Concrete Plastic Shrinkage Reduction Potential of Synergy Fibers

By Dr. V. Ramakrishnan Distinguished Professor of Civil Engineering South Dakota School of Mines and Technology

Abstract

The contribution of synergy fibers to plastic shrinkage reduction of concrete was studied using cement-rich concrete and the experimental results are reported in this paper. The fiber dosages used were 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 percent by volume of concrete. Three different batches of concrete were made and a total of 15 slabs were tested. The tests were conducted using 51mm(2.0 in.) thick slab that was 1m(3 ft) long and 0.6m(2 ft) wide. The crack development was enhanced by using fans that can produce a wind velocity of 22 km/h. The performance of these fibers was compared using the crack areas of control slab with no fibers and fiber reinforced slabs. The results indicate that synergy fibers at the dosages used, tremendously reduced the plastic shrinkage in concrete. The crack area reduction varied from 100 to 92 percent of the plain concrete. There was absolutely no cracking when a fiber dosage of 2.0 percent by volume of concrete was used. There was 98 percent and 92 percent reduction of plastic shrinkage cracking when the fiber dosages were respectively 1.0 percent and 0.5 percent by volume of concrete.

Keywords: Fiber Reinforced Concrete; Synthetic Fiber; Plastic shrinkage

INTRODUCTION Currently, two sizes of fibers are used in fiber reinforced concrete. Small diameter (1000 to 10000 denier) and lengths varying from 10 mm to 50 mm synthetic fibers mainly polypropylene either monofilament or fibrillated and nylon are used in low volumes (0.07 to 0.1 percent by volume) to substantially reduce the plastic shrinkage potential of concrete. Larger diameter fibers (0.5 to 1.5 mm equivalent diameter) length varying from 19 mm to 80 mm made of steel or synthetic are used in high volumes (0.5 to 2 percent by volume) to enhance the strength and toughness properties such as first crack strength, flexural strength (modulus of rupture), shear strength, impact strength, fatigue strength, toughness, ductility and post crack energy absorption capacity to failure. These fibers are available in various configurations, round or flat, straight or corrugated, with various end conditions such as straight, hooked, enlarged or twisted. These fibers are generally known as structural fibers. In order to incorporate both benefits in concrete, that is to reduce the plastic shrinkage cracking and to enhance the structural properties, a mixture of both types of fibers could be added. A combination of small diameter synthetic (polypropylene or nylon) and steel fibers or a blend of both small and large diameter synthetic fibers could be used. This blending of fibers could create a synergetic effect. This hybrid fiber system would accomplish both the plastic shrinkage reduction potential and enhancement of the structural properties. In this investigation a blended fiber mix known as synergy fibers is used. Both sizes of fibers are made from 100 percent virgin co-polymer. These fibers are non-magnetic, acid and alkaline proof, rust proof and chemically inert. This paper presents the results of an experimental investigation evaluating the plastic shrinkage reduction potential of the synergy (hybrid) fiber reinforced concrete.

In most cases. the slabs were placed on a flat surface and subjected to a wind velocity of 22 km/h.6m(2 ft) wide. The cracks started to develop in 2 to 3. Thus the total crack area for a given slab is calculated. after casting. The crack area of the other panels was expressed as a percentage of the control and the percent reduction of crack area due to the addition of fibers is obtained. concrete sand and coarse aggregate. and the tensile strength of the concrete during the hardening process. Conceptually. it can be assumed that the concrete shrinks as it hardens and develops cracks when restrained from free movement [1 to 3]. the cracking would be complete in about 6 to 8 hrs. Both fine and coarse aggregates . Immediately after casting. The plastic shrinkage cracks occur within the first 12 hours after the casting of the concrete. The coarse aggregate had a maximum size of 19mm(0. type of restraint. The mechanism for the development of cracks is a complex process. TEST METHOD: Tests were conducted using 51mm(2 in. The primary factors are amount of shrinkage. using high-velocity fans. The slabs were restrained around the perimeter using wire meshes.5 hrs.OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to evaluate the performance of Synergy fibers for the reduction in plastic shrinkage cracking.). The longer duration was chosen to make sure that all the cracks had developed and stabilized. The length of the crack was measured for each crack and multiplied by the average width.The control slab (no fibers) crack area was taken as 100 percent. The crack widths and lengths were measured after 24 hrs. Materials: The materials consisted of ASTM Type I cement.75 in.) thick slabs that were 1m(3 ft) long and 0. The crack width was measured accurately at a number of locations along the length of the crack.

and the wind velocity (22 km/h) were kept constant for each batch. it was necessary to make the concrete with a very high potential for shrinkage cracking. the higher the water content. the humidity. to increase the cracking potential. cement contents and maximum size of coarse aggregates. the maximum size of the coarse aggregates. the wind velocity. Mix Proportions: The major factors that will influence the formation of plastic shrinkage cracks are the cement content.000 denier cut in 54mm length.satisfied ASTM aggregate requirements. Since the major objective was to study the influence of fiber addition on the plastic shrinkage. These fibers color blended. the humidity and the ambient temperature. and fully oriented. The basic mixture proportion used was as follows: Cement (kgs) Water (kgs) Water/ Cement Ratio Concrete Sand (kgs) Coarse Aggregates (kgs) Maximum Size of Aggregates (mm) 389 194 0. The testing conditions. The plastic shrinkage will be higher. Three different batches of concrete were made with the same water contents. were made from 100 percent virgin co-polymer. Fibers: A hybrid fiber. was used. A higher cement content was used. lower the humidity and lower the maximum size of the aggregates (3). consisting of both flat monofilament copolymer approximately 3000 denier cut in 54mm length and a fibrillated bundle approximately 10. higher the ambient temperature. higher the wind velocity. the water to cement ratio. the higher the cement content. known as synergy fiber. Synergy fibers were supplied by Forta Corporation. such as the ambient temperature.5 483 483 19 .

Cement was then added along with the remaining one third of the water. There was no segregation or balling of the fibers in all the mixes. consolidating and finishing for all the slabs. widths. the mixing drum was thoroughly cleaned. which was followed by a three minute rest period and a final mixing was done for 2 minutes so that the fibers distributed properly.255 cum capacity mixer. They were tested after 14 days of curing and the results are given in Table 1. The complete details of measured crack lengths. both mixing and placing was carried out without any problems. Then the sand and two thirds of the water were added and mixed for one minute. The fibers were weighed accurately and kept in a separate plastic container. The 14-day compressive strengths of all mixes were approximately the same. and a buffer mix was done. B1 and B2.Mixing Procedure and Casting the Specimens: All mixing was done in a 0. The photographs of all the tested slabs after 24 hours of curing were taken and are available in Reference 4. and areas for the control and fiber reinforced slabs are given in Tables A1 to A3. After each mixing. consolidating and finishing the slabs. There was very good quality control and the cylinder strengths in all the mixes were consistently close. a concrete contractor and finisher with 20 years of experience in finishing was hired to do the placing. and C1 to C3. before the next mix was done. Then coarse aggregates were added in the mixer. Since the mixes were of a flowing consistency. The . TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Three cylinders were made for each of the six mixes with and without fibers according to the ASTM procedures. Then the fibers were added and the ingredients mixed for three minutes. Three batches were made in 3 different days during the month of August 1999. All the mixes were done under identical conditions. First the buffer mix was done. In order to maintain consistency in placing.

as anticipated.6 shows the crack reduction potential with various fiber dosages. The time of the appearance of the first crack also increased as shown in Fig. The comparison of the crack areas due to the plastic shrinkage between the control slab and the fiber reinforced slabs with different fiber dosage is shown in Fig. The comparison of various parameters for different fiber contents is shown in Table 3. However the amount of crack reduction was different for . 1 shows the influence of the fiber content on the plastic shrinkage crack area. that all three fiber contents were effective in reducing the plastic shrinkage cracking in concrete. 4 shows the comparison of the crack area of control slabs and slabs with fiber contents. Fig.5 to 2.0 percent by volume of synergy fibers. Three specimens were tested for each of the three fiber contents and the average crack areas were calculated and given in Table 2.0 percent by volume. There is a tremendous decrease in the crack area as the fiber content was increased from 0. This table also includes the average crack area of two control slabs without fibers.5 to 2. There were no cracks in all the three slabs reinforced with 2. As anticipated.0 volume percent. Fig 2 shows the effect of the fiber content on the length to width ratios of cracks for different fiber contents. CONCLUSIONS The results indicated. 3.0 volume percent. The control slab cracking depended on the temperature and humidity. The crack areas of FRC are expressed as percent of the crack area of the control slabs and the percentage reduction of the plastic shrinkage cracking due to the addition of three fiber dosages are also given in Table 2. there was a considerable reduction in this ratio as the fiber content was increased.Fig. The first crack time increased from 175 minutes to 195 minutes when the fiber content was increased from 0.summary of the test results and the percentage reduction in plastic shrinkage cracking are given in Table 2.5 to 1. There was a considerable reduction in the crack area as the fiber dosage increased from 0.5. Fig .

. Balaguru. Pennsylvania. Thesis. There was absolutely no plastic shrinkage cracking when 2. P. 91. P. “Contribution of Fibers to Crack Reduction of Cement Composites During the Initial and Final Setting Period. 2. Fiber Reinforced Cement Composites.0 percent by volume of synergy fibers. 535 pp. Ramakrishnan. N. September 1999. M.. . Balaguru. S.0% by volume of fibers were used. submitted to Forta Corporation. South Dakota School of Mines and Technology.different fiber dosage. V.. No.5 percent volume. S. With 1. Rapid City... 1994. May-June 1994. L. The synergy fiber was very efficient in reducing the plastic shrinkage cracking in concrete. “Evaluation and Comparison of the Properties of Synthetic Fiber Reinforced Concretes at Low Volume Dosages”. “Concrete Plastic Shrinkage Reduction Potential of Synergy Fibers”. 3. 280-288. It is remarkable that at a dosage of 0.” ACI Materials Journal. 1992. REFERENCES 1. Prasad. D. 3. pp. The crack reduction potential varied from about 92 to 100 % for these fiber contents. and Shah. 4. V. S. McGraw-Hill. P. a crack reduction of 92% could be achieved. the crack reduction was 98%. South Dakota School of Mines and Technology Report 99-12.

25 34.66 32.00 FEP1-2 (control) FEP1-3 FEF1-1 1.Table 1.12 C 32.01 32.61 33.88 32.50 FEF3-2 FEF3-3 Comp.00 FEP3-2 (control) FEP3-3 FEF3-1 0. 14-Day Compression Strength for Shrinkage Test Specimens Batch No.00 FEF1-2 FEF1-3 FEP2-1 0.71 32.81 33.02 32.10 32.35 33.31 33.34 Average (MPa) A 32.16 34.00 FEP2-2 (control) FEP2-3 FEF2-1 2. Strength (MPa) 32.12 33.) FEP1-1 0.08 32. (% by Vol.91 32.64 .80 B 33.58 32.81 33.00 FEF2-2 FEF2-3 FEP3-1 0.08 30. Fiber Specimen Content No.44 32.98 34.

76 304.93 195.45 13.5% by Volume Slab 1 Slab 2 Slab 3 Average Crack Area Crack Area Crack Area 2 (mm ) (% of Control) (Reduction %) 413.09 8 92 .85 100 5.42 13.68 1.73 2 98 373.07 192.26 15.81 424.77 100 26.39 100 No Crack No Crack No Crack 0 100 210. Plastic Shrinkage Reduction due to addition of Synergy Fiber Type BATCH A Control Slab 1 Control Slab 2 Average Synergy Fiber 1% by Volume Slab 1 Slab 2 Slab 3 Average BATCH B Control Slab 1 Control Slab 2 Average Synergy Fiber 2% by Volume Slab 1 Slab 2 Slab 3 BATCH C Control Slab 1 Control Slab 2 Average Synergy Fiber 0.97 399.06 6.47 175.Table 2.59 5.

67 120 43.3 317.82 120 Control Slabs L/W Casting Conditions Humidity Temperature (%) (Deg C) 38 24 20 37 35 31 1.5 15.176 38. All the three slabs in Batch B did not crack .13 Time of First Crack (min) 44.8 431.0 Lab Batch Batch C Batch A Batch B Notes: Crack Area 2 (mm ) 192.8 Lab Batch Crack Length (mm) 47. The values under Crack area.37 L/W Time of First Crack (min) 170 195 Casting Conditions Humidity Temperature (%) (Deg C) 38 24 15 40 39 28 46.77 304. Crack length and Crack width for the control slabs are the the average of values from two slabs.39 Crack Length (mm) 238. The values under Crack area.73 Crack Width (mm) 1.489 Crack Width (mm) 5.85 399. 2.73 Batch B 2. Comparison of Various Parameters for Different Fiber Contents Slabs with Fiber Fiber Crack Content Area 2 (% by Vol. Crack length and Crack width for the slabs with fiber are the average of values from three slabs.0 6.99 9.02 1.09 Batch A 1.) (mm ) Batch C 0. 3.10 52.35 9.19 125 34.Table 3.

00 1.00 0.87 0.50 215.00 2.00 0.80 1.99 11 11.36 0.80 0.50 1.40 32. Control Slab 1.30 0.30 9 13.43 2.00 0.00 0.51 6.00 0.00 0.40 0.80 0.00 0.55 0.00 2.55 7A 7.00 1.34 0. Area Crack Length No.40 0.20 0. 2 2 (mm ) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm ) (mm) 8 6.25 0.50 0.00 0.15 0.00 0. Details of Crack Lengths.00 1.00 2.00 0.26 2.45 0.40 0.30 1.00 1.50 0.50 0.20 0.80 0.64 0.93 354.50 13 4.80 1.74 0.13 . Width 2 (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm ) 1 11.60 0.20 0.35 3.83 7C 27.29 3.80 0.80 0.10 0.00 0.30 1.90 0.40 1. Batch A.35 3.80 1.92 4 11.15 1.45 1.45 0.50 7 115.50 0.34 4.80 0.70 0.20 0.00 2 6.45 2.20 2.80 0.15 0.89 0. Widths & Areas. Area Width (mm) (mm2) 0.70 0.30 0.80 0.00 0.80 0.50 0.80 0.45 0.73 0.00 Avg.82 5 10. Area Crack Length Width Avg. Width No.50 0.28 1.00 0. No.00 2.45 0.07 7B 19.80 0.90 0.50 14 23.15 15.00 2.80 0.20 0.29 3.80 0.Table A1.45 2.15 2.30 Area Crack Length Width Avg.35 0.00 0.50 Width (mm) 0.55 0.50 2.83 12 53.80 0.00 1.76 Total Area Total length Total width 413.40 0.6 12.35 0.80 0.70 0.36 4.00 3 6.15 2.78 1.80 39.15 1. Crack Length Width Avg.84 3.58 2.60 0.18 63.59 6.20 10 11.20 0.30 0.15 6.80 1.00 0.47 6 12. Width No.61 2.90 0.43 0.

20 0.40 0.20 0.46 0.21 0.81 Total Area Total Length Total width 195.40 0.80 6 9.20 0.30 0.40 0.80 9 43.30 15 24. Area Crack Length Width Avg. Width (mm) (mm) 0.20 0.35 0.20 0.22 5.Table A2.50 0.24 0.84 0.80 0.80 7 31.28 14.30 0.73 6.35 0.20 0.20 0.21 4.20 0. Area Crack Length No.30 0.30 0.20 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.70 1.20 0.76 508.20 19 23.50 3 9.20 0.20 0.30 0.00 0.30 0. Details of Crack Lengths.60 0.87 14 12.0 7.80 0.20 11. Area Width No. Batch A.30 Avg.40 0.25 3.68 2.20 0.20 0.45 14.45 0.80 0.42 17 22.17 0.80 0.33 5.45 0.20 0.20 8.66 0.60 0.20 0.20 3.35 0.80 0.20 2.23 5.20 10 15.20 0.20 13 12. Width No.80 0.00 0.80 0.45 0.67 0.50 4 22.35 0.50 1.39 0. 2 (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm ) (mm) 1 19.35 Width Avg.20 0.35 0.69 15.22 5.02 0.20 0.20 0.35 0.00 1.20 0.40 0.60 0.20 16 26.45 0.20 0.20 0.30 0.30 0.20 0.35 0.15 0.20 0.00 11 23.80 1.20 0.20 0.04 0.20 0.20 0.28 6.30 0.20 0.20 21 19.16 0.00 1.00 1.23 6.96 0.80 0.50 2 38.20 Area Crack Length Width No.20 0.40 0.20 15.20 0.00 2.00 1.45 0.20 0.20 0.84 16.50 5 15.40 0.30 0.18 0. Width 2 2 (mm) (mm ) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm ) 18 14.30 0.20 0. Crack Length Width Avg.26 0.50 0.40 0.13 .90 0.45 0.00 0.36 0.00 0.20 0. Widths & Areas.20 20 28.20 0.20 0.90 1.20 0.22 3.20 0.70 0.45 0.20 2.80 0.35 0.58 0. Control Slab 2.40 0.30 0.20 0.20 0.03 39.20 0.30 0.50 0.20 0.50 0. 2 (mm ) (mm) (mm) 12 54.80 8 40.40 0.45 0.42 0.20 0.

90 0.50 0.20 0.20 0. Slabs Reinforced with Synergy Fiber (1%) Slab 1 Slab 2 Crack Length Width Avg.20 0.20 0.21 1.30 0.20 0.15 3 5.90 0.60 0.30 0.20 1 8.79 0.38 4 7.40 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0. Batch A. No.20 0. Width (mm 2) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm 2) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm 2) 1 5.20 6 5.20 0.15 0.18 0.25 5 14.17 2.19 0.30 0.24 1.60 0.22 5 8.20 0.20 0.20 0.23 0.25 1.20 4.30 1.15 3 19.20 0.30 4 5.15 0.30 0. Widths & Areas.20 0.30 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.30 0.62 0.20 0.15 4 10.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Total Area 5.20 0.20 0.26 2.Table A3.30 0.15 2 6.41 0.03 0.15 6 5.20 Total Area Slab 3 Crack Length Width Avg. Width (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm 2) (mm) (mm) (mm) 1 6.15 0.15 0.30 0.34 0.34 0.18 1.20 0.20 3 4.20 0.70 0.65 0.13 0.20 0.15 2 3. Area Crack Length Width Avg.50 5 10.72 0.15 0.15 0.40 0. Width No.15 0.50 0.20 0.25 0.20 0.30 0.13 0.15 0.20 0.90 0.15 2.20 0.90 0.20 0.23 0.18 1.19 1.21 1.21 0.20 0.20 0.15 0.21 0.15 2 7. Details of Crack Lenghts.15 0. Area No.68 0.40 0.20 0.33 0.25 1.08 0.20 0.76 0.15 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 1.70 0.20 0.20 0.22 0.15 7 8.21 0.15 7 5.30 0. Width No.15 0.60 0.06 Total Area 0.19 1.16 Area 1.30 13.20 0.30 1.20 1. Area Crack Length Width Avg.70 0.20 0.20 0.74 0.60 0.20 0.30 0.30 8 7.88 0.38 0.20 0.18 1.20 0.45 .

33 1. 1 Length (mm) 66.11 3 40.45 0.30 0.45 8 10.30 0.00 3.80 1.30 0.00 0.30 0.80 1.00 1.45 0.13 75.20 Width (mm) 0.00 3.20 0.60 9.84 Total Area Total length Total width 373.24 2.89 10 8.00 2.00 1.80 0.72 1.23 6.80 0.00 1.00 2.00 2.08 59.76 56.37 3.20 0.82 10.Table B1.00 1.30 0.30 0.40 0.00 3.50 0.80 0.00 2. Crack No.00 1.00 2. Control Slab 1.87 107.50 1.00 2.02 4 32.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 3.20 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.00 2. Widths & Areas.40 0.80 0.35 0.20 48.00 2.81 317.00 2.99 6 13.81 2 57.00 1.00 2.80 0.30 0.50 Average Width (mm) Area (mm2) Crack Length No.80 1.00 2.90 Width (mm) 0.00 0.80 1.20 0.30 0.00 2.40 1.80 1. Details of Crack Lengths.20 Average Width (mm) Area (mm2) 0.14 1.20 0.80 1.99 . (mm) 7 5.00 2.30 0.00 0.00 0.88 5 55. Batch B.80 9 26.00 1.45 0.80 1.30 0.00 0.70 1.

20 0.00 Average Width (mm) Area (mm ) 2 Crack No.00 3. Batch B.00 2.30 0.20 0.40 Total Area 0.42 8. Control Slab 2.45 0.00 3.60 2.55 .00 3.00 1.50 0.00 2.00 1.00 0.20 0.00 1.80 0.30 8 0.30 0.00 2.50 0.00 3.80 0.45 0.90 9.45 0. Details of Crack Lengths.04 13.00 3.00 2.40 0.80 1.30 1.20 0.09 168.00 2.20 0.30 3.96 4 25.30 5.Table B2.00 2.80 0.00 2.17 43.00 2.70 2 9.81 58.00 0.30 7 0.01 3 19.30 Average Width (mm) Area (mm ) 2 1.20 0. Widths & Areas.00 0.80 0.80 0.50 0.50 0.88 115.00 3.60 Width (mm) 0.60 Width (mm) 1.25 0.64 5.00 2.45 0.09 Total length Total width 424.63 16.10 2. 6 Length (mm) 71.00 2.23 5 80.50 0.50 0. 1 Length (mm) 61. Crack No.00 2.99 16.40 0.80 1.50 0.00 1.00 3.53 5A 20.50 0.80 0.00 1.97 317.00 2.

50 0.20 0.18 Total Area Total length Total width 210.32 2 46.90 2A 20.40 0.20 0.00 1.30 0.70 0.20 0.80 1.50 0.20 0.00 0.20 0.00 1.20 0.20 Average Width (mm) Area (mm2) 6 Crack No.20 0. Length (mm) 11.30 0.80 0.47 7.30 0.02 5 19.30 0. Details of Crack Lengths. Control Slab 1.50 0.80 1.80 0.00 1.37 63.20 0.70 0.80 0.63 8 11.00 2.54 11.90 Width (mm) 0.30 0.50 0.47 273.50 0.80 0.00 0.36 5.40 0. Batch C.88 7 15.96 1.30 0.20 0.00 1.30 0.70 48.50 0.20 0. 1 Length (mm) 49.60 0.80 0.00 2.68 2B 14.20 0.60 0.20 0.00 2. Widths & Areas.00 1.20 0.60 0.Table C1.30 0. Crack No.20 0.20 0.22 3.20 0.40 1.20 0.20 59.26 2.80 0.28 4 68.50 0.20 0.80 1.40 0.00 1.40 0.00 0.00 2.25 2.31 6.50 0.20 0.40 Width (mm) 0.00 2.20 Average Width (mm) Area (mm2) 0.19 .40 5.11 3 15.50 0.

20 0.20 0.01 5 29.50 0.00 0.30 0. Batch C.31 9.20 1.00 2.00 3.20 0.30 0.34 3 19.20 0.00 3.22 3.30 5.30 0.20 2.20 0.24 2.40 Average Width (mm) Area (mm2) 0.91 5.40 0.40 0.40 0. Crack No.53 4 10.75 2 16. Widths & Areas.40 0.10 5.20 0.20 0.20 0.30 0.38 Total length Total width 175.40 0.80 0.20 Total Area 0.20 0.00 0.20 0.27 4.00 1.10 132.00 3.20 0. Details of Crack Lengths.37 4.40 0.70 6D 0.30 0.43 15.50 0.00 2.00 2.00 2. Control Slab 2.03 Crack No.30 0.23 2.20 0.24 6 63.10 Width (mm) 0.20 0.30 0.50 0.20 0.40 0.40 0.80 0.30 0.20 0. Length (mm) 12.40 0.40 0.60 6C 0.20 1.20 0.20 0.30 0.72 6A 11.80 Width (mm) 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 Average Width (mm) Area (mm2) 6B 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.50 0.80 0.07 204.Table C2.74 .30 0.00 2.30 0.30 6.40 0.30 0. 1 Length (mm) 20.50 0.67 3.20 0.

20 0.40 0.30 0.20 2 7.20 5 4.20 2 14.30 0.20 0.20 0.44 0.20 0.30 0.26 0.50 3 25.20 13.20 0.20 0.30 4 6.30 0.30 0.61 0. Area Crack Length Width Avg.40 0.40 0.17 0.38 0.20 0. Area No. Width No.20 3 7.20 0. Width 2 2 (mm ) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm ) 1 6.80 0.452 0.20 0.30 Total Area 0.30 0.20 0.40 0.30 0. Width 2 (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm ) 1 5.24 1.20 2 24.30 0.52 0.Table C3.40 0.30 6.30 0.03 0.30 0.50 0.30 0.80 0.80 0.20 1 6.5%) Slab 1 Slab 2 Crack Length Width Avg.30 0.30 0.20 0.50 0.258 Area .23 1.50 0.18 0.30 0.30 0.22 1.22 1.42 Slab 3 Crack Length Width Avg.20 0.727 0.20 0. Batch C.27 2. Widths & Areas.20 0.20 0.20 0.60 0.51 16.20 0.40 0.23 1.30 0.70 0.20 0.25 0.20 0. Slabs Reinforced with Synergy Fiber (0.20 0.72 0.20 Total Area 26.25 6.08 0.50 0.20 5.59 Total Area 5.20 1.35 0.30 0.70 0.20 0.30 3 32. No.20 0.30 0. Details of Crack Lenghts.40 0.30 0.

Comparison of Length to Width Ratios of Cracks for Different Fiber Contents . Comparison Between the Crack Areas for Different Fiber Contents 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 0.5 2 2.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Fiber Content (% by Vol.5 Length to Width Ratio Fiber Content (% by Vol.) FIG 2.) FIG 1.) 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 0.16 Crack Area (sq.mm.5 1 1.

6 0.Time of First Crack (min) 200 195 190 185 180 175 170 165 0 0.8 1 1.4 0.2 0. Comparison of Time of First Crack for Different Fiber Contents Note: Slabs with 2 % Fiber Content Did not Crack 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Control Slabs Slabs with Fiber Crack Area (sq. mm. Comparison of Crack Areas between Control Slabs and Slabs With Fiber for Different Laboratory Batches .2 Fiber Content (% by Vol.) FIG 3.) Batch B Batch A Laboratory Batch C Batches Type of Specimen FIG 4.

0% Fiber Content (% by Vol.5% 1.0% 2.0% Crack Area (% of Control) Fiber Content (% by Vol.5% 1.100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 control 0.0% 2.) FIG 6: Comparison of Crack Area Reduction for Different Fiber Contents .) FIG 5: Comparison of Crack Area as a percentage of Control for Different Fiber Contents 100 Crack Area Reduction (%) 98 96 94 92 90 88 0.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful