Mechanical Mechanical Splices Splices A superior splice system of high performance and reliability A superior splice system of high performance and reliability
Outline Introduction. • Lap Splices vs. Mechanical Couplers. • INCON 3 rd Generation Swaging System. INCON 3 Generation Swaging System. • • INCON Coupler Types. • INCON Bar Terminator (End Anchor). • Testing Results. • 2
Introduction • INCON is a Canadian company specialized in design, development and production of high quality steel products. • Through collaboration with Western University, INCON developed their innovative couplers and bar terminators. 3
Introduction • INCON manufacturing plants produce over 10,000,000 couplers per year. These couplers are distributed all over the world. • INCON couplers are tested and proven to work. They meet all international codes and standards. • We believe INCON Coupler to be the most effective and useful couplers on the market. 4
Introduction • Our products are: 1. ICS ICS – Standard couplers. 2. 2. ICP – Position couplers. ICP ICP – Position couplers. ICP 3. ICST ICST – Transition couplers. 4. ICT ICT – Rebar Terminator (End Anchor). 5
Lap Splices vs. Mechanical Couplers • Traditionally, reinforcement has been connected by overlapping two parallel bars and securing them using tie wires. • The design and construction processes of lap splices can be very tedious tedious and time time consuming consuming as they rely on several parameters that govern their structural integrity and performance. 6
Lap Splices vs. Mechanical Couplers • According to the American Concrete Institute (ACI), there are many situations where couplers are more practical practical and cost practical practical and cost cost effective cost effective effective effective than lap splices. • Couplers should should be used instead of lap splices in the following conditions: 7
Lap Splices vs. Mechanical Couplers 1. Where large size bars are used. 2. Where spacing is insufficient to permit lap splices. 3. When code requirements result in very long lap splices. 8
Lap Splices vs. Mechanical Couplers 4. To satisfy the maximum steel Rft. ratio of columns. 5. When new bars must be connected to the existing ones. 6. When members may be subjected to seismic loads. 9
Lap Splices vs. Mechanical Couplers 10
INCON 3 rd Generation Swaging System INCON Swaging Swaging Coupler Coupler System System (IC) (IC) is a superior • splice system of high performance and reliability. • At INCON , we developed our • At INCON , we developed our own 3 3 rd generation generation swaging swaging rd machine machine which makes the swaging process much faster and more accurate. 11
INCON 3 rd Generation Swaging System • The swaging process does not reduce the bar sectional area to ensure its ultimate capacity is maintained. • The sectional area of the thread on the couplers is greater than that of the bar. than that of the bar. 12
INCON Coupler Types ICS ICS – – Standard Coupler Standard Coupler ICP ICP – – Position Coupler Position Coupler ICST ICST – – Transition Coupler Transition Coupler 13
ICS – Standard Coupler • Composed of a female and a male coupler pressed on two bars of the same size to be connected. 14
ICS – Standard Coupler • Widely used for general applications where the rotation and axial movement of one rebar is allowed. 15
ICS – Standard Coupler • Main Features: 1. Applicable for high strength bars up to ASTM Grade 75. 2. Easy and highly efficient for construction on site. 3. Accurate splice length control due to the precise joint. 4. Highly reliable due to our swaging technology and improved design of the coupler. 16
ICP – Position Coupler • Composed of female couplers and an extended coupler assembly, pressed on two bars to be connected. 17
ICP – Position Coupler • The rebar remains in its position and no rotation or movement is needed for either rebar while the gap is covered. 18
ICP – Position Coupler • Suitable for the most challenging connections where the bar must be positioned accurately while rotation is not allowed such as in a steel cage. a steel cage. • The deviation adjustability makes the cage connection easy and accurate. 19
ICP – Position Coupler Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Erect the steel Place the steel cage Connect the cages cages on site in its position using ICP couplers 20
ICST – Transition Coupler • Composed of a female and a male coupler pressed on two bars of different sizes to be connected. 21
