinforcing bars
(GRADE 60; #6 is equivalent to JIS D19).
[0046] Initially, as shown in Fig. 6, the test piece utilizing conventional technology showed
a large rotation of the sleeve due to tensile forces acting on the reinforcing bars.
The reinforcing bars also suffered large bending deformation resulting from the rotation.
The bending of the reinforcing bars also produced force components acting to widen
the sleeve openings, thereby causing a splitting fracture in the sleeve.
[0047] From this test result, it is shown that the test piece of conventional technology
causes a splitting fracture of the sleeve before base-material fracture of the reinforcing
bars.
[0048] Now, in the test piece corresponding to the present embodiment shown in Fig. 5, the
sleeve showed some rotation due to tensile forces acting on the reinforcing bars,
but the amount of rotation was significantly less than in Fig. 6. Bending deformation
of the reinforcing bars ascribable to the rotation was also small. In consequence,
no splitting fracture of the sleeve was caused.
[0049] This test result shows that the test piece corresponding to the present embodiment
caused a bending tensile fracture of one reinforcing bar near the joint location.
The breaking force, however, exceeded the tensile strength (rated value) of the reinforcing
bars and reached the same load as the intrinsic tensile strength of that material.
This shows that the reinforcing bar joint according to the present embodiment fully
satisfies the requirements of a reinforcing bar joint intended for main reinforcing
bars.
[0050] While the present embodiment has dealt with the case where the reinforcing bar joint
1 is intended to join main reinforcing bars of an RC or SRC structure to each other,
it may be applied to join shear reinforcing bars to each other instead.
[0051] Although not specifically described in the foregoing embodiment, a concrete filling
hole 51 may be provided in the sleeve 2 as shown in Fig. 7.
[0052] According to this configuration, concrete flows into the interior of the sleeve 2
through the concrete filling hole 51 during concrete casting. This can increase the
joint strength of the reinforcing bars 5a, 5b. It should be appreciated that a plurality
of holes may be formed in the sleeve 2 along the axis thereof, so that some of the
holes can be used as wedge insertion holes and the rest as concrete filling holes.
[Example 1]
[0053] Table 1 shows the results of a tensile test. The tensile test used reinforcing bars
of steel type SD345 (concrete reinforcing steel rod, Japanese Industrial Standard,
specification values of 345 N/mm
2 in yield point and 490 N/mm
2 in tensile strength), having a diameter of D22 (nominal cross-sectional area of 387.1
mm
2). In the cases where two holes were provided, the holes were spaced 50 mm apart.
The same holds for the tests to be described hereinafter.
[0054]
table 1
| Test piece |
Sleeve |
Test result |
| Steel type |
Yield point |
Tensile strength |
Length |
Thickness |
Number of holes |
Sectional area |
Yield strength |
Maximum strength |
Maximum tensile strength (kN) |
Final condition |
| sσy (N/mm2) |
sσu (N/mm2) |
sL (mm) |
st (mm) |
sn |
sA (mm2) |
sPy (kN) |
sPu (kN) |
| 1 |
STKM13A |
215 |
370 |
100 |
4.0 |
2 |
586.1 |
126.0 |
216.9 |
180.0 |
Split |
| 2 |
150 |
1 |
157.5 |
Pulling out |
| 3 |
2 |
225.0 |
Base-material fracture |
| 4 |
100 |
10.0 |
2 |
1599.6 |
343.9 |
591.8 |
224.0 |
Base-material fracture |
| 5 |
S45C |
325 |
510 |
100 |
5.0 |
1 |
719.4 |
233.8 |
366.9 |
175.4 |
Pulling out |
| 6 |
2 |
208.4 |
Base-material fracture |
| 7 |
100 |
4.5 |
2 |
654.5 |
212.7 |
333.8 |
176.2
204.6 |
Split
Wedge break |
| 8 |
120 |
2 |
216.4 |
Base-material fracture |
[0055] Initially, test pieces 2 and 3 used sleeves of the same steel type and the same configuration.
The difference between the test pieces consists in that the test piece 2 had one wedge
member (a pair of wedge insertion holes) while the test piece 3 had two wedge members.
From a comparison between these test pieces, it can be seen that the reinforcing bars
were pulled out in the case of the sleeve with a single wedge member while base-material
fracture in the reinforcing bars was caused in the case of the sleeve with two wedge
members.
[0056] It is thus shown that even if the sleeves are of the same steel type and the same
configuration, the reinforcing bar joint provides a tensile strength higher than the
rated value of the tensile strength of the reinforcing bars when two wedge members
are provided. This demonstrates the operation and effect of the present invention.
[0057] Next, test pieces 5 and 6 used sleeves made of a different steel type from the test
pieces 2 and 3, but identical steel type and configuration to each other. As with
the comparison between the test pieces 2 and 3, the test pieces 5 and 6 were intended
to compare the case of the sleeve with a single wedge member with the case of the
sleeve with two wedge members.
[0058] From a comparison between these test pieces, it can be seen that the reinforcing
bars were pulled out in the case of the sleeve with a single wedge member while base-material
fracture in the reinforcing bars was caused in the case of the sleeve with two wedge
members. As with the comparison between the test pieces 2 and 3, this shows that even
if the sleeves are of the same steel type and the same configuration, the reinforcing
bar joint provides a tensile strength higher than the rated value of the tensile strength
of the reinforcing bars when the number of wedge members is two. This demonstrates
the operation and effect of the present invention.
[0059] Test pieces 1 and 4 both had two wedge members, and their sleeves were also identical
(with a short sleeve length of 100 mm each) except in thickness. The test piece 1
had a thickness of 4 mm while the test piece 4 had a thickness of 10 mm.
[0060] From a comparison between these test pieces, it can be seen that the sleeve was split
at a thickness of 4 mm while base-material fracture in the reinforcing bars was caused
at a thickness of 10 mm. In view of this test result alone, it might be considered
that the lesser thickness will not allow base-material fracture of the reinforcing
bars even with two wedge members. Nevertheless, with consideration also given to the
test piece 3 where base-material fracture in the reinforcing bars was caused even
with the same thickness, it can be concluded that the operation and effect of the
present invention resulting from providing a distance between the press-in positions
of the two wedge members was not fully exercised since the short sleeve meant that
the distance between the two wedge members was small.
[0061] Next, test pieces 7 and 8 were provided with the same number of wedge members, and
their sleeves were of the same steel type and the same thickness. The difference between
these sleeves consisted in that the test piece 7 had a sleeve length of 100 mm while
the test piece 8 had a sleeve length of 120 mm.
[0062] From a comparison between these test pieces, it can be seen that the sleeve length
can be increased to reduce sleeve rotation, thereby avoiding a split of the sleeve
ends, and pulling out and a wedge break of the reinforcing bars.
[Example 2]
[0063] Table 2 shows the results of another tensile test. In the table, pulling out refers
to a shear fracture of a reinforcing bar at a position where a wedge member bites
into (an area of chipped section). A split refers to a splitting fracture of a sleeve
end in contact with a reinforcing bar. A wedge break refers to a breakage of a reinforcing
bar at a position where a wedge member bites into (an area of chipped section).
[0064] The tensile test used reinforcing bars of steel type SD390 (concrete reinforcing
steel rod, Japanese Industrial Standard, specification values of 390 N/mm
2 in yield point and 560 N/mm
2 in tensile strength), having a diameter of D22. If a test result included variations,
the plurality of results is shown in the "test result" field.
[0065]
table 2
| Test piece |
Sleeve |
Test result |

|
| Steel type |
Tensile strength (spec) |
Tensile strength (material) |
Length |
Thickness |
Number of holes |
| (N/mm2) |
(N/mm2) |
(mm) |
(mm) |
|
| 9 |
S45C |
510 |
679.4 |
100 |
4.53 |
2 |
Wedge break Base-material fracture |
0.93∼0.97 |
| 10 |
679.4 |
110 |
4.55 |
2 |
Wedge break Base-material fracture |
0.93∼0.98 |
| 11 |
4.60 |
Base-material fracture |
0.97∼0.99 |
| 12 |
4.55 |
Base-material fracture |
0.97∼0.98 |
| 13 |
679.4 |
110 |
5.00 |
Base-material fracture |
0.98∼0.99 |
| 14 |
5.00 |
Wedge break |
0.98 |
| 15 |
S45C Annealed |
510 |
589.4 |
110 |
4.55 |
2 |
Split Base-material fracture |
0.97∼0.99 |
| 16 |
4.52 |
Split Base-material fracture |
0.99∼1.00 |
| 17 |
4.53 |
Base-material fracture |
0.99∼1.00 |
| 18 |
589.4 |
110 |
4.79 |
Base-material fracture |
0.99∼1.00 |
| 19 |
4.80 |
Base-material fracture |
1.00∼1.01 |
| 20 |
4.80 |
Base-material fracture |
1.00∼1.02 |
[0066] Initially, a test piece 9 produced variations in the result. In view of this, the
sleeve was extended in length from 100 mm to 110 mm to provide test pieces 10 to 12,
most of which successfully showed base-material fracture. The reason for this is considered
to be as follows: When the sleeve is short, the amount of rotation increases, producing
a large bending moment on the reinforcing bars. This greatly affects the areas at
which a wedge member bites into the bars (areas of chipped section), causing a wedge
break of the reinforcing bars. If the sleeve is made longer, conversely, the amount
of rotation decreases to correspondingly reduce the bending moment on the reinforcing
bars. This reduces the effect on the areas at which a wedge member bites into the
bars, allowing base-material fracture.
The test pieces 10 to 12 had tensile strength ratios of 0.93 to 0.99, however, showing
that there is still room for performance improvement.
[0067] As employed herein, the tensile strength ratio refers to the ratio of a tensile strength
obtained by a test to the tensile strength of the reinforcing bars (material). If
this value is below 1, it means that the two reinforcing bars are jointed with a decrease
in tensile strength.
[0068] Next, in view of the fact that the test pieces 10 to 12 failed to provide adequate
tensile strength ratios, the sleeve thickness was increased to 5 mm to provide test
pieces 13 and 14. No great improvement was observed, however.
[0069] As can be seen from the results of the test pieces 10 to 14, the sleeve length can
be optimized to provide a certain tensile strength ratio but no further improvement
even at increased thicknesses. The present inventors considered that the reason for
this might be ascribable to excessively high sleeve rigidity, and thus annealed the
sleeves used in the test pieces 9 to 14 to provide test pieces 15 to 20.
[0070] More specifically, the sleeves of the test pieces 9 to 14 were made of S45C (carbon
steel for machine structural use, Japanese Industrial Standard) non-annealed raw material.
Since the S45C raw material has sufficient hardness without quenching, the test pieces
15 to 20 of S45C were annealed into a hardness lower than that of the reinforcing
bars.
[0071] As a result, the test pieces 18 to 20 of approximately 4.8 mm in thickness showed
tensile strength ratios of approximately 1, and all allowed base-material fracture
of the reinforcing bars. The reason for this is considered to be that the annealing
makes the sleeve highly ductile, thereby reducing reaction forces acting from the
regions of the sleeve edges on the reinforcing bars and stresses occurring in the
reinforcing bars due to those reaction forces. Asperities on the peripheries of the
reinforcing bars can also bite into the inner periphery of the sleeve, absorbing asperity
variations on the peripheries of the reinforcing bars.
[0072] Table 3 shows the results of the same tensile test where the reinforcing bars were
changed from D22 to D25 in diameter. Although the sleeve lengths were changed to 110
to 130 mm in accordance with the increase in bar diameter, the test results were generally
the same as with the test pieces 9 to 20. The test pieces 28 to 35 of annealed S45C
showed tensile strength ratios of approximately 1. All the test pieces excluding some
of the test piece 33 allowed base-material fracture of the reinforcing bars.
[0073] As with D22, the reason for this is considered to be that the annealing makes the
sleeve highly ductile, thereby reducing reaction forces acting from the regions of
the sleeve ends on the reinforcing bars and stresses occurring in the reinforcing
bars due to those reaction forces. Asperities on the peripheries of the reinforcing
bars can also bite into the inner periphery of the sleeve, absorbing asperity variations
on the peripheries of the reinforcing bars.
[0074] The test piece 35 in which the sleeve length was changed from 120 mm to 130 mm successfully
caused base-material fracture without fail, and improved the tensile strength ratio
to 1.00 to 1.01. The reason seems to be that the longer sleeve reduced the amount
of sleeve rotation.
[0075] It should be appreciated that the sleeve thickness may also be increased for improved
sectional properties, ascribing the foregoing splitting fracture of sleeves to a decrease
in sleeve strength because of annealing. Even with this method, it seems possible
to avoid a splitting fracture of the sleeve and allow base-material fracture of the
reinforcing bars without fail.
[0076]
table 3
| Test piece |
Sleeve |
Test result |

|
| Steel type |
Tensile strength (spec) |
Tensile strength (material) |
Length |
Thickness |
Number of holes |
| (N/mm2) |
(N/mm2) |
(mm) |
(mm) |
|
| 21 |
S45C |
510 |
679.4 |
110 |
5.13 |
2 |
Wedge break Base-material fracture |
0.94∼0.97 |
| 22 |
120 |
5.06 |
Wedge break Base-material fracture |
0.97∼0.98 |
| 23 |
130 |
5.08 |
Base-material fracture |
0.98 |
| 24 |
679.4 |
120 |
4.98 |
Pulling out Wedge break Base-material fracture |
0.85∼1.01 |
| 25 |
5.03 |
Pulling out Wedge break Base-material fracture |
0.85∼0.99 |
| 26 |
4.95 |
Pulling out Wedge break Base-material fracture |
0.84∼1.01 |
| 27 |
4.98 |
Wedge break Base-material fracture |
0.91∼0.99 |
| 28 |
S45C Annealed |
510 |
589.4 ∼ 585.2 |
120 |
5.10 |
2 |
Base-material fracture |
0.98∼1.00 |
| 29 |
5.01 |
Base-material fracture |
0.97∼0.98 |
| 30 |
5.09 |
Base-material fracture |
0.99 |
| 31 |
4.98 |
Base-material fracture |
0.98∼0.99 |
| 32 |
5.14 |
Base-material fracture |
0.99∼1.00 |
| 33 |
4.96 |
Split Base-material fracture |
0.99∼1.00 |
| 34 |
5.16 |
Base-material fracture |
1.00∼1.01 |
| 35 |
130 |
4.95 |
Base-material fracture |
1.00∼1.01 |
[0077] As above, it is shown that the use of an annealed sleeve can significantly improve
the joint performance of the reinforcing bar joint according to the present invention.
In the meantime, it is also found that the strength decrease due to the annealing
must be compensated for, e.g., by increasing the thickness, or the sleeve might be
split at an edge (the test pieces 15, 16, and 33).
That is, when using an annealed sleeve, it is essential to give due consideration
to the sectional properties and the post-annealing strength of the sleeve.
Instead of compensating for a decrease in strength caused by annealing, the sleeve
length may be increased to suppress sleeve rotation so that the load acting on the
sleeve decreases. By this method, it is possible to avoid splitting at sleeve edges
and allow base-material fracture of the reinforcing bars without fail (see the test
pieces 1, 3, 7, and 8).