PHYSICAL, GEOMETRICAL, CHEMICAL AND MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF SOME SELECTED REINFORCING STEEL BARS FROM STEEL PLANTS.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	PHYSICAL, GEOMETRICAL, CHEMICAL AND MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF SOME SELECTED REINFORCING STEEL BARS FROM STEEL PLANTS.
Authors:	Onuigbo, O. C.¹ ositadimma.onuigbo@gmail.com, Edokpia, R. O.¹ ralph.edokpia@uniben.edu, Eboigbe, C. I.¹ christopher.eboigbe@uniben.edu
Source:	Academic Journal of Manufacturing Engineering. 2026, Vol. 24 Issue 1, p132-141. 10p.
Subjects:	Reinforcing bars, Tensile strength, Geometry, Properties of matter, Chemical structure, American Society for Testing Materials, Mechanical behavior of materials, Buildings safety measures
Geographic Terms:	Nigeria
Abstract:	This study critically examined the quality of reinforcing steel bars in Nigeria due to frequent building collapses. It investigated five sizes (10-25 mm) from six local brands (A-F) for compliance with necessary standards. Testing included mechanical (tensile), hardness, chemical, geometrical, physical properties, and SEM-EDS analysis. Yield Strength showed significant variation, ranging from 360.96 MPa to 634.99 MPa. Ultimate Tensile Strength (UTS) ranged from 573.62 MPa to 791.43 MPa, and Elongation showed adequate ductility (16.66% to 41.31%). Only sample A25 failed the NIS and ASTM yield strength standards. Only a few samples (A10, B10, B12, E20) met the stricter BS 4449 yield strength standard.8All brands met the ASTMA706 and NIS 117 standards for UTS, but A10 and A20 failed the BS 4449 threshold. In terms of chemical composition (C, Mn, P, S, CEV), only Brand A consistently met all (BS 4449, NIS, ASTM A706) requirements. Brands B, C, D, E, and F showed inconsistent adherence to the required chemical composition standards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of Academic Journal of Manufacturing Engineering is the property of Academic Association for Manufacturing Engineering and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Engineering Source

Description
Abstract:	This study critically examined the quality of reinforcing steel bars in Nigeria due to frequent building collapses. It investigated five sizes (10-25 mm) from six local brands (A-F) for compliance with necessary standards. Testing included mechanical (tensile), hardness, chemical, geometrical, physical properties, and SEM-EDS analysis. Yield Strength showed significant variation, ranging from 360.96 MPa to 634.99 MPa. Ultimate Tensile Strength (UTS) ranged from 573.62 MPa to 791.43 MPa, and Elongation showed adequate ductility (16.66% to 41.31%). Only sample A25 failed the NIS and ASTM yield strength standards. Only a few samples (A10, B10, B12, E20) met the stricter BS 4449 yield strength standard.8All brands met the ASTMA706 and NIS 117 standards for UTS, but A10 and A20 failed the BS 4449 threshold. In terms of chemical composition (C, Mn, P, S, CEV), only Brand A consistently met all (BS 4449, NIS, ASTM A706) requirements. Brands B, C, D, E, and F showed inconsistent adherence to the required chemical composition standards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	15837904
DOI:	10.5281/zenodo.19219011