ICP – Position Coupler • The ICT is similar to ICS but with a smaller sized male coupler to receive the smaller sized bar. • Main Features: • Main Features: 1. Applicable for high strength bars up to ASTM Grade 75. 2. Easy and highly efficient for preparing the splice and assembly on site. 3. Highly reliable due to our special crimping technology. 22
Advantages of INCON ICP Couplers Accurate The deviation adjustability • makes the cage connection easy and accurate. Efficient Efficient Suitable for challenging • connections where bars cannot rotate Simple No special tools required • 23
Bar Terminator vs. Bent Bars • Bent bars are required if the available length is smaller than the development length necessary to maintain the bond between concrete and the embedded steel bars. 24
Bar Terminator vs. Bent Bars • Disadvantages of Bent Bars: 1. Require Comprehensive Connection Detailing. 2. 2. Increase Reinforcement Congestion. Increase Reinforcement Congestion. 3. Slow Down Construction. 4. Possibly Increase Material Cost. 5. Increase risk of strength loss due to possible hook straightening. 25
Traditional Anchorage Method Traditional Method Criteria: • Available length is smaller than required length than required length Purpose: • Required to maintain bond between concrete and embedded steel 26
Traditional Anchorage Method Disadvantages 1. Requires Comprehensive Connection Detailing 2. Increases Congestion 2. Increases Congestion 3. Slows Down Construction 4. Potential Increase in Costs 5. Risk of Strength Reduction 27
Bar Terminator vs. Bent Bars • Why Bar Terminators? 1. Simplify Connection Detailing. 2. Reduce Reinforcement Congestion. 3. Speed up Construction. 4. 4. Possibly Reduce Material Cost. Possibly Reduce Material Cost. No risk of strength loss due to possible hook straightening. 5. 28
INCON Bar Terminator Types ICT ICT – – F w/t ICS Male Coupler F w/t ICS Male Coupler ICT ICT – – M w/t ICS Female Coupler M w/t ICS Female Coupler 29
INCON Bar Terminator (End Anchor) • The bar terminator is a large anchorage foot with threading compatible with INCON ICS couplers. • Through screwing it on an ICS coupler which is already pressed on the end of a steel bar, it provides the anchorage performance within the concrete as a hook or bent bar does. 30
INCON Bar Terminator (End Anchor) • Due to the standard design and application of ICS couplers, with just a terminator they can easily be turned into a mechanical anchorage for rebar in concrete. • The design is in compliance with ACI 318-08 and BS8110 for rebar sizes from 12mm to 52mm. 31
INCON Bar Terminator (End Anchor) • Anchorage can be easily achieved by screwing the terminator onto the ICS couplers in beams/columns and piles etc, and future extensions can be effortlessly arranged. 32
Experimental Program • An experimental study was performed at Western University University in in Canada Canada aiming aiming at at understanding understanding the the behaviour of mechanical splices embedded in concrete, with emphasis on quantitatively characterizing the slip behaviour of commercially available mechanical couplers. 33
Tensile Test Setup Designing Slip Evaluation Apparatus: Apparatus Design Alignment Testing 34
Tensile Test Procedure 35
Testing Results Using INCON coupler, failure happened by bar fracture. 700 700 600 600 500 500 500 Stress (MPa) Stress (MPa) 400 400 300 300 Bar (1) Bar (1) Bar (2) 200 200 Bar (2) Coupler (3) Coupler (3) 100 100 Control Control 0 0 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025 0.030 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025 Strain Strain Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering 36
Strength Test Results INCON: ICP 700 Ultimate 600 500 Yield Stress (MPa) Stress (MPa) 400 300 200 Plain Bar Incon ICP 100 0 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 Strain 37
Testing Results Using the competitor’s coupler, failure happened in the coupler itself. 500 500 450 450 400 400 350 350 350 350 300 300 Stress (MPa) Stress (MPa) 250 250 Bar (1) Bar (1) 200 200 Bar (2) Bar (2) 150 150 Coupler (3) Coupler (3) 100 100 Control Control 50 50 0 0 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 Strain Strain Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering 38
Strength Test Results Competitor 700 Ultimate 600 500 Yield Stress (MPa) Stress (MPa) 400 300 200 Plain Bar Competitor 100 0 0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 Strain 39
Recommend
More recommend
