Quick Search

844 Defects in tapered thread reinforcement bars for coupling

Report ID: 844

Published: Newsletter 55 - July 2019

Report Overview

Representatives of both the reinforcement and coupler manufacturers inspected reinforcement bars on site and confirmed that they were defective and were unlikely to provide the required tensile capacity when connected.

Report Content

A reporter says that B500 reinforcing bars of 12mm, 25mm and 32mm diameter were observed after delivery to site to have visually different tapered threads cut into the bars, with the length of threaded section and depth and pitch of the threads varying between bars of the same diameter.

These bars were quality controlled during their production, including the threading of the bars, continues the reporter. The reinforcement manufacturer cuts the threads into the bars using equipment supplied by the coupler manufacturer. The manufacturer’s quality control process requires that 1 in 10 bars are checked using thread gauges.

When these bars were delivered to site, most of the threaded bars were already fitted into the reinforcement couplers by the manufacturer. This is common, as the bars with couplers fitted are first cast into elements, with threaded bars later being installed into the couplers for construction of follow-on elements. This means that it may not be possible to visually assess threaded bars before use.

Representatives of both the reinforcement and coupler manufacturers inspected the bars on site and confirmed that they were defective and were unlikely to provide the required tensile capacity when connected. A technician from the coupler manufacturer visited the reinforcement manufacturer and inspected the machinery used for cutting threads, and it was confirmed that the machine was working properly. The cause of the defects was determined to be machine operator error.

All threaded bars were returned to the manufacturer, fitted couplers were removed and 100% of the threaded bars were tested using thread gauges, which was witnessed by representatives from both the purchaser and reinforcement manufacturer. Over 25% of the couplers tested were found to have non-compliances with the coupler manufacturer specified thread requirements. Four distinct defects were identified; thread cut too short, thread cut too long, incorrect thread pitch and non-contiguous threads cut into bars leaving considerable surface area of bar unthreaded.

All defective bars were replaced. The manufacturer's quality control process was amended to 100% testing of all manufactured bars using thread gauges before fitting of couplers and supply to site. To avoid recurrence, consideration should be given to specifying 100% thread gauge testing of bars. Removal of couplers and visual inspection of threads for randomly sampled bars is recommended by the reporter, at least for initial deliveries to site.

Comments

This is a valuable report highlighting what might be a very important safety issue. If the defective bars had been cast in, and not discovered, then safety would have been compromised. Alternatively, if the defects were discovered during or after construction, remedial costs and delays could have been huge. It is fortunate that vigilance on site detected the problem and that responsible action was taken to resolve the situation.

The construction industry relies on products meeting defined standards. The onus is on the supplier to operate quality systems to ensure such standards are met. However, as product quality often depends on workmanship, it is essential to have adequate supervision and inspection of work on site.

It is not known whether the reinforcement and mechanical couplers were specified as CARES approved in accordance with the UK National Structural Concrete Specification. Reinforcement and mechanical couplers provided in the UK would normally be certified by CARES (UK Certification Authority for Reinforcing Steels). This certification should cover the threading and attachment of the specified couplers prior to delivery to site.

It is not clear whether the reinforcement and mechanical couplers in the report were supplied by a supplier/fabricator with appropriate certification under the CARES scheme. Certification schemes rarely involve 100% sampling, and therefore rely on quality management systems and quality control procedures, where defects such as the one described in this report should be reported to the supplier/fabricator and, where the response is considered inadequate, to the certification body.

Certified suppliers should be operating continuous improvement processes which reports such as this would feed into to reduce future risk. Overall the benefits of independent third-party certification by an accredited body, of safety critical components, has been long acknowledged. Indeed, the use of such schemes is a recommendation of the Hackitt report Building a safer future - Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety for safety critical products.

In 2018, construction of a major railway project in Hong Kong was severely delayed due to allegations of steel reinforcing bars being improperly cut to imitate proper installation into couplers on parts of the project. The Interim Report of the Commission of Inquiry was published in February 2019 and shows the extent of problems that can be attributed to issues with couplers.

 

CROSS depends on you for reports - if you have experienced a safety issue that you can share with CROSS, please Submit a CROSS Report which is treated as confidential

If you have any comments regarding this CROSS report, please Submit Feedback

View other CROSS reports published in Newsletter 55

Images

Defects in tapered thread reinforcement bars for coupling



Email Updates

How to Report

Online submission:
Submit by post: