{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02034428794992175, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01773604590505999, 'mean_word_length': 4.74251497005988, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Strength Performance of T-Headed Rebar in Concrete

In recent years, the T-Headed bar has been gradually applied to bridge and building structures. However, until Year 2008, a debut of the headed bar in the ACI 318 Design Code was found. There were six limitations on materials’ strength properties, bearing area of head and concrete-cover thickness and spacing of the reinforcement with the head to be made in the Section 12.6 of the ACI 318-08 Code. This paper concerns some issues that were difficult application for the practical engineering or had potential to be improved. They include the clear spacing of the headed bars not less than 4 times the diameter of the bars, the bearing area of head of the headed bar not less than 4 times cross-sectional area of the bars and concrete limit on normal-weight and its effective compression strength not more than 42 MPa. In this study, a total of 43 specimens with a CCT node (Compression-Compression-Tension Node) experimental model were conducted to evaluate anchored performance of the headed bars. Study parameters in this work included strength of concrete, size of reinforcement, bearing area of T head, spacing of bars and confinement condition provided by horizontal reinforcement. Additionally, some benchmark specimens those placed straight bars, and standard 90º and 180º hook bars were carried out for comparison. Test results showed that for anchorage performance, the T-headed bars could provide better than the standard 90º and 180º hook bars. Test results also indicated that the headed bars with head bearing area of three times sectional area of the bar were able to perform as well anchored behavior as their head bearing area with four times sectional area of the bar. In addition, comparing the test results of specimens their spacing having 1.5 and 4 times diameter of the bar, it was found that their anchored strength capacities were similar.