strebar5.gif (2111 bytes)

Home

Introduction

Stainless Steels

Standards

Applications

Economics/
Advantages

Suppliers

Institutes/
Organizations

Publications

News/Events

Contact Web Developers

Stainless Steel Reinforcing Bars (Rebar)
Applications

A selection of international applications of stainless steel reinforcing bars (rebar) are listed below; the total number of stainless rebar projects (some planned or ongoing) in various parts of the world extends well beyond this partial listing.

North America | Europe | Asia | Australia | Middle East | Africa

Projects are listed sequentially from earliest to more recent applications (scroll down the page for latest projects listed).


North America:

  • The marine pier in Progreso, Yucatan (Mexico), was built in 1937-1941.

Mexico.jpg (36947 bytes)

A detailed account of the history and remarkable performance of this pier has been provided by Torben Skovsgaard (ARMINOX) and Asger Knudsen (RAMBØLL) in the August/September 1999 issue of Concrete Engineering International.  According to this publication, the 2.1 km long pier was constructed by a Danish contractor. Stainless reinforcing bars (Type 304) were incorporated in view of the severely corrosive exposure conditions and the relatively high porosity of the concrete.

pier2.jpg (21885 bytes)

Image courtesy of Arminox, Mønsted, Viborg, Denmark.

According to the Progreso Port Authority, no major repairs or significant maintenance activities have taken place over the lifetime of this structure. In contrast, severe degradation has occurred on an adjacent pier built much later, in the 1960's, with carbon steel reinforcement. The photograph below shows the destruction of the conventional structure in the foreground, with the stainless steel reinforced pier in the background.

pier1.jpg (18015 bytes)

Image courtesy of Arminox, Mønsted, Viborg, Denmark.

An excellent comprehensive report on the history, inspection and condition of the Progreso pier has also recently been published by ARMINOX. This report documents inspection work performed in December 1998 by RAMBØLL Consulting Engineers and Planners on the initiative by ARMINOX.


  • Type 304 rebars (33 tons) in Interstate Highway I-696 bridge deck near Detroit, Michigan (1985).

  • Carbon steel rebars with external cladding of Type 304 as reinforcing in I-295 bridge deck near Trenton, New Jersey (1985).

    Both bridges experience de-icing salts each winter. Core samples taken after 9 years exposure showed the stainless and stainless-clad bars to be in excellent condition.

  • Type 316LN stainless rebars (11 tons) in the bridge deck for the new Highway 407, Toronto, Canada (1996).

    407A.jpg (157415 bytes)            407B.jpg (173154 bytes)

  • More than 75 tons of Type 316LN stainless rebar were used for the Brush Creek highway bridge in Oregon (1998).

    brush2.jpg (23681 bytes)               brush1.jpg (23473 bytes)

    Images courtesy of Emipre Specialty Steel Inc., Dunkirk, New York, USA.

  • 165 tons of 2205 (duplex) stainless rebar were supplied for the new ramp of the Garden State Parkway in New Jersey (1998).

    gstate1b.jpg (46570 bytes)      gstate1a.jpg (39701 bytes)

    Images courtesy of Acerinox USA, Inc., Hackensack, New Jersey, USA.

  • 125 tons of Type 316LN rebars were supplied for the Smith River Bridge project in Oregon (1998).

  • Church St. Bridge, Ajax, Ontario (Highway 401, East of Toronto). Two phase project involving 150 tons of Type 316 LN stainless rebar in 16 mm to 30 mm sizes (second phase to be completed in Spring 1999).

    Church1.jpg (31548 bytes)            hwy.401-overpass-church-st-eastbound-collector-stainless19.jpg (418763 bytes)                            

    Images courtesy of Empire Specialty Steel Inc., Dunkirk, New York, USA
    and Ministry of Transportation Ontario, Canada respectively.

  • Other Ontario, Canada projects using stainless steel reinforcing as of Year 2000:

    From: B.H. Neuhart and V.J. Martin, "Stainless Steel Reinforcement in Bridge Construction - Status Year 2000", 17th International Bridge Conference, Pittsburgh, PA, June 2000.

    • CNR Bridge over the Black River
    • Highway 406, St. Catherines
    • Highway 1 and Highway 141, Port Sydney
    • Lincoln Alexander Parkway, Hamilton
    • Highway 518 over Highway 11, Emsdale
    • Burlington Skyway, Burlington
    • Muskrat River Bridge, Carlton Place
    • Boivarird Dr. Bridge, Brampton
    • QEW Overpass, Erin Mills
    • QEW Guelph Interchange
    • Overpass, Welland
    • Overpass, London
    • QEW Overpass, Oakville
    • Overpass, Thorold
    • Garden City Skyway
    • Highway 404/401

     

  • Alberta, Canada projects using stainless steel reinforcing as of Year 2000:

    From: B.H. Neuhart and V.J. Martin, "Stainless Steel Reinforcement in Bridge Construction - Status Year 2000", 17th International Bridge Conference, Pittsburgh, PA, June 2000.

    • Cadotte River Bridge, Peace River
    • Marten River Bridge, Peace River
    • Whitemud River Bridge/Hwy 35, Calgary

     

  • Nearly 400 tons of duplex 2205 stainless steel rebar have been supplied for the Haynes Inlet Slough Bridge, near the coastal town of Coos Bay, Oregon (USA). Reportedly, this new bridge is using more stainless steel rebar than any North American bridge application. The bridge is located in a corrosive marine environment and completed by the end of 2003 at a cost of approximately $12 million.

    Source: Roads & Bridges, May 2002, p.34-37.

  • Approximately 16 tons of Type 316LN stainless steel rebar (in various sizes) was used to repair a road bridge in Chautauga County, NY. The rebar was specified for the bridge deck rehabilitation project on the King Road in the town of French Creek.

    Sources:
    The Observer, Dunkirk, New York, October 19, 2003.
    G. Zaffalon (private communication).

  • Belt Parkway Bridge, Brooklyn, New York

    The New York City Department of Transportation's Belt Parkway Bridge is constructed with stainless steel reinforcing bars of the 2205 (UNS S31803) variety. It is exposed to a marine environment (close to the Atlantic Ocean) and deicing salt applications in winter. This new bridge replaces a nearby 45-year-old-bridge. Life cycle costing featured prominently in the selection of the stainless steel reinforcing bars, with only an approximately 1% increase in total cost associated with these bars, and an estimated doubling of projected service life combined with reduced maintenance costs (compared with the use of "black" carbon steel rebars). Some 400,000 lb. of stainless steel rebar were reportedly supplied for this project.

    Sources:
    Materials Performance, October 2004, p.11.
    Carpenter Technology Corp. news item, published at www.cartech.com (August 2004).

  • Driscoll Bridge, New Jersey

    A total of 1300 tons of stainless rebar (Type 2205 and 316LN) has reportedly been specified for expanding and rehabilitating this bridge, spanning the Raritan River in New Jersey.

    Reference: R. Trate: "Choosing Stainless Steel Rebar", Wire Forming Technology International, Winter 2004, pp.18-19.

  • Wisconsin Avenue Bridge, Washington, DC

    Stainless steel reinforcing rods were used to strengthen and extend the life of this historic (oldest in Washington, DC) stone bridge over the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal. The stainless reinforcing rods were installed in drilled holes, and surrounded by grout filled "fabric" sleeves.

    Further details are available at: http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/05mar/07.htm

    Reference: C. Darden and T.J. Scott: "Strengthening from Within", Public Roads, March/April 2005.

  • Type 2205 stainless steel rebar used in replacement bridge across the Middle Fork of the Flathead River in Flathead County, Montana (USA). Design for uninterrupted long-term service, with bridge falling under (complex) multiple jurisdictions.

    Reference: W.H. Hartt, R.G. Powers, Y.P. Virmani: "Job Site Evaluation of Corrosion Resistant Alloys for Use as Reinforcement in Concrete - Innovative Bridge Construction Program, Concrete Bridge Conference, 7-10 May 2006, Reno, Nevada, USA.

