臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

國內公共工程實施三級品管制度多年，營造施工廠商及人員對於工程施工品管觀念已有所提昇，然而對於工地鋼筋遭受污染需清潔之程度仍有爭議。因鋼筋清潔固然增加成本相對亦會影響工程進度，究竟要清潔到何種程度才是適當？為此本研究就建築工地中常見之七種鋼筋汙染情形予以研究。模擬鋼筋在工地沾染泥土、油漆、養護劑、模板脫模劑、前次混凝土附著、表面生銹、甚至於作記號之膠帶等物之污染下試驗分析其握裹力強度。
本研究採用90公分長的SD280W D13號筋，附著前述七種汙染後，製作15cmX30cm混凝土圓柱試體，將受汙染之鋼筋至於試體中央，採用建築工地配比之210kgf/cm2預拌混凝土，每種污染製作10個試體及無汙染之對照組試體10個作拉拔試驗。試驗結果顯示泥土污染對握裹力影響極大，其它污染情形下鋼筋握裹力分析與無污染之對照組比較顯示在92.84%~101.47%之間。

Taiwan public works has implemented the three-tier quality control system for many yeas. Quality requirement and management concepts are upgrading among works and contractor. However, arguments about cleaning the contaminants on reinforcement still exist. All the specifications of construction and inspection require that the reinforcement should keep clean and the rust, oil, mud spot should be cleaned. Cleaning the reinforcement will cost time-consuming and expenses of engineering. The argument occurs between the supervisor inspector and contractor, which how clean are clean that would not affect the bond strength and cost time- consuming and expenses. To really understand the problem, bond strengths of seven common contaminants attached on reinforcements are studied.
Experiment specimens are prepared at a building construction site. Clay, paint, curing agent, form release agent, surface rust, mark tapes, and the spotted concrete, these seven types of contaminants were made on 90cm long SD280W D13 rebars. With 15cmX30cm cylinder form, fixing rebar at center, 210kgf/cm2 ready-mixed concrete was used to make 80 pullout test specimens where 10 specimens for each polluted type and clean typ. Also 10 specimens for concrete compression test were made. After 28 days curing of specimens, MTS machine with 100t capacity was used to do pullout tests. Rebar is pullout failure in all tests. The bond strength of each pollution type is compared to the clean rebar bond strength. The results show that except clay pollution situation, the bond strengths lie on 92.84%~101.74% of clean rebar bond strength.

中文摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌 謝 iv
目 錄 v
表目錄 viii
圖目錄 ix
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究動機 1
1.2 研究目的 2
1.3 研究方法 3
1-4 研究內容 3
第二章 文獻回顧 5
2.1 鋼筋混凝土握裹力之行為 5
2.2 握裹力試驗回顧 13
2.3 規範探討 17
第三章 試驗計畫 20
3.1 試驗計畫規劃 20
3.2 前導試驗 22
3.3 正式試驗試體準備 26
3.4 試驗步驟 31
第四章 試驗結果分析研究及探討 34
4.1 試驗結果 34
4.2 試驗結果分析 58
第五章 結論及建議 67
5.1 結論 67
5.2 建議 69
參考文獻 71
附錄Ａ、各污染物質測定膜厚一覽表 73
附錄B、混凝土抗壓強度標準常態分配圖座標值 76
附錄C、污染物膜厚測定照片 78
附錄D、材料常數K1計算表 82
簡歷 84

1.ACI Committee 408, 1991, “State-of-the-Art Report：Bond under cyclic load”, ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 88, No. 6, pp.408 .
2.洪士凱，2008，火災後鋼筋握裹力檢測評估-應力波法，朝陽科技大學，碩士論文。
3.黃玉麟，顏聰，劉玉雯，1992，“高溫作用後鋼筋混凝土之握裹能力”，中國土木水利工程學刊，4卷，1期，頁71~76。
4.許財民，1998，鋼筋握裹狀況與彈性波傳遞的關聯性分析，朝陽科技大學，碩士論文。
5.林保展，2006，鋼筋自然鏽蝕與混凝土握裹強度之關係，國立成功大學，碩士論文。
6.Soroushian, P., Mirza, F. and Alhozaimy, A., 1994, “Bonding of confined steel fiber reinforced concrete to deformed bars”, ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 91, No. 2, pp.144-149.
7.Cairns, J. and Jones, k., 1996, “An evaluation of the bond-splitting action of ribbed bars”, ACI Materials Journal, Vol. 93, No. 1, pp.10-19.
8. 陳柏志，2002，鋼筋拉拔與混凝土握裹破壞之有限元素法分析，朝陽科技大學，碩士論文。
9.Edwards A.D. and Yannopoulos P.J., 1979, “Local Bond-Stress to Slip Relationships for Hot Rolled Detormed Bars and Mild Steel Plain Bars”, ACI Journal, Proceeding, Vol. 76, No. 3, pp.405-420,May.
10.Hwang S.J., Lee Y.Y. and Lee C.S., 1994, “Effect of Silica Fume on the Splice Strength of Deformed Bars of High-Performace Concrete”, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 91, No. 3, pp.294-303, May-June.
11.Soroushian, P., Choi, K. B., 1989, “Local bond of deformed bars with different diameters in confined concrete”, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 86, No. 2, pp.217-222.
12.Bruce Johnston and Kenneth C. Cox, 1940, “The Bond Strength of Rusted Deformed Bars”, Journal of the American Concrete Institute, September.
13.楊定良，黃隆茂，2006，“營建工地的鋼筋要多乾淨才算乾淨”，現代營建，322期，頁62~69，10月。
14.ACI 311, ACI Manual of Concrete Inspection, SP-2, ACI, 1992.
15.經濟部中央標準局，2005，根據鋼筋混凝土握裹力比較混凝土性能試驗法，CNS總號11152，10月。
16.經濟部中央標準局，2005，鋼筋混凝土用鋼筋，CNS總號560，10月。
17.張奇偉，葉坤原，連泓勝，陳明照，2003，“應用超音波檢測技術與Tepfers’模式進行鋼筋混凝土對腐蝕損傷之握裹強度研究”，中華理工學刊，1卷，1期，頁85-93，3月。