Fracture Mechanics of Concrete and Concrete Structures High Performance, Fiber Reinforced Concrete, Special Loadings and Structural

Applications- B. H. Oh, et al. (eds) ⓒ 2010 Korea Concrete Institute, ISBN 978-89-5708-182-2

Shear strength of steel fiber-reinforced lightweight concrete beams
T. H.-K. Kang & W. Kim
University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, USA

ABSTRACT: Experimental data were utilized to investigate the effect of steel fibers on the shear strength of a lightweight concrete beam. Prior tests of steel fiber-reinforced lightweight concrete (SFRLC) beams or smallscale concrete mockups were reviewed. Only two large-scale test programs on SFRLC beams are available to date. The variables studied in these programs included the shear span-to-depth ratio and steel fiber volume fraction. The addition of steel fibers with steel fiber volume fractions of 0.5% to 0.75% increased the shear strength by roughly 25% to 45%. It is also found that the shear-to-depth ratio adversely affected the shear strength. Several models for the shear strength of steel fiber-reinforced concrete beams were evaluated using the re-assessed data to evaluate the shear strength of the SFRLC specimens. Finally, design shear strength equations for SFRLC beams without stirrups have been proposed based on the calibration results. 1 INTRODUCTION Use of steel fiber-reinforced concrete (SFRC) is increasingly popular in the U.S. and other countries, as it tends to improve mechanical properties and structural performance relative to conventionally reinforced concrete (with the same steel volume fraction). The addition of steel fibers (Fig. 1) to a reinforced concrete (RC) beam is known to improve shear and flexural behavior. The improved behavior of SFRC members is associated with the postcracking tensile strength of SFRC; thus, the use of SFRC helps in reducing the degree and width of cracking (Fig. 2). Along with these advantages, one of the most useful applications of SFRC is to relieve steel congestion by reducing the amount of shear or confining transverse reinforcement without sacrificing structural performance. A similar improvement may be anticipated in steel fiber-reinforced lightweight concrete (SFRLC); however, the application of minimum steel fiber volume fraction to lightweight concrete is questionable. To address this question, mechanical properties of SFRLC need to be first identified, and then structural performance needs to be verified through largescale experimental testing. Finally, a database would be compiled and studied for development or support of design models and provisions. In this paper, these procedures are conducted using previous and current research on SFRLC materials and structural members. Available studies on the structural behavior for large-scale steel fiber-reinforced members with lightweight concrete are scarce, although a large number of studies on SFRC structural members with normalweight concrete have been conducted by many investigators over the past decades (Narayanan & Darwish 1987, Kwak et al. 2002, Ashour et al. 1992, Swamy et al. 1993, Choi et al. 2007, Kang et al. 2009) (see Fig. 3). Given this gap, a review of experimental studies of the shear behavior of SFRLC beams without stirrups is carried out.

Figure 1. Discrete hooked steel fibers.

Figure 2. Steel fibers that restrain crack opening during shear testing (at Fears Lab of the University of Oklahoma).

evaporable water vs relative sess the applicability of discrete steel fibers for be used according to the sign ofimthe varia proving mechanical properties of normal-strength relativity humidity. 150 x 300 mm cylinders (see Figs. Twenty connection specimens were tested under various parameters The water content w can of be steel expressed a fiber shapes. SF shear tests. and small-scale shear specimens (e. c paper theproperties semi-empirical expression pro The improved mechanical were observed Norling Mjornell (1997) is adopted b for all combinations of the fiber lengths (30. 2010 . and at punching (by 30% age-dependent sorption/desorption to 100%).75%) are evaluated. 50. and adsorbed water) and the non-e 0.6 c Pantazopoulo & Mills 1995). It was reported that 1) the shear strength of SFRC beams was slightly larger than that of SFRLC beams J = different).1 MPa) lightweight isotherm for programs HPC is influenced by many p concrete. per ASTM C496/496M. determ C1018. Theodorakopoulos & Swamy (1993) investigated − ∂w = ∇ • and J punching shear behavior strength of SFRLC ∂t slab-column connections. and 3) the shear moisture permeability and span-toit is a nonlinea depth ratio adversely shear h strength of of theaffected relative the humidity and temperature SFRLC beams. i. temperature. 4 and 5). b. the addition allevaporable types of steel fi. Balaguru & Dipsia 1993. volume all relative to normalweight conof concrete (water content w) be eq crete of the same divergence compressive (as per Ch. Neglecting their difference (Xi et al.e. and Proceedings of FraMCoS-7. Kayali et al. (2) to assess the shear behavior of SFRLC beams quantitatively. It is reas MPa).. splitting structure tensile and compressive strength (waterand pore size distribution tests of cylinders ratio. and 4) and steel fiber volume fraction (Vf = 0%. and (chemically bound) wn (Mil concrete compressive strength ( f’ = 17. 1993.T) The proportionality and 45%.) 1994). However.is a fu assume thatof the water bers in SFRLC slab-column connections increased relative humidity. Balaguru & Foden 1996. splitting tensile strength ( f ) by 80% to in th sp concrete (Xi et (E al.8 to 58.humi relation. Only 3 large-scale structural testing programs of SFRLC members were reported (Swamy et al. studies on the use of steel fibers in lightweight concrete have been sparse. (1993) tested seven large-scale specimens of SFRLC I-section beams with a span length of 3 m.5%. of strength the moisture flux J 2 of ACI 318-08).1 Large-scale structural tests Swamy et al. May 23-28. Usage (Norling of paddleMjonell steel fibers with Vf = 1% 1997). and 200water mm). per inASTM chemical turn. Swamy & Jojagha 1982a. 2 PREVIOUS EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMS To date. In their experimental studies. h. Under this assum resulted in the greatest punching shear strength. The shape of the (42 MPa) and high-strength (62. 1997. it was mix curing time and method. and modulus of elasticity by 5% to 25%. case. if the hysteresis&of the Experimental studies were conducted by Balaguru isotherm would be taken intoto account. column size (100. and 0. 1999. Kang & Kim (2009) reported monotonic fourpoint loading tests of nine SFRLC and three SFRC beams. Vf (0. λ is the modification factor re& Najjar 1972). The moisture mass balanc flecting the reduced properties ofthe lightthat mechanical the variation in time of water mas weight concrete. 0. − D (h. In literature formulatio concrete increased the compressive strength (f’c) isotherm by found to describe the sorption 30% to 40%. Theodorakopoulos & Swamy 1993. at yielding (by 12%= to 80%). Most previous tests of SFRLC materials were performed using approximately 100 x 100 x 360 mm prisms (see Fig. 3. 80 x 80 x 155 mm) (Balaguru & Ramakrishman 1987.g. αs. found that the addition of the steel fibers to various lightweight etc. ‘‘sorption isotherm” will be reference tests to both sorption and desorption c 2. Four-point loading of a steel fiber-reinforced beam (at Fears Lab of the University of Oklahoma). 150.5% and 1%). reinforcing ratios of wa of the evaporable water we (capillary tension and compression slab steel (0. Kang & Kim 2009). The experimental consisted of and especially those that influence extent third-point loading tests reactions of prismsand. The test results indicated that the ultimate shear strength was dependent upon span-to-depth ratio (a/d) and tension reinforcing ratio (ρ).2 Small-scale materials By the way.The objectives of this study are (1) to verify the effectiveness of steel fibers in lightweight concrete. 4). Higashiyama & Banthia 2008). Here. where the parameters of the shear span-todepth ratio (2. and that SFRLC with a steel fiber volume fraction (Vf) of 1% showed significantly greater shear strength (by 60% to 210%) than equivalent beams without steel fibers.57%). Figure 3. and direct cement chemical composition. by substituting Equation 1 into Equati obtains − ∂w ∂h e + ∇ • ( D ∇h) = ∂we h ∂α ∂h ∂t ∂w eα & & α c + s + w ∂α c s where ∂we/∂h is the slope of the sorption/ isotherm (also called moisture capac governing equation (Equation 3) must be by appropriate boundary and initial conditi The relation between the amount of e water and relative humidity is called ‘‘ Figure 4. two Dipsia (1993) and Balaguru & Foden (1996) as. 2. T )∇h 2) the steel fiber vol(failure modes were ume fractions (Vf) of both 0. and (3) to develop design shear strength equations for SFRLC beams. 100%. Gao et al.). Overall. respectively. we=w degree of silica (by fume reaction. the following. Modulus of rupture testing (per ASTM C1609) and isotherm” if measured with increasing splitting tensile strength testing and (per ASTM C496) of concrete in th humidity ‘‘desorption isotherm” mixes (at Fears Lab of the University of Oklahoma).32% and vapor. degree of hydration the gravity load at first cracking 33% to 50%).5% and 0.75% increased the shear strength of plain concrete by coefficient about 25% D(h.

Kang & Kim 2009) were built before the inclusion of §5.α ) e not considered for design and s  model simplification   current ACI 318-08  code to be consistent with the provisions (§8.2Rchemical reactions and.αs) strength SFRLC ( ≥ 70 MPa) by Gao et al. assume that the evaporable water is a function of relative humidity.6. and vibratorhumidity and ‘‘desorption isotherm” in the opposite based remolding tests. and Similar experiments were α conducted for highdegree of silica fume reaction.22 1 1 1 . (Norling Mjonell 1997).T) is called moisture permeability and it is a nonlinear function of the relative humidity h and temperature T (Bažant & Najjar 1972). & Jojagha (1982a) performed a variety of The relation between the amount of evaporable workability tests for both SFRC and SFRLC in the water and relative humidity is called ‘‘adsorption fresh state. In this  study.75%. Heat conduction can be δmid = L/150 is neither less than 75% of the peak nor described in concrete.and adsorbed water)tests andofthe non-evaporable Figure Compressive strength SFRLC cylinders per ASTM C496. However.3 and L is Fourier’s law. further 1 rational  and sta we (h. relative humidity. isotherm steel fireadsin lightweight concrete appear to be equally efbers fective in improving mechanical properties and structural performance  as steel fibers in normalweight concrete.e. oneshear obtains can calculate K1 as on According to the new provision of ACI 318-08 (§5. with two strain gauges per to measure (Mills 1966. the following three steps of the calibration approach were whereFirst.6. (1993) and From Kang the & ksvg are material where kcvg andby Kim (2009) were used for this evaluation. This expression is valid only for low content DESIGN SHEAR STRENGTH EQUATIONS of SF. Results from the prior SFRLC beam tests reported Swamy et al. determine pore 78.).75%). Here. and 1. reaction SFreviews content. 1993. SFRC exhibited better governing equation (Equation 3) must be completed shear and flexural toughness properties than SFRLC. May 23-28. since the chemical reactions fies that SFRC should be considered acceptable for associated with cement hydration and SF reaction shear resistance only if the prism flexural strength at are exothermic.75 (4) generally applicable for most cases with relatively ∞ α )h  in λ is 10(g α small variations. 1994).75Mcr. including inverted slump cone tests. However. be Swamy used according to the sign of the variation of the & Jojagha (1982b) experimentally asrelativity humidity. The effects of found to describe the sorption isotherm of normal steel fiber shape and geometry were evident by the concrete (Xi et al.5. the temperature field is not uniform δmid = L/300 is neither less than 90% of the peak nor for non-adiabatic systems even if the environmental 90% of cracking moment (Mcr). αof s ) =the vgACI c 318 vg α specified ss eration lightweight concrete factor (λ). of 0.6.63λ√f’c MPa per §9.αc. the effect of the dosage fillAs all part pores (both capillary pores and gel pores). under impact loads by means of a drop hammer test especially those that influence extent and rate of the and a drop ball test in accordance with ACI 544. 60 and (1) 0. at early age. 1994). α c . maximum amount of water per unit volume that can of the analyses. is the absolute used. is reasonable to red gravels exposed are expanded shale lightweight aggregates. by Swamy appropriate boundary and initial conditions. This rate is equivalent to a mix with s   ∞ − α h α specimens g Vf = 0.α )= G ( α c . Three and four mixes were tested for normalstructure and pore size distribution (water-to-cement weight and lightweight concrete. αc. evaporable water vs relative humidity. Two fiber volume fractions (Vf = c s 0. mix additives.5.2(a)). i. which reads the prism span length. 2010 The water content w can be expressed as the sum of the evaporable water we (capillary water. Mcr is calculated using the modulus exceeding 100°C (Bažant & Kaplan 1996). s.55%.2rupture Temperature evolution resistance (see Fig. but much less (124 and 192) for crimped and Proceedings of FraMCoS-7.9%. ‘‘sorption isotherm” will be used with ture should be added to release inter-locking friction reference to both sorption and desorption conditions. 0.1). It was concluded that pulvercase. if the hysteresis of the moisture Balaguru & Ramakrishen (1987). most shear T strength models for temperature. The ACI 318 provision speciNote that. The shape of the sorption sessed material characteristics of SFRC and SFRLC isotherm for HPC is influenced by many parameters. The results indicated that for a given fiisotherm (also called moisture capacity). (1997) = age-dependent sorption/desorption isotherm and for normal-strength SFRLC by Kayali et and al. Both ratio.6. Mjornell 1997)the as shear strength equations available In this section. in ized fuel ash and water-reducing-plasticizing admixthe following. in the present fact that the number of shocks needed to fail was paper the semi-empirical expression proposed by 536 and 793 for paddle and hooked shapes. 4).5% and 1%) were selected for third-point loading tests in accordance with ASTM C1609 and for direct is the slope of the sorption/desorption where ∂we/∂h shear tests. sorption Based and on the of This the prior tests. The moisture mass balance requires that the variation in time of the water mass per unit volume of concrete (water content w) be equal to the divergence of the moisture flux J − ∂ = ∇•J ∂ w t (2) explicitly accounts for the evolution of hydration plain shapes. respecNorling Mjornell (1997) is adopted because it tively. it was concluded isotherm would be taken into account. free (evaporable) water content in concrete at According to ACI 318-08 (§5.25% to 1. we=we(h.2. of ItOklahoma). The coefficient G1 represents the amount of water unit volume held most in theavailable gel pores previous at 100% In the per preceding section. one rate of steel fibers strength is investigated.188 0. ASTM C1609 is referred to.65%.6. cement chemical composition. Higashiyama & Banthia (2008) evaluated rela∂w ∂w ∂w ∂h tions between shear and flexural toughness for both eα eα & & & + ∇ • ( D ∇h ) = − e (3) c + s + wn h ∂ α ∂ α ∂ ∂ h t SFRC and SFRLC.2 thes ACI 318 code and k this The material parameters kcvg in vg and g1 can series. degree of hydration. Although  the investigated e  c c − (Swamy et al. water vapor. isotherm” if measured with increasing relativity standard slump and flow table tests. The ber type and volume fraction.1%).6. two different that toughness and energy absorption for SFRLC relation. and similar results were obtained with the fiby substituting Equation 1 into Equation 2 one ber length of about 25 mm and the volume fraction obtains where the first term (gel isotherm) represents the physically bound (adsorbed) water and the second term (capillary isotherm) represents the capillary 3 DEVELOPMENT & CALIBRATION OF water. (chemically bound) water wn cylinder strains (at Fears Lab the University Note that Pantazopoulo & of Mills 1995). at least for temperature not 0. h. α s )1 − +  would s tistical assessment of the increased properties 1 ∞ 10(g α − α c )h   be needed to judge whether of is e the 1λ cfactor   0. temperature.2). steel fiber-reinforced concrete     should ∞  g α − α h   c c   be considered acceptable for shear resistance when w − α s + α s −G  −e  c s  less  the dosage rate of deformed steel fibers is not  (6)  3 K (α c 60 = α )kg/m than . respectively. q is theavailable heat flux. in turn. and the strength at temperature is constant. SF content. in considc α c + k s to G1 (α are (5) c . Neglecting their difference (Xi et al. From similar tests of By the way. a mid-span deflection (δmid) should also be measured during the modulus of testing if a member is designed for shear 2. resistance than those without steel fibers by a subetc. by of rupture (fr) = 0. Detailed equations are not provided in 10 0 0. and on it can be expressed (Norling experimental research SFRLC was summarized. T )∇h steel fiber volume fractions (0. The proportionality coefficient D(h. 1 10 1 1 . parameters.J = mm) − D ( h.6. 12 of 15 specimens satisfied minimum be calibrated by fitting experimental data relevant to requirement (60 kg/m3 or Vf = 0. between fibers and aggregates. the −variation c − 1 1 c  K1 (α c . must were equivalent to those for SFRC. SFRC and SFRLC with Vf = 1% had greater impact curing time and method. In order to develop design shear strength modq = − λ ∇T (7) el(s) for SFRLC beams without stirrups. where various ages (Di Luzio & Cusatis 2009b). in this SFRC beams (none lightweight) were extracted from the literature. In the literature various formulations can be stantial degree up to a factor of 10. and λ is the heat conductivity. for SFRC beams were evaluated as to whether or not they alsokapplicable SFRLC beams.75%. Under this assumption (1999).

(2002) by aremany p especially those that influence extent chosen to propose design shear strength model(s) for and chemical reactionsthe and.2258 1.75 0.72 2. On the other hand. evaporable water vsoverall relative humi Kwak et al. the evaporable water is a fu assume Table 2. Sharma (1986).1704 initial conditi Li et al.79 3.0318 0.36 0. (model A.0577 slope of0. (1999). (2007) 1. 1. Steepness (slope) of the linear regression line for the degree ofstress silica(vu) fume s.5708the 0. with the consideration of lightweight con(Norling Mjonell 1997). & onNajjar average.1108 0.40 2.0474 0.4688 is the 1. (1): λ fc' λ 2 f c' vc for lightweight concrete = = vc for normalweight concrete fc' fc' (1) Finally. (2002) 0. TheJradivergence ofrespectively). (vu/vn) is the same as (Vu/Vn). Max: Maximum of (vu/vn)’s for 15 SFRLC beams. (1987) 0. The lack of data warrants additional large-scale experimental studies. compared the other various models that found to describe the sorption isotherm are quite sensitive to each variable (Figs 6(c).54 _________________________________________ Stdev. we=w ratio of measured peak shear to reaction. used according to the the sign of the satisfactory in this Based on review in varia relativity humidity. i. Comparisons of measured peak stresses (vu) and shear stress capacities (vn) based on the available SFRC shear strength models except the replacement of f’c by  2f’c for SFRLC beams. and the models by Khuntia vapor. as well as the slope of the linear regression lines were compared in this study (Tables 1 and 2). respectively. The moisture mass balanc for about 15% ofthat the specimens are below 1.87). Table 1.0the (minthe variation in time of water mas imum: 0.0759 0.60 1. calculated α shear = age-dependent sorption/desorption stress capacity (vn). However.1845 2. h. and minimum and maximum values of the ratios.39 1. (2002) and Shin et al. determ SFRLC beams.16 1.86 and volume 0. and adsorbed water) and the non-e et al.0348 0. In with the literature formulatio main variables. Under this assum crete factor (λ= 0.32 1. if the hysteresis of the ble 2 indicates that the models by Narayanan & taken A. relation. (1994) 0. Ashour et al. Kwak et al. (1994) are be aspect.5114 &+ &+ water and relative humidity is called _________________________________________ _________________________________________ Narayanan et al. (2007) 0. in turn.71 Max.2418 ∂α 0.38 1. T )Narayanan ∇h cate that the models & Darwish (1987). J = − D (by h.16 1. divided by the beam web width (bw) and effective depth (d). It is shown these chemical selected models are curing and method. (1999) Sharma (1986) Imam et al. (1994).05 1.5945c 0. right column).84 for Ashour et al. (2002) Khuntia et al. relative humidity.1431 s Kwak et al. whereas the models by Ashour et al. (1994) showed lower standard deviations (average = 0. It is reas in their predictions (Tablethat 1). for (vu/vn) ratios is oneNeglecting of the most robust statistical the following. [model A] (1992) [model B] Kwak et al.2397 0.88 Min. the lightweight concrete modification factor of λ (= 0. standard deviation.62 0. Even the ( v /v ) ratios u n 1972).0274 Khuntia et al. Figure 6 illustrates distributions and different pore size independent distribution (waterof (vu/vn) ratios structure against four ratio. isotherm Ashour would et al. Here. into account.1827e 0. (model B.3732 capac isotherm (also called moisture Imam et al. 1994). ‘‘sorption isotherm” indicators to evaluate the sensitivity of the depend-will be reference both sorption and desorption c ent variable (vu/vn ) to each to independent variable. wa of the evaporable water we≥(capillary with maximum of 1.75) (see Fig.25 0. ∂h Narayanan et al. (1987) Ashour et al. It is noted that this analysis is based on limited data (only 2 test programs and 15 SFRLC specimens).75) was accounted for by replacing f’c with λ2f’c for SFRLC beams. The shape this and previous paragraphs. −given ∂t the brittleness nature of the shear failure modes. 1992) and Shin et al. (2002) have reasonable safety margins (about D(h.e.0077 0.43 0. (1992) 0. Second.0210 ∂α h ∂t 0. 6(f). Min: Minimum of (vu/vn)’s for 15 SFRLC beams. the ratio (vu/vn) of measured peak shear stress to shear stress capacity calculated based on the existing model.1878 The relation between amount of e Choi et al.84 0. the moisture flux ther unconservative models may not be appropriate for the development the shear strength model for ∂wof =∇ •J an SFRLC beam. the models by Ashour of the isotherm iset influenced et al.2575 the sorption/ ∂we/∂h Sharma (1986) 0. May 23-28.79 1. and Choi etwater al. (1992) Choi et al. 1992).87 1.1237 0. asmeasured material properties are used for the calculation of vn. 1992) and for by HPC Kwak al.0283 governing equation (Equation 3) must be Shin et al. TaBy the way.2406 0.0002 (1992) [model B] 0. The mean. paper the semi-empirical expression pro The first design shear strength equation proposed Norling b for SFRLC beams is the Mjornell modified (1997) version is of adopted the Proceedings of FraMCoS-7.0225 0.33 1. SF variables. concrete (Xi et al.T) The proportionality coefficient 30%). (1992). (1994) Li et al.11 0. (1997) 0. and vu and vn are defined as the maximum shear force (Vu) and the nominal shear strength (Vn). the model by Narayanan & Darwish (1987)content somewhat overestiThe water w can be expressed a mates the shear strength (20% of specimens 1. two Darwish (1987).that cement composition.5747 0. Ashour et al.02 1.64. Although the constant λ is too simplified for predicting the shear strength of various lightweight concrete. 4). 0.22 0.37 1.14 0.0106 h 0. and Kwak et al.this paper for the sake of brevity.). their difference (Xi et al.1524 0.14 0.19) relative to other models (Table 1).0997 0. (model moisture permeability and it is a nonlinea B. Thus.05 1. [model A]∂0. (2002). (1999)where 0.0346 0. of concrete (water content w) be eq 1992) and Shin et al. except for the replacement of f’c by λ2f’c.70 0. The models by Narayanan & Darwish (1987). (1994) have small of the relative humidity h andsafety temperature margins of 16%. be (model 1992).0115 0. The mean values of (vu/vn) indi- ‘‘ isotherm” if measured with increasing humidity isotherm” The slope (steepness) ofand the ‘‘desorption linear regression line in th case.30 2.: Standard deviation of (vu/vn)’s for 15 SFRLC beams.57 1.0868 0.01 2.02 1.1262 2.22 0. degree of hydration by substituting Equation 1 into _________________________________________ Independent variableobtains f’c MPa a/d Vf %   % Equati _________________________________________ ∂w ∂w ∂w _________________________________________ Model Mean Stdev.0006 0.19 0.0010 e αc αs w + ∇ • ( D ∇h ) = − e Ashour et al. this process is analogous to the application in the current ACI 318-08 code as shown in eqution.72 0.86 1. and Shin et al. (2007) (chemically bound) wn (Mil are overly conservative or provide substantial scatter Pantazopoulo & Mills 1995).0307 by appropriate boundary and0. in th 6(i) and 6(l). 2010 . not overly sensitive to time the variation of these four mix etc.34 2.0046 0. (1997) Shin et al. The standard deviation is a good statistical indicator of consistent accuracy. was determined for each specimen to make a direct comparison between the models.69 0. temperature. (model A.

(2002) (c) Sharma(1986) y = -0. σ = 0. From the where kcvg 0 maximum 0 1 2 amount 3 4 5 of 0 water 1 2 3per 4 unit 5 0 volume 1 2 3 that 4 5 can 6 (a/(both d) (a/pores d) a/d) fill all pores capillary and gel (pores).4. as‘‘adsorption 1. The ratio of (vu/vn) vs.). wL w ( h. (1992). vb is the humidity and (= ‘‘desorption isotherm” in splitting the opposite tenpullout stress 0. vb (capillary water.4(d /a).33. May 23-28.7 +hysteresis F By the way.14) (mean = 1. otherwise taken as 3.32.5 substituting Equation 1 plain into Equation 2 one (= for circular section fiber. σ = 0. of equations (2) and (3).33.5.3.0274x + 1. in sile strength computed using eqution the following. The shape of the sorption der strength (f’c) is typically 0.41τF). The relation between the amount of evaporable watere and relative humidity is taken called here.5 1   0 ∞ 10 −    1  y = 0. and it can be expressed (Norling Mjornell 1997) as 2 c c c (a) Ashour et al. structure and pore size distribution (water-to-cement which tends to occur when (a/d) is less than about ratio. (model A.76 y1 =− -0.25) y = 0.1878x  + 0.α αc . 2002). is the arch action factor. and 1 for indented ficrimped ber (Narayanan & Darwish 1987).4. σ = 0. ( vu / v n) The proportionality coefficient D(h. Vf is the (Norling Under this and steel fiberMjonell volume 1997). Lf/Df)Vfdfα f = age-dependent sorption/desorption isotherm fiber length.83) spfc ) ⎝ a⎠ by appropriate boundary and initial conditions.6.25)∞  = 1. w t explicitly accounts of the SFRLC beamsfor andthe theevolution feasibilityof of hydration using the reactionavailable and SF design content. at early age.75 was applied as per and relative h. swhere is the steel factor ) silica is equal to (reaction. extra shear strength due to the arch action is conseretc. σ = 0.2 (mean = 1. In considered the literature various formulations can be vatively when (a/d) is less than 2. value of f cuf equal to 1.(2002) (l) Choi et al. 0. The moisture mass balance requires for (a/ d) ≥ 2.e.75% to 0. as given in eqution (4). and taken adsorbed water) and the non-evaporable tentatively as 4. as given in equtions. fcuf according is the cube The cylinrelativity humidity. mix additives. one Figure 6. It is reasonable to and Kwak et al. 1  10(g α ∞ K1 (α c .43) 0 1     )=   ∞ 10 −   1  −1 0.28 (mean = 1.33. and Norling Mjornell (1997) is adopted because it this work was limited to evaluating the performance Proceedings of FraMCoS-7.188 − x+ −  1 (mean = 1. chemical reactions and.12 + 0. 2010 in MPa. T )∇ h SFRC shear strength equations developed by Ashour et (1) al. et al. inthe theprevious present steel fiber-reinforced beamsHowever.6 (mean = 2. fraction.2418 x + 1.5concrete at 0 0.33 ( we ( h.11 ⎜and ⎟ of the relative h ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ a⎠ & Najjar 1972). The ratio of (vu/vn) vs. α s ) =G + (mean (mean = 1. since the chemical reactions Note associated with cement hydration and SF reaction are 2exothermic. (2) − ∂ = ∇•J ∂ f’c is the cylinder concrete strength of SFRLC here. if + the of the moisture 20 − F ( ) isotherm would be taken into account.(1999) (model A) k vg are (e)material Kwak et al. ρ.14) y = -0.(1992) 0 3 1 0 0.25) y = -0. σ = 0. the variation of the here. αs) degree(F of fume e= e c .021x + 1.5 1 0 0.5 1 0 0.26 y = 1.71) ( vu / v n) ρ [%] q = − λ ∇T ρ [%] Figure 6. in these two modified models correspond well to this the current and prior data of SFRLC beams in terms of .1524x + 1. Heat conduction can be 1 described in concrete.28 (mean = 1.5. The 2/3 ⎛ d⎞ 3 governing (Equation be completed (4) vn = 3. (2002). and τ ment. σ = 0.shear This models sorptionand isotherm readily lightreads concrete modification factor (λ).14) y = 0.0 if (a/d) isotherm” if measured with increasing relativity fiber > 3.33.62)  e 1 c   4 5 6 7 4 2 Measured f'c [ksi] Measured f'c [ksi] Measured f' [ksi] where ∂we/∂h is the slope of the sorption/desorption isotherm (also called moisture capacity).41as τF). (2002). term 6.7 y = -0. thus.3. α c (mean .3.(1992) (model A) (b) Kwak et al. referenceλto f cuf (MPa) (5) f spfc = 0. in time of the water mass per unit that the variation d⎞ a ⎞ be equal to the ⎛ ⎛ content volume of concrete vn = [ Eq.(1992) be calibrated by fitting data relevant to (h)experimental Kwak et al.(2002) (i) Li et al. water of the evaporable water w is the average fiber matrixe interfacial bond stress. the second design eα eα & & & w + + ∇ SFRLC • ( D ∇h) beams = − e equation for is based on (3) the c proposed s + n h ∂α ∂α ∂h ∂t c developed s SFRC shear strength equation by Kwak et al.T) is called moisture permeability and is⎞ a nonlinear function ⎛ it d ⎛ ⎞ 3 (MPa) T (Bažant (2) vn = f c′ + 7 F ⎟ 3 λ 2 humidity ρ temperature ⎜ 2. (a/d) as obtains (continued). vapor. was part of paper the semi-empirical expression proposed by studies (Ashour et al. α .(2002) and parameters. σ  = 1. and λ is the heat conductivity. σ = 0. Kwak et al.columns) T is the absolute Figure center depicts that temperature. the temperature field is not uniform for non-adiabatic systems even if the environmental temperature is constant.15 MPa based on the recom1966.7e ( fequation vb must(MPa) ρ ⎜ ⎟ + 0.95% of the isotherm for HPC is a influenced by many parameters. σ = 0.33 (mean = 1.5 Vf [%] Vf [%] w α s c α s G s e g αc αc h Vf [%] ( vu / vn) K (α2 c αs . i.1. et al.5. Pantazopoulo & Mills 1995).0474 1.1).A) which reads 0 y = 0. temperature. σ = 0. The ratio (vone u/vn) vs.39. and fspfc is the case.0006 x + 1. two different relation.5 (water ]⎜ ⎟ + vb ⎜ 2. The(acoefficient G (arepresents 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 21 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 3 water per unit volume held in the gel pores at 100% relative humidity. Vf (continued).fiber the ACI humidity. (capillary isotherm) represents capillary water. The lightweight concrete assume that the evaporable water is a function of modification factor (λ) of 0. 1992.14) 10(g α − α c )h  σ = 0.(2007) (model Fourier’s law. (1993).511x + 0.5 1 0 1 0 V (Di [%] Luzio & Cusatis V [%] V [%] various ages 2009b).3.31 − 0. 1 (6) e g αc αc h Figure 6. cube strength. α s )e 1 c   − α c )h (4)  − 1   ( v u / vn) 0 where the first term (gel 40 isotherm) represents the 30 40 50 30 50 30 40 50 0 physically bound (adsorbed) water Measured and the second Measured f' [MPa] Measured f' [MPa] f' [MPa] Figure The ratio of (vu/vn) vs. ∂w ∂w shear strength ∂ w ∂h Alternatively. 1 (5) s (f) Khuntia et al. 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ρ [%] (7) where q 6is(left the and heat flux.6. The(g) material parameters kcvg and ksvg and g1 can Ashour et al. must be used tostrength the sign of of SFRLC. 1994).75 for obtains fiber or hooked fiber. − ⎟w)(MPa) (3) (2) 2.0002x + 1. Note found to describe the sorption isotherm of normal that quantification of the effect of arch action for concrete (Xi et al. ‘‘sorption isotherm” will be used with 2 both sorption and desorption conditions.(1992) (model A) 0 free (evaporable) water content in 0. weight 5 6 7 c 7 0 4 5 6 3 1   x + 4. Df is the steel fiber diameter. (2) and (3).2f’c is especially those that influence extent rate of the recommended as was used by Kwak and et al. evaporable water vs relative humidity. 1992). 1994). This expression is valid only for low content /d) /d) /d) the(aamount of of SF.016 x + 1.2 Temperature evolution ρ [%] ρ [%] ρ [%] 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 3 that. In the first design modelcomposition. the curing time and method.5 divergence of the moisture flux J a⎠ d⎠ ⎝ ⎝ for (a/d) < 2. determine pore This model empirically considers the arch action. Neglecting their difference (Xi(5). s) 1= 0. f f f 1 2. (chemically by bound) water Swamy wn (Mills mendations Li et al. measured f’c the (continued).7) c α c+ ks α s G (α c α s ) = k vg c vg s 1 . can calculate K1of (d) Ashour et al.8 (mean = 1. cement chemical SF content.22y = 0. in turn. As is the area of tension flexural reinforceThe water content w can be expressed the sum is the fiber pullout stress (= 0.(1992) (k) Kwak et al. hydration. (2002). provisions degree of (§8. σ = 0.469x + 3.J = −D ( h .25) (mean = 1. by (j) Ashour et al. at least for temperature not exceeding 100°C (Bažant & Kaplan 1996). 318-08 code The . 3.0759 y = -0. αc. and d the bond factor f is assumption by 0.

Prof. §11. However.6. reference to both sorption andSantidesorption c ago.6. or unit weight of concrete were also examined. if the hysteresis Leonardo Massone and Prof. The results signal that all the conventional stirrups could be replaced by use of steel fibers for lightweight concrete (as permitted for SFRC by ACI 318-08. it is recommended that this study not be considered conclusive on this point due to the lack of data and the absence of comparative studies between SFRLC beams with and without stirrups.8). are heartily capac isotherm (also called moisture acknowledged for their energetic and enthusiastic governing equation (Equation 3) must be participation.of the By the way. which are increasingly popular the United States. temperature. The proportionality coefficient D(h. the lightweight concrete modification factor (λ) of 0. 2008. while extensive (waterstructure and pore size distribution calibration analysis is presently OU. The measured peak shear forces of the tested SFRLC beams (Kang & Kim. more experimental data on SFRLC beams both with and without stirrups would be very useful. 2010 The work presented in this paper was sponsored by ∂w ∂w ∂w ∂h eα the Oklahoma Transportation Center Grante α & & + ∇ • (D ∇h) = under − e c + s + w h ∂α and REU ∂α ∂h Research ∂t No. Here. Kyu Kim. as well. also assuming that the ACI 318 specified minimum amount of shear stirrups are provided. assistants c s students (Kah Mun Lam. case. The relation between the amount of e Also. Thus. safety (minimum greater than unity) and structural efficiency (maximum less than 1. J= − D ( h .e. Under this assum by substituting Equation 1 into Equati ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS & FUTURE STUDY obtains curing time and method. These models are only applicable to the SFRLC beams without stirrups. a term associated with the momentshear interaction (e. however.1(f)). In the literature various formulatio REFERENCES found to describe the sorption isotherm concrete (Xi et al.2(a)) could be reduced to improve concrete workability. Sung-Gul Hong at isotherm” measured with increasing Seoul National University. Structural in turn. = age-dependent sorption/desorption 5 (Norling Mjonell 1997). degree of hydration of comparative studies beams α with degreebetween of silica SFRLC fume reaction. however. Yoon-Keun Kwak at Kumoh National water and relative humidity is called ‘‘ Insititute of Technology and if Prof.g. and model calibrations using the prior data.4. Building Code Requirements for paper semi-empirical expression pro Structural Concrete (ACIthe 318-08) and Commentary (318RNorling Mjornell (1997) is adopted b Proceedings of FraMCoS-7. Thomas Kang (PI) are isotherm would be novel taken into account. 1994).6. The data were evaluated mainly in terms of the steel fiber volume fraction and the shear span-to-depth ratio. i. Thein water content w can be expressed a 6) The reported results signal that all the of the evaporable water wconvene (capillary wa tional stirrups could be replaced by use of vapor. (11-3) and (11-15) of ACI 318-08.4 MPa) in Section 11. consistency (standard deviation). permeability and it is a nonlinea 5) Two shear of strength models for SFRLC the relative humidity h andbeams temperature without stirrups [eqution (2) & (3) and eqution (4) & balanc & Najjar 1972).1-27.5% to 0. .T) when (a/d) is 3 ormoisture less.e. The shape of the tive failures. ratio.75% improves the resistance to structural damage and ultimate shear strength in SFRLC by roughly 25% to 45% (based on the research by Kang & Kim 2009). two currently co-developing robust and nonlinear relation. Finally.2) volume with of concrete content w) be eq provision for thedivergence lightweight modification of concrete the moisture flux J factor (λ = 0. evaporable water vs relative humi modeling techniques for according steel fiber-reinforced conbe used to the sign of the varia crete members susceptible to flexure-shear interacrelativity humidity.75 is conservatively applicable to the steel fiber-reinforced beam. May 23-28.and especially those that influence thors of this paper at the Donald G. are grate. the following were found: 1) The shear strength of the steel fiber-reinforced normalweight concrete beam is slightly larger than that of the steel fiber-reinforced lightweight concrete beam.6. for his active participation in the project. in th ACI Committee 318. Norman. material and reinforcing properties. random variation (slope of linear regression line). Michael Van Zandt.in th humidity and ‘‘desorption isotherm” fully thanked for their willing discussion and support. a/d) should be included in the shear strength equation of SFRLC beams. we=w and without stirrups. the minimum amount is determined based on ACI 318-08. §11. Other variables related to steel fibers. mix etc. 2) The addition of steel fibers with Vf of 0. determ Engineering Laboratory of OU. §11. Based on the study. It is reas mended that this assume study not be considered conclusive that the evaporable water is a fu on this point due relative to the lack of data h and the absence humidity. Perhaps these − two ∂t models could be conservatively used for precast..). This study also signals that the limitation of f’c (41. SF . s. The support from the faculty and staff conditi by appropriate boundary and initial of OU is highly appreciated. The moisture mass (5)] have been proposed based on available SFRC rethat the variation in time of the water mas search and in accordance the ACI(water 318-08 (§11. This is mainly due to the brittle nature of shear failure and the lack of available experimental data.75).1(f) could be increased.4.4. both in Korea.4. 3) The shear span-to-depth ratio adversely affects the shear strength of the lightweight fiber-reinforced beam. As isotherm part of this ongoing work. the authors would like to recognize Prof.. cement underway chemical at composition. and∂w John Paul Badasci) at the where e/∂h is the slope of the sorption/ University of Oklahoma (OU).75% 3 (i.1(f)). largefor carried HPC is out influenced by many p scale experimental testing is by theextent au. Neglecting their difference (Xi et al. T ) ∇h 4) The ACI 318 minimum requirement of 0. & Mills it1995). for design models. Prof. Saagar Patel. These models correspond well to the existing data with reasonable ∂w = ∇ • J precision and repeatability. and adsorbed water)steel and fithe non-e bers for lightweight concrete (as permitted for SFRC (chemically bound) water wn (Mil by ACI 318-08. For these expansions. 60 kg/m ) for shear resistance (§5. Fears chemical reactions and. 4 SUMMARY & FINDINGS The study herein was comprised of a re-assessment of data from previous structural and material tests.the prediction (mean).6. 2009) are at least 30% larger than the ACI 318 shear strengths (Vn) of imaginary beams with the same details but without steel fibers. ‘‘sorption isotherm” Leonardo Massone at the University of Chile. is recomPantazopoulo however.6.will be the following.1(f). and Vn is calculated from equations (11-2). prestressed SFRLC girders. OTCREOS9.

1999.-G. USA. In the literature various formulations be 624-628. T.-K. D. α Fibre weSteel = G1 (α c . and & Goel. Measurement of Properties of Fiber The proportionality coefficient is called Reinforced Concrete (ACI 544. W. R.). by appropriate boundary andLightweight initial conditions. and it can be expressed (Norling Mjornell 1997) as c α c+ ks α s G (α c α s ) = k vg c vg s . 1978. i. Workability of Steel Fireads bre Reinforced Lightweight Aggregate Concrete. Shear of Normal andhysteresis High-Strength ByStrength the way. & Ramakrishman. in ing Neglecting Fly Ash.. R.. Kim. Shear Toughness of Lightweight Fiber-Reinforced Concrete. cement chemical composition. LA. 89 (2): 176-184. 89 especially those that influence extent and rate of (5): the 499-508. Patel.1994).S. Sharma.H. Park. J. ACI Materials Journal.. C.. one can calculate K1 as one obtains w K (α c α s ) = .P. ACI Materials Journal . Wight. A. A. temperature.2R-78). MI. of American Society flux for Testing and Materials Annual Book of ASTM Standards. 75 (7): 283-290. if the of Fiber the Reinforced moisture Concrete Beams without Stirrups. 19: 307-313. Use of Steel Fibers as structure and pore size distribution (water-to-cement Shear Reinforcement. Swamy. Mortelmans. ACI JOURNAL. 1999.G. V. T is the absolute temperature. Fiber Reinforced (Mills 1966. M.. The water content w can be expressed as the sum Balaguru. 227. Ward. Hassanain. International Journal of Cement Composites and Lightweight Concrete.-K. G. A. A. Proceedings. M.. 90 (5): 399-405. Lam. substituting Equation 1 into Equation 2 one Cement and Concrete Composites . the temperature field is not uniform for non-adiabatic systems even if the environmental temperature is constant. 2008. O. This expression is valid only for low content of SF.N.Journal water of Structural the evaporable water we (capillary 93 (1): 62-78. R. V. Reinforced Pantazopoulo & Mills 1995). ACI humidity Fall Convention. 1993.-S. at least for temperature not exceeding 100°C (Bažant & Kaplan 1996). N. Y. 90 (4): 342-355. Self-Consolidating Concrete. isotherm” if measured with increasing relativity Kayali. The shape of the sorption without stirrups. & Wafa. as Shear Reinforcement.O. two different 96 (2): 282-289. MI. S. which reads q = − λ ∇T (7) Norling Mjornell (1997) is adopted because it Proceedings of FraMCoS-7. 1992. S.A. & Zhu. that the variation in time of Aggregate. M. reactions and.   Swamy. Synthetic Fibers isotherm forR.2 Temperature evolution Note that. Drying Shrinkage of humidity and ‘‘desorption in the opposite Fibre-Reinforced Lightweight Aggregate Concrete Containcase. West Conshohocken. Li. 1992.N. Kang. 1 0 − 0. Influence of  10(g A. American assume that the evaporable water is a function of Concrete Institute.Y. & Banthia. 104 (1): 12-22. From the maximum amount of water per unit volume that can fill all pores (both capillary pores and gel pores).T. Headed Bars The and isotherm (also called moisture capacity). e eα e α wn + ∇ • ( D ∇h ) = − (3) s High-Strength 1997. Eberhard. USA: 456. 1 (5) &+ &+ & where kcvg and ksvg are material parameters. F. Fiber Reinforced crete Developments and the Innovations . Oh.αc.M.N. determine pore chemical Narayanan. isotherm” B. American explicitly accounts for evolution of hydration Concrete Institute. K. ACI Structural Journal. 1982a. (chemically bound) water wn Fiber Concrete Properties and Applications. 2010 where q is the heat flux. 19 (9): 738-747. (1) 08). • J& Dipsia. T.K. OK.S. obtains H. 4 (2): 103-109. Van Zandt. M. hydration. F. and adsorbed water) and the non-evaporable Balaguru.D(h. curing time and method. evaporable water vs relative humidity. 1996.. in the present Laboratory-Sized High-Strength Concrete Beams Reinpaper the semi-empirical expression proposedConby forced with Bars and Steel Fibers. Mechanical Properties of (Norling Mjonell 1997).K. water. & Kim.N. h& . vapor. Promoisture permeability and it is a nonlinear function ceedings. and Steel Fiber-Reinforced Concrete Beams with Web Reindegree of silica fume reaction. M. ACI Structural Journal. and λ is the heat conductivity. P. reaction and SF content. USA. Choi. must Kwak. SP-142. 1987.H. Properties of Fiber ReinBalaguru. 1993.09. W. J. & Ghosh. by Fourier’s law. & Najjar 1972).e. L. 2. 1994.TShear Beof the relative humidity h and temperature (Bažant havior of High-Strength FiberReinforced Concrete Beams.-K. αs. & Morino. Vandewalle. K. S. Research in Progress Session. This sorption isotherm Swamy. S..H. 2009. ACI Structural Journal. Impact  (h. High-Strength. 1993.K. HPC is influenced bySteel many parameters. USA: 305-322. West Conshohocken. we=we(h. at early age. of Fibrec Reinforced h ∂α ∂α ∂h ∂t Shear Domain c s Concrete Beams.-W. Oklahoma City. 1993. The coefficient G1 represents the amount of water per unit volume held in the gel pores at 100% relative humidity.-K. USA. be Shear used Strength according to the sign of the variation the of Steel Fiber-Reinforced Concrete of Beams relativity humidity. Shear Behavior of concrete (Xi et al. Shear Strength of Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete Beams. New ‘‘adsorption Orleans. R.4   c Concrete 1 c eand Lightweight   (4) (4): 209-220. R. mix additives.αs) forcement. Detroit. conditions. 2008. 1987. ∞ α − α )h Journal of Cement Composites . J. S.T) ACI Journal . PA... degree of 2007. Lightweight Conby crete. MI. & Van Gemert. T )∇h Concrete Institute. ACI Structural . the slope sorption/desorption where ∂we/∂h Highway Bridges Using Steel Fibers. α s )e Journal. t ∂ forced High-Strength Semilightweight Concrete. ACI c . can 83 (4): etc. Haque. ACI Committee 544.. The moisture mass balance requires ACI Structural Journal. Concrete Mineral Book of volume of concrete (water content w ) be equal to the ASTM Standards. Farmington Hills. Reliefof of the Reinforcing Congestion in is 2009. It is reasonable to Concrete Properties and Applications. water and 2009 relative is called USA. ACI Structural Journal . Farmington Hills.H. Shear Strength of relative humidity. . I.F. α s )Reinforced s )1 − 10(g Concrete.. ∂w ∂w ∂w ∂h Imam. Sun. in this . divergence the moisture J ASTM. Properties of Fiber Reinforced Lightweight Concrete. However..    Theodorakopoulos. 2009 OTC-ODOT Research governing equation (Equation 3) must be completed Day. Cement and Concrete Research 29 (11): the1835-1840. & Foden. & Kim. PA. N. 1986.D. & Darwish. in turn.P. 04.M. Kang. B. 1994). J. SF content.. Under this assumption and Steel Fiber-Reinforced. Concrete Beams The Steel relation between the amount of evaporable with Fiber Shear Reinforcement. W. Resistance of 1  1982b. 1997. USA: 181-200. α ∞ − α )h  ConSteel Fibers on the Shear Resistance c − 1 1 c of Lightweight  K1 (αStructural crete I-Beams. 90 (1): 103-114. & Badasci. since the chemical reactions associated with cement hydration and SF reaction are exothermic. P. May 23-28. Engineering Structures. isotherm would be taken into account. relation. Jones. (2) − ∂w = ∇ P. Heat conduction can be described in concrete. 2002. R. both sorption desorption Khuntia. A. Contribution of Steel Fibers to the Strength Characteristics of Lightweight Slab-Column Connections Failing the in where theConcrete first term (gel isotherm) represents Punching Shear. ACI Materials Journal. 84(3): 216ratio.. ‘‘sorption isotherm” will be used with reference to Stojadinovic. W. & Hamza. Kim.J= − D (American h. H. following. the water Annual mass per unit ASTM. & Swamy. their difference (Xi et al. Ashour. αc. ACI Structural Journal. physically bound (adsorbed