  • Woodrow Wilson Bridge, linking Virginia with Maryland over Potomac River (projected completion in 2007)

    About 1000 tons of stainless rebar (Type 2205 and 316LN) specified for bridge decks.

    Reference: R. Trate: "Choosing Stainless Steel Rebar", Wire Forming Technology International, Winter 2004, pp.18-19.


Europe:

  • Stainless steel rebars were used in a sea-front building restoration in Scarborough, UK (early 1980's). They were selected for stabilization of the sea wall, in-situ concrete on the promenade, and pre-cast units around the main entrance. Type 316 stainless steel rebar was utilized immediately adjacent to the sea, while Type 304 stainless reinforcing was applied further inshore. Conventional rebar was used well back from the sea front.

scarbo.jpg (63518 bytes)

Click on image to enlarge
(Photo courtesy of Mr. J.M. Haynes, Civil Engineered Products Ltd., Rotherham, UK)

  • 240 tons of Type 316 stainless steel rebar used in the road slab of an underpass at Cradlewell, UK (1995).

Cradle.gif (59162 bytes)

Image courtesy of Ancon CCL Limited, Sheffield, U.K.

  • Five bridges on the M4 motorway in the UK required reconstruction because of carbon steel rebar corrosion concerns (1996). Selective use of Type 304 stainless steel rebar (27 tons) for safety parapets and tying these into the main structure.

  • The Guildhall Yard East project in London, England (1996) utilized over 140 tons of Type 304 rebar. Although the new structures will not be exposed to de-icing salts or a marine environment, the design engineers were looking for a very long design life, in keeping with the famous historic buildings on the site.

guild1.gif (91866 bytes)           

Photo kindly provided by Fixing Centre Ltd., Chertsey, Surrey, U.K.

  • 46 tons of austentic stainless rebar were used in a new laboratory building of the National Physical Laboratory in Teddington, United Kingdom. The austenitic grade reportedly used was 316S33 ribbed bar, in accordance with BS 6744. Sizes ranged from 8 to 40 mm diameter, with a dominant size range of 10 to 12 mm diameter.

    (Project details kindly provided by Mr. Colin Abbott of Fixing Centre Ltd., Chertsey, Surrey, U.K.)

npl2.jpg (223743 bytes)    npl1.jpg (211593 bytes)

Click on images to enlarge

Photos kindly provided by Fixing Centre Ltd., Chertsey, Surrey, U.K.

  • The Schaffhausen Bridge in Switzerland, across the Rhine River, contains Type 304 austenitic and 2205 duplex stainless rebar in critical parts of the structure (1995). An important consideration in selecting stainless steel rebars in areas affected by de-icing salts was the minimization of repair and disruption costs. More than 13 tons of stainless rebar (304 and 2205 combined) were used.

  • Seven additional applications of stainless reinforcing in Switzerland have been described in a recent comprehensive report by Dr. F. Hunkeler (see Publications Section).

  • Type 316 rebars (11 tons) were used during the refurbishment of the A48 Highnam Bridge in the U.K. The project, completed in late 1998, involved a combination of stainless steel and carbon steel reinforcement. Type 316 was used in four link beams in the center of the bridge, where there was no water membrane. These beams were then linked to the main parapet beams running across the structure. 16 mm and 32 mm diameter rebars were used in this project. 

highnam.jpg (142899 bytes)
Click on image to enlarge

Photo kindly provided by Fixing Centre Ltd., Chertsey, Surrey, U.K.

Further information is available in Concrete Engineering International, May 1999 (see the Publications Section).

  • Other European stainless steel rebar applications include:

    • Restoration of the North Wing of John Nash's Cambridge Park Terrace at Regent's Park, London;
    • The British Library, London;
    • The Ilfracombe Pavilion, North Devon (4.8 tonnes);
    • Knucklas Viaduct, North Wales (9 tonnes).

    Further details on these projects are available in the recent report by the Concrete Society (see the Publications Section).

