RockRebar Test UM 04.12.16

University of Miami
College of Engineering
Structures and Materials Laboratory
CERTIFIED TEST REPORT
EVALUATION of RockRebarTM per

ICC-ES Acceptance Criteria 454 and
FDOT Section 932-3, Fiber Reinforced
Polymer (FRP) Reinforcing Bars
Report Number: IR-5.10_NRR_AC454/932
April 13, 2016
REPORT PREPARED FOR:
Raw Energy Materials Corp.

Attn: Don Smith
Chairman
don@rawenergytec.com
http://www.newrebar.com/
Quality System: The Structures and Materials Laboratory (SML) maintains a quality system in compliance with ISO
17025-2005, accredited under International Accreditation Service (IAS), testing laboratory, TL-478
and qualified laboratory by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT).
Procedures: All tests and services are done in accordance with the SML Quality Manual (Version 2.2) revised
March 18, 2013; relevant standard operating procedures (SOPs); and with the applicable
requirements of the reference standard test methods.
Test Data: All the test results presented herein are linked through unbroken chain to the raw data files recorded
on the day of the test. Analyzed data is obtained directly from the recorded raw data during testing,
from which the test results are presented. This report contains analyzed tabulated data results of
each test.
University of Miami, College of Engineering, Structures and Materials Laboratory

1251 Memorial Drive, McArthur Engineering Building 108, Coral Gables, FL, 33146
Phone: 305-284-3391 ♦ Fax: 305-284-3492 ♦ Email: f.decasoybasalo@umiami.edu
RECORD Page 2 of 23
Document Number: IR-5.10_NRR_AC454/932
Test Report
Controls:
Superseded Report n/a
Reason for Revision New report
Effective Date April 13, 2016
Test Report Approval Signatures:
Quality review Approval I indicate that I have reviewed this Test Report and agree with the contents it
presents, and find it meets all applicable laboratory requirements and policies.
I approve for its release to the customer.
Name: Francisco De Caso
Signature:
_______________________________
Date: April 13, 2016
Technical review I indicate that I have reviewed this Test Report and agree with the technical
Approval contents it presents, and find it meets all applicable laboratory requirements
and policies. I approve for its release to the customer.
Name: Antonio Nanni
Signature:
________________________________
Date: April 13, 2016
RECORD Page 3 of 23
Test Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This interim certified test report presents summary average results to determine the physical and
mechanical behavior of basalt fiber reinforced polymer (BFRP) bars, under the trade name
RockRebarTM, for used as internal reinforcement of concrete members. The nominal BFRP bars
under evaluation include #3, #4, #5 and #8, and a stirrup #4.
Based on the results presented herein, RockRebarTM longitudinal sizes #3, #4, #5 and #8, and a
stirrup #4 meet the criteria required by:
The International Building Code (IBC) as per the International Code Council Evaluation
Service (ICC-ES) acceptance criteria AC454 June 2014, ‘ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA FOR
GLASS FIBER–REINFORCED POLYMER BARS FOR INTERNAL REINFORCEMENT
OF CONCRETE MEMBERS’ and
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) SECTION 932 ‘NONMETALLIC
ACCESSORY MATERIALS FOR CONCRETE PAVEMENT AND CONCRETE
STRUCTURES, subsection 932-3 Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) Reinforcing Bars.
RECORD Page 4 of 23
Test Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION TITLE PAGE
1. INTRODUCTION 5
2. TEST DATA 7
3. GLASS TRANSITION (Tg) TEMPERATURE – ASTM E1640 8
4. CROSS-SECTIONAL AREA – ASTM D792 11
5. TENSILE PROPERTIES – ASTM D7205 13
6. TRANSVERSE SHEAR STRENGTH – ASTM D7617 17
7. VOID CONTENT - VISUAL 20
8. STRENGTH OF BENDS - ACI 440.3R, B.5 21
RECORD Page 5 of 23
Test Report
1. INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
This certified test report presents experimental test results and other relevant information to
characterize and verify the requirements for fiber reinforced polymer reinforcement bars (rebars)
for concrete under the International Code Council Evaluation Service (ICC-ES) for RockRebarTM
as required by AC454 June 2014 (ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA FOR FIBER–REINFORCED
POLYMER BARS FOR INTERNAL REINFORCEMENT OF CONCRETE MEMBERS), as well as
required by the Florida Dept. of Transportation (FDOT) 932-3 Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP)
Reinforcing Bars, of Section 932 (NONMETALLIC ACCESSORY MATERIALS FOR CONCRETE
PAVEMENT AND CONCRETE STRUCTURES) for the products described in Section 1.3 of this
document.
The test sample numbers for each property provided within this report do not meet the complete
test repetition requirements of AC454. The results are intended to provide a preliminary evaluation
to determine RockRebarTM properties and evaluate if such properties meet the requirements set
forth by AC454 and FDOT 932-3. Further testing is currently ongoing.
STRUCTURES AND MATERIALS LABORATORY (SML)

All tests presented in this report, including material sampling and specimen preparation, were
performed by and under the supervision of the University of Miami, College of Engineering,
Structures and Materials Laboratory, herein referred to as SML. This testing laboratory has met
the requirements of the International Accreditation Service (IAS) AC89 (Accreditation Criteria for
Testing Laboratories), has demonstrated compliance with ANS/ISO/IEC Standard 17025:2005,
“General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories,” and has been
accredited for the test methods listed in the approved scope of accreditation under Testing
Laboratory #TL-478; and is a District 6 qualified laboratory by the Florida Department of
Transportation (FDOT).
DESCRIPTION OF PRODUCTS UNDER EVALUATION

RockRebarTM is a round solid Basalt Fiber-Reinforced Polymer (BFRP) composite reinforcing bar
(re-bar) made from continuous basalt fibers, in an epoxy matrix/resin and a quartz sand coasted
surface. The nominal rebar sizes under evaluation include:
1.3.1 RockRebarTM #3
BFRP 3/8-in.nominal diameter, #3 size (D10) rebar.
1.3.2 RockRebarTM #4.
BFRP 1-in.nominal diameter, #8 size (D25) rebar.
RECORD Page 6 of 23
Test Report
Refer to Table 1.1, for the summary of products under evaluation and the reference name of the
products within this report. Figure 1 shows RockRebarTM BFRP composite rebar under evaluation
with the different sizes.
Table 1.1 - Summary of RockRebarTM products under evaluation with the report reference ID.
FRP products under evaluation Report Reference Name
RockRebarTM #3 (Ø 3/8 in.) 03

Figure 1 – RockRebarTM Basalt Fiber-Reinforced Polymer (BFRP) composite reinforcing bar under
evaluation, from left to right #3, #4, #5 and #8.
CLIENT INFORMATION
The test report has been requested by:
Raw Energy Materials Corp.

Attn: Don Smith
Chairman
don@rawenergytec.com
http://www.newrebar.com/
RECORD Page 7 of 23
Test Report
2. TEST DATA
RAW DATA
All the test results presented herein are linked through unbroken chain to the raw data files
recorded on the day of the test. Details regarding raw data can be found in the technical test
record completed at the time of the tests. Raw data is available upon request.
ANALYZED DATA
Analyzed data are obtained directly from the recorded raw data during testing, from which the test
results are presented. This report contains analyzed tabulated data results of each test
assessment. Additionally, as part of the standard operating procedures and quality assurance of
the SML, intermediate checks of the data analysis are performed at various stages of the data
analysis process reducing the possible analysis errors. Fully analyzed data files are available
upon request.
REPORT PRESENTATION OF TEST RESULTS

Test results are presented in the subsequent chapters of this report (indicated with X in Table
2.1), structured in the following chapter sub-sections:
Table 2.1 – Chapter sub-sections structure
Sub-chapter Title Description
X.1 TEST SUMMARY Contains test standard references, objectives,

product under evaluation, test location, test
technician and reference to test additional
information.
X.2 SPECIMEN PREPERATION Contains specimen size, layout (if applicable),
and relevant specimen preparation procedures
and conditioning parameters as needed.
X.3 TEST SET-UP Contains test set-up information as well as the
rate and method of loading.
X.4 TEST RESULTS Contains a brief test summary, modes of failure,
calculations and/or graphs results (if applicable),
and complete tabulated results for all test
specimens.
PRODUCT HANDLING
All the products were handled based on the manufacturer’s specifications and laboratory internal
procedures, where handling and special storage considerations where provided as needed before
products where used to fabricate specimens.
RECORD Page 8 of 23
Test Report
3. GLASS TRANSITION (Tg) TEMPERATURE – ASTM E1640
TEST SUMMARY
3.1.1. AC454 Section/s
Section 4.1.2. Glass Transition Temperature
3.1.2. Reference Standard/s
ASTM E1640 – 13, Standard test method for assignment of the glass transition temperature by
dynamic mechanical analysis.
3.1.3. Test Objective
Determine the glass transition temperature (Tg) of the re-bar under evaluation based on dynamic
mechanical analysis (DMA) method.
3.1.4. Test Location
Structures and Materials Laboratory, SML, Main Laboratory, University of Miami, 1251
Memorial Dr., MEB108 Coral Gables, FL, 33146
3.1.5. Laboratory Technician/s
Zahra Karim and Francisco De Caso
SPECIMEN PREPARATION
3.2.1. Specimen Size
Nominal specimen dimensions were 20 mm (0.8 in.) span length, 5 mm (0.2 in.) width, and 1 mm
(0.04 in.) thickness, as per ASTM E1640.
3.2.2. Preparation Procedure
Segments of randomly selected bars were cut to then cut the glass transition temperature
specimens to the prescribed dimensions using a high precision blade saw from the core of the
rebar.
3.2.3. Conditioning Parameters
All specimens were conditioned under laboratory ambient conditions at room temperature
23 ± 1°C (73 ± 3°F) and 60 ± 5% relative humidity, for at least 24 hrs. prior testing.
TEST SET-UP
3.3.1. Set-up
A Dynamic Mechanical Analyzer (DMA), TA instruments Q800, was used with a flexural set up to
apply a forced oscillation with constant amplitude at a fixed frequency. The change loss modulus
with the increasing temperature is obtained by the analysis of the flexural mechanical response
and plotted in a graph to determine the glass transition temperature, Tg based on two
methodologies: i) storage modulus and ii) loss modulus. The test set-up is shown in Figure 3.1.
3.3.2. Rate and Method of Loading
A heating rate of 1°C/min (1°F/min) and a frequency of 1 Hz was applied.
RECORD Page 9 of 23
Test Report
Figure 3.1 – Tg test set-up
TEST RESULTS
3.4.1. Results Summary
Based on the experimental tests presented herein the average Tg of the re-bars under evaluation
are summarized in Table 3.1. The Tg meets the conditions of acceptance of AC454,
which states that the Tg shall not be less than 100°C (212°F).
Table 3.1 – Average tests result for Tg
Storage Modulus, Loss Modulus, Tan Delta AC454
T g* T g* T g* criteria
°C °F °C °F °C °F
TG 109.1 149.8 120.0 161.6 129.5 171.8 PASS
3.4.2. Calculations
The Tg is determined by the extrapolated onset to the sigmoidal change in the loss modulus,
storage modulus and tan delta observed in going from the hard, brittle region to the soft, rubbery
region of the material under evaluation.
RECORD Page 10 of 23
Test Report
3.4.3. Graphical Representation of Results

Figure 3.2 shows a typical graphical result for the determination of Tg.
Figure 3.2 – Storage modulus / loss modulus vs temperature response graph for a representative test.
Test Report
4. CROSS-SECTIONAL AREA – ASTM D792

TEST SUMMARY
Section 4.1.3, Measured Cross-sectional Area; and
ASTM D7205/D7205M - 06 (2011) Standard test method for Tensile Properties of Fiber
Reinforced Polymer Matrix Composite Bars.
ASTM D792-13 Standard Test Methods for Density and Specific Gravity (Relative Density) of
Plastics by Displacement.
Determine the measured cross-sectional area by volume of water displacement method of the re-
bar products under evaluation.
Memorial Dr., MEB108 Coral Gables, FL, 33146.
Guillermo Claure and Francisco De Caso
Nominal specimen length dimensions were 100 mm (4.0 in.).
The specimens were cut to the prescribed dimensions using a high precision blade saw.
4.1.1. Specimen Conditioning
All specimens were conditioned under laboratory ambient conditions for at least 40 hrs. at room
temperature 23 ± 3°C (73 ± 6°F) and 50 ± 10% relative humidity.
TEST SET-UP
4.2.1. Set-up
A light-weight wire frame resting on a micro-balance, where the re-bar specimen is suspended
from and then immersed into distilled water, was used as the test set up.
Test Report
TEST RESULTS
Based on the experimental tests presented herein summarized in Table 4.1, the average cross-
sectional areas of the rebar sizes under evaluation meet the ranges listed in column 1 of Table 1
of AC454, and stated below.
Table 4.1 – Average cross-sectional area and Maximum dimension results

Acceptance Criteria AC454
Average Measured Area
Specimen ID AC454 Area Range criteria
2 2 2 2
mm in mm in
03_MXA_CC_00 67.10 to 103.87 0.104 to 0.161 97.206 0.151 PASS
04_MXA_CC_00 119.35 to 169.68 0.185 to 0.263 157.314 0.244 PASS
05_MXA_CC_00 185.81 to 250.32 0.288 to 0.388 218.290 0.338 PASS
08_MXA_CC_00 476.13 to 589.03 0.738 to 0.913 572.424 0.887 PASS
4.3.2. Calculations
The results reported herein have been computed as per ASTM D792, where the parameters are
as follows:
Symbol Parameter Description
a Mass Apparent mass of specimen, without wire/string or sinker, in air (i.e.
dry conditioned specimen). Mass of fixture, ‘s’ predetermined.
b Mass Apparent mass of specimen (and of sinker, if used) completely
immersed and of the string partially immersed in water, with
holding fixture on scale.
w Mass (a+s) - b
L Length Average length of specimen based on three measurements
∆M Change in mass ∆ M = a-w
SG Specific gravity Specific gravity of specimen
P Density Density of specimen
V Volume Volume of specimen
A Area Measured (experimental) cross-sectional Area of specimen
Test Report
5. TENSILE PROPERTIES – ASTM D7205

TEST SUMMARY
Section 4.2.1, Ultimate Tensile Load,
Section 4.2.2, Mean Tensile Modulus of Elasticity, and
Section 4.2.4, Calculated Ultimate Tensile Strain
ASTM D7205/D7205M-06 Standard test method for Tensile Properties of Fiber Reinforced
Polymer Matrix Composite Bars.
Determine the ultimate tensile load carrying capacity, tensile modulus of elasticity and computed
ultimate strain for each re-bar size, based on an assumed linear elastic behavior.
Structures and Materials Laboratory, SML, University of Miami, 1251 Memorial Dr., MEB108 Coral
Gables, FL, 33146
Keith Holmes and Francisco De Caso
5.2.1. Specimen Size and Layout
Nominal specimen dimensions as reflected in Figure 5.1,
Figure 5.1 – Tensile specimen geometry
Table 5.1 – Nominal tensile test specimen dimensions

Length Free length
anchors Diameter of
between
steep pipe
Specimen ID (steel pipe) anchors
La L Dpipe
mm in. mm in. mm in.
03_TNS_CC_00 300 12 25.4 1.00
04_TNS_CC_00 300 12 915 36 25.4 1.00
05_TNS_CC_00 300 12 25.4 1.00
08_TNS_CC_00 460 18 765 30 31.8 1.25
Test Report

The specimens were cut to the prescribed dimensions using a high precision blade saw. Steel
pipe type anchors were installed as indicated in ASTM D7205 using expansive grout by laboratory
personnel after machining the ends of the re-bar specimens so as to center the bar specimens in
the anchors. All specimens where left cure for a minimum period of 7 days to ensure the grout
reached its maximum internal pressure ensuring proper gripping of the re-bar specimen.
23 ± 1°C (73 ± 3°F) and 60 ± 5% relative humidity, for a minimum of 72 hrs. prior testing.
TEST SET-UP
5.3.1. Set-up
Uniaxial tensile load was applied to all specimens. Tensile testing was performed using a screw-
driven universal test frame with a maximum capacity of 889 kN (200 kip). Tensile load was
measured with the internal frame load cell in compliance with ASTM E4-10 (Standard Practice for
Force Verification of Testing Machines), while the extension (elongation) of the specimen was
measured using a Class B-2 clip on extensometer in accordance to ASTM E83-10a (Standard
Practice for Verification and Classification of Extensometer Systems), with a 50 mm (2.0 in.)
gauge length, placed at mid-length of the free length between the anchors. The extensometer
was removed half way during the test to avoid damage of the instrument. Specimen’s anchors
were gripped with mechanical wedge type grips. The test set up is shown is Figure 5.2. All data
was gathered using a National Instruments data acquisition system at a rate of 100 Hz.
Figure 5.2 - Tensile test set-up

Test Report

Load was applied in displacement control to effect a near constant strain rate in the gauge section,
producing failure within 1 to 10 minutes, as per ASTM D7205 requirements.
TEST RESULTS
All specimens behaved linear elastically until failure. Based on the experimental tests presented
herein the average ultimate force carrying capacity (Pmax), tensile strength (Ftu), the computed
average ultimate tensile strain (εu), and the average modulus of elasticity (E) meet the AC454
condition of acceptance as per Table 1, and Section 4.2 for the re-bar sizes under evaluation
except as indicated in Table 5.2.
Table 5.2 – Average results for tensile tests
Peak load Guaranteed Nominal Modulus AC454
Pmax Tensile Load Ult. Strain E criteria
Specimen ID
εu-nom
kN lbs kN lbs % GPa Msi
03_TNS_CC_00 87.4 19660 77.6 17449 1.32 45.44 6.59 PASS
04_TNS_CC_00 130.3 29288 114.8 25818 1.70 48.79 7.08 PASS
05_TNS_CC_00 183.6 41271 158.7 35650 1.83 46.13 6.69 PASS
08_TNS_CC_00 439.9 98891 363.6 81741 1.70 45.20 6.56 PASS
*Condition of acceptance is equivalent to minimum guaranteed tensile load of:
> 13.2 kips for #3;
> 21.6 kips for #4;
> 32.2 kips for #5;
> 70.6 kips for #8; and
E >45 GPa (6.5 Msi) regardless of bar size
Test Report
5.4.2. Modes of Failure

The mode of failure for all bars was by tensile rupture of the re-bar as seen in Figure 5.3.
Figure 5.3 – Representative failure mode of tensile test
5.4.3. Calculations
The results reported herein have been computed as per ASTM D7205 and summarized in Table
5.3. Note that the results have been calculated using the computed area based on average of five
specimens.
Table 5.3 - Definitions of calculations for tensile tests
Pmax Maximum force at failure Peak load recorded during test.
A Measured experimental area Cross-section area as per ASTM D792
Anom Nominal cross-section area Cross-section area as per AC454 Table 1.
Ftu Experimental ultimate tensile strength Ftu = Pmax / A
Ftunom Nominal ultimate tensile strength Ftunom = Pmax / Anom
εu Experimental ultimate strain εu = Ftu / E
εu-nom Nominal ultimate strain εu-nom Strain calculated as per AC454 Section
4.2.4; εu = (Pmax - 3σ) / (Eave * Anom)
E Tensile modulus of elasticity As per Section 13.3.1 ASTM D7205 –
computed by experimental stress difference at
the equivalent strain range between 1000 and
3000 µε; divided by the difference between the
two strain points (Δε), nominally 0.002
E = ∆ Ftu / ∆𝜀
Enom Nominal tensile modulus Enom = ∆ Ftunom / ∆𝜀
Test Report
6. TRANSVERSE SHEAR STRENGTH – ASTM D7617

TEST SUMMARY
Section 4.2.3, Mean Ultimate Shear Strength (Perpendicular to the Bar).
ASTM D7616/D7616M-11, Standard Test Method for Transverse Shear Strength of Fiber–
Reinforced Polymer Matrix Composite Bars.
Determine the ultimate shear strength for each bar size under evaluation.
Kyrah Williams and Francisco De Caso
Average nominal specimen length was 300 mm (12.0 in.).
The specimens were cut to the prescribed dimensions using a high precision blade saw.
23 ± 1°C (73 ± 3°F) and 60 ± 5% relative humidity, for at least 24 hrs prior testing.
TEST SET-UP
6.3.1. Set-up
Transverse compressive load was applied to the bar using a fixture as per ASTM D7617, providing
an evenly distributed load applied to the bar in a double shear configuration. The load was applied
using a screw-driven universal test frame with a maximum capacity of 130 kN (30 kip). The load
was measured with the internal load cell of the frame in compliance with ASTM E4-10. The test
set-up is shown is Figure 6.1.
Test Report
Figure 6.1 – Transvers shear strength test set-up

Load was applied in displacement control to effect a near constant strain rate in the gauge section,
producing failure within 1 to 10 minutes, as per ASTM D7617 requirements.
TEST RESULTS
Based on the experimental tests presented herein the average mean transverse shear strength
of the re-bars under evaluation meet the AC454 Section 4.2 and the condition of acceptance, and
was at least 152 MPa, (22 ksi), regardless of the bar size or shape, as summarized in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1 – Average transverse shear strength results
τu-nom (Nominal) AC454
Specimen ID
MPa ksi criteria
03_TSS_CC_00 198.1 28.7 PASS
04_TSS_CC_00 183.3 26.6 PASS
05_TSS_CC_00 152.4 22.1 PASS
08_TSS_CC_00 191.2 27.7 PASS

The mode of failure was by double shear.
6.4.3. Calculations
The results reported herein have been computed and summarized based on the definitions in
Table 6.2
Test Report
Table 6.2 - Definitions of calculations for transverse shear strength

Pmax Maximum failure force Peak load recorded during test
Aexp Measured cross-section area Area per ASTM D792
Anom Nominal cross-section area Area per AC454 Table 1
τu-exp Experimental Transverse shear strength τu = Pmax / (2*Aexp)
τu-nom Nominal Transverse shear strength τu = Pmax / (2*Anom)
Test Report
7. VOID CONTENT - VISUAL

TEST SUMMARY
Section 4.2.8 Mean Void Content or Longitudinal Wicking.
Visual Inspection.
Determine if any unintentional continuous voids or crack exist within the products under
evaluation.
Guillermo Claure and Francisco De Caso
7.2.1. Specimen Size and layout
25.0 mm (1.0 in.) long segment cut at different locations from the re-bar.
The specimens were cut to the prescribed dimensions using a high precision blade saw, and the
ends polished to ensure a clear surface was prepared for the visual inspection.
TEST SET-UP
7.3.1. Set-up
Specimens are placed under a high contrast background light, parallel and perpendicular to the
axis of the bar to determine any inconsistent and unintentional contrast differences, indicating
potential voids or longitudinal wicking. Furthermore high magnification electronic magnifying glass
was used as needed for closer visual inspection when potential cracks may have been detected.
TEST RESULTS
Overall no unintentional continuous voids, or cracks or longitudinal wicking was detected in any
of the products under evaluation, meeting the conditions of acceptance of AC454.
Document Number: IR-5.10_CBAR_AC454/932
Test Report
8. STRENGTH OF BENDS - ACI 440.3R, B.5

TEST SUMMARY
Section 4.3.2, Mean Strength of Bends
ACI 440.3R-12, Method B.5. Guide Test Methods for Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP)
Composites for Reinforcing or Strengthening Concrete and Masonry Structures, Test method for
bond strength of FRP bars, Test Method for Strength of FRP Bent Bars and Stirrups in Bend
Locations.
Determine geometry characteristics of the bend radius, and the mean strength of the bend.
Keith Holmes and Francisco De Caso
8.2.1. Specimen Size and layout
Specimens where configured as per ACI 440.3R-12, Method B.5, by placing the pre-bend bar
with the ends enchase in reinforced concrete blocks 500 by 300 by 300 mm (20 by 8 by 8 in.)
length, width, depth; where a minimum length of 400 mm (15 in.) was left between the concrete
blocks for placing the hydraulic jack. In addition, the open end of the bend bar and radius portion
was the only part in contact, bonded to the concrete as seen in Figure 8.1, per ACI 440.3R-12,
Method B.5 requirements, where the straight potion was covered to break the bond between the
bar and the concrete.
Figure 8.1 – Specimen layout for strength of bend tests.

Note: bend bars were not open, manufactured continuous closed stirrups were tested.
Test Report

The inside bend of the specimen was measure for compliance to compare the specified
manufactures reported bend. All specimens were prepared simultaneously from one single batch
of concrete on November 10, 2012, following ASTM C192/C192M-13a, Practice for Making and
Curing Concrete Test Specimens in the Laboratory. The 28 day concrete compressive strength
was then tested as per ASTM C39, (Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of
Cylindrical Concrete Specimens) to ensure it met the requirements with ACI 440.3R-12 Method
B.3 at 30 ± 3 MPa (4350 ± 435 psi). Summary results are presented in Table 8.1.
TEST SET-UP
8.3.1. Set-up
A hydraulic jack was used to apply the relative displacement between the two concrete blocks
and a load cell in compliance with ASTM E4-10 to measure the applied load. Steel plates where
used to between the concrete blocks and the loading apparatus and to distribute the applied load
evenly to the surface of the concrete blocks, one of the blocks was placed on steel rollers to
minimize the friction forces between the block and ground, refer to Figure 13.2.
Load was applied smoothly and continuously from start until failure of the specimen, where the
load rate ensured that the specimen failure was reached between 1 and 10 minutes from the start
of the test.
Figure 8.2 – Representative test setup for bend bar tests.

Test Report
TEST RESULTS
Based on the experimental tests presented herein the geometry of the nominal #4 bend rebar and
the average strength of the bend bars under evaluation met the AC454 condition of acceptance,
where the bend strength meets and surpasses the required 60% over threefold of the mean tensile
strength (χnom = 0.6) as reported in Section 5.4. Results are the Table 8.1. This is primarily due to
the continuous close stirrup fabrication providing high performance.
Table 8.1 – Average tests result for Strength of Bend Bars
Nomila Bend
Max
Bend Bar Nomnial Capacity of
Compressive
Strength Area, Anom FRP stirrup, χnom
force, Fub
fub-nom
kN lbs mm2 in2 Mpa ksi
AVERAGE 190.1 42740 1334.7 193.6 2.16
Sn-1 20.5 4605 71.22 0.110 143.8 20.9 0.23
CV( (%) 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8
The mode was by slip of the bend bar followed by concrete crushing.
8.4.3. Calculations
The results reported herein have been computed as per ACI 440.3R, method B.5. Definitions of
the parameters used for calculation is provided in Table 8.2.
Table 8.2 - Definitions of calculations for strength of bend bars

Fub Maximum force at failure Ultimate load capacity according to bend test
A Measured cross-section area Cross-section area as per Section 0
Anom Nominal cross-section area Cross-section area as per AC454 Table 1.
fub Experimental Bend capacity fub = Fub / (2* A)
fub-nom Nominal Bend capacity fub-nom = Fub / (2* Anom)
fu Ultimate tensile strength (parallel As per Section 5.4, average result of group of data
to the fibers) based on experimental or nominal data.
χ Strength Reduction Factor χ = fub / fu
χnom Strength Reduction Factor χ = fub-nom / fu-nom
♦ END OF TEST REPORT ♦

RockRebar Test UM 04.12.16

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RockRebar Test UM 04.12.16

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

RockRebar Test UM 04.12.16

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

University of Miami

CERTIFIED TEST REPORT

EVALUATION of RockRebarTM per

Report Number: IR-5.10_NRR_AC454/932

April 13, 2016

REPORT PREPARED FOR:

Raw Energy Materials Corp.

University of Miami, College of Engineering, Structures and Materials Laboratory

Superseded Report n/a

Reason for Revision New report

Effective Date April 13, 2016

Test Report Approval Signatures:

SECTION TITLE PAGE

STRUCTURES AND MATERIALS LABORATORY (SML)

DESCRIPTION OF PRODUCTS UNDER EVALUATION

FRP products under evaluation Report Reference Name

RockRebarTM #3 (Ø 3/8 in.) 03

Raw Energy Materials Corp.

REPORT PRESENTATION OF TEST RESULTS

Table 2.1 – Chapter sub-sections structure

Sub-chapter Title Description

X.1 TEST SUMMARY Contains test standard references, objectives,

3. GLASS TRANSITION (Tg) TEMPERATURE – ASTM E1640

Figure 3.1 – Tg test set-up

3.4.3. Graphical Representation of Results

4. CROSS-SECTIONAL AREA – ASTM D792

Table 4.1 – Average cross-sectional area and Maximum dimension results

5. TENSILE PROPERTIES – ASTM D7205

Figure 5.1 – Tensile specimen geometry

Table 5.1 – Nominal tensile test specimen dimensions

5.2.2. Preparation Procedure

Figure 5.2 - Tensile test set-up

5.3.2. Rate and Method of Loading

5.4.2. Modes of Failure

Figure 5.3 – Representative failure mode of tensile test

6. TRANSVERSE SHEAR STRENGTH – ASTM D7617

Figure 6.1 – Transvers shear strength test set-up

6.3.2. Rate and Method of Loading

6.4.2. Modes of Failure

Table 6.2 - Definitions of calculations for transverse shear strength

7. VOID CONTENT - VISUAL

8. STRENGTH OF BENDS - ACI 440.3R, B.5

Figure 8.1 – Specimen layout for strength of bend tests.

8.2.2. Preparation Procedure

Figure 8.2 – Representative test setup for bend bar tests.

Table 8.2 - Definitions of calculations for strength of bend bars

♦ END OF TEST REPORT ♦

You might also like