Current standards for reinforcement steel may not accurately reflect the actual properties of steel used in construction, leading to potentially underestimating the resistance and longevity of structures. The study discusses the discrepancy between minimum permissible steel properties required by current standards such as ASTM A615/A615M, BS 4449:2005, and ES 262-2/2015 and actual properties of steel frequently used in construction and its impact on the sustainability and progressive collapse resistance of reinforced concrete structures. This discrepancy may lead to false sense of how sustainable and reliable structures are against progressive collapse. The study employs two-dimensional fiber element models to simulate the behavior of structures under progressive collapse. The study quantifies the difference in mechanical properties between actual steel used in construction and the standards it should meet. Correlation relationships are developed to forecast the structure progressive collapse behavior and ductility using the structure known material mechanical properties. Tests of hypothesis and confidence intervals are employed to draw conclusions and demonstrate the impact of underestimating steel properties on the structure longevity and resistance to progressive collapse. This study addresses a crucial aspect of structure design by highlighting the importance of using accurately steel properties to ensure safety and longevity of structures.

Progressive collapse, reinforcement steel, catenary action, reliability index, confidence intervals, test of hypothesis, finite element modeling