  • A bridge project with austenitic Type 316 reinforcing bars was carried out by the Danish Road Directorate. The concrete bridge deck concerned was reinforced with a combination of Type 316 stainless and conventional carbon steel reinforcement in one half, and CFRP (carbon fiber reinforced polymer) reinforcing in the other half.

    An interesting life cycle cost analysis, comparing Type 316 stainless steel, CFRP and conventional carbon steel reinforcement was performed. When considering constructions costs, maintenance/repair costs and traffic disturbance costs in the context of Danish bridge projects, the lowest overall costs were associated with the stainless steel reinforced deck.

    Reference: Concrete Engineering International, June 2000 - see the Publications Section.

  • Duplex stainless steel rebars were utilized in the rehabilitation of St Brandon's Church (Durham, England) and also in other European churches.

    Reference: Concrete Engineering, Vol.6, No.2. Summer 2002, pp.64-67.

  • Broadmeadow Bridge (near town of Swords, Ireland, opened in 2003) - 186 tons of Type 316 stainless rebars utilized in support piers for long term durability. The bridge on the M1 Northern Motorway spans an ecologically sensitive estuary (saline, marine environment). This construction project was the overall winner of the 2003 Concrete Design Award from the Irish Concrete Society.

    References: Plan Magazine, June 2004. Nickel Magazine, Vol.20, No.2, March 2005.


Asia:

  • Stonecutters Bridge (Hong Kong, April 2004-2008)

    Stainless steel reinforcing bars (~3000 tons), Type 304, have been selected for concrete piers and major tower splash zones. This structure will be a 1.6 km long cable stayed bridge, with a main span of 1018 metres. It is part of Route 8 between Tsing Yi and Cheung Sha Wan, at the entrance to the busy Kwai Chung Container port and at the Eastern side on Stonecutters Island.

    More background information at:  http://www.hyd.gov.hk/eng/major/majorworks/sb/index.htm


Australia:   

  • Stainless steel rebars selected for Sydney Opera House forecourt restoration project (~1990). Type 316 was specified by the engineers of the N.S.W. Government Public Works and 14 tons were supplied for the project.

sydney.jpg (24666 bytes)

Image courtesy of Ancon CCL Limited, Sheffield, U.K.

  • Type 316 stainless steel reinforcement (4 mm and 6 mm) has been utilized in the construction of concrete whale and fish sculptures for the Cook and Phillip Park Aquatic Center in Sydney, Australia. The sculptures are of a large size, with an average mass around 5 tons. Stainless steel was selected in this application in view of the concrete sculptures' exposure to a corrosive marine environment. The total length of stainless reinforcing amounted to 1.5 kilometers.

  • Brisbane River Walk (a floating walkway, opened in December 2003) - 140 tons of stainless steel rebar (in 10 mm, 12 mm and 16 mm diameters) utilized in the 850 metre-long, 5.4 metre-wide pontoon system, connecting the city of Brisbane to the inner suburb of New Farm. The pontoon structure, located some 35 metres from the river bank, has been designed for a 100 year service life and a special "walking on the water" experience. The use of stainless steel reinforcing reportedly facilitated lighter, enhanced buoyancy pontoons (through reduced concrete cover thickness) and contributed to overall cost savings.

    Reference:  Australian Stainless Steel Development Association article "Brisbane Riverwalk: Floating on Stainless", 2004.


Middle East:

  • 25 tons of Type 316 rebars were used as reinforcement in bollards at harbor facilities in U.A.E. and Qatar (1998).

  • The use of stainless steel reinforcement has been reported in roof structures (A. Knudsen and T. Skovsgaard, 2001 - see publications section)

Africa:

  • Stainless reinforcing steel and stainless steel tie wire have been used in a Kwazulu Natal coastal railway project in South Africa. This application involved the replacement of conventional reinforced concrete in a coastal (marine) environment and was driven by life-cycle cost benefits.

Arro3w1.gif (1039 bytes)
Home

Copyright © 1998-2006 Tullmin Consulting, All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer