Abstract
This paper presents development length comparison between Chinese and Australian codes study on HRB500 steel bars in concrete. After introducing the existing code provisions about the anchorage length and experimental investigation of tensile HRB500 steel bars, the calculation approaches in different codes are compared with the test data. Additionally, the development length of tensile HRB500 reinforcement bars in AS3600-2001, Proposed Revision of AS3600, GB50010-2010 and the calculation equation proposed from test results are compared with each other in beams and slabs. It is proved that AS3600-2001 is inconsistent with other standards and the tests results and needs to be revised, while the Proposed Revision of AS3600 provided a good agreement with the test data and brings the code into line with other international codes, particularly Eurocode 2. Moreover, the Proposed Revision of AS3600 is a significant improvement on the method in AS3600-2001. The anchorage length formula in GB50010-2010 can still be used for designing HRB500 steel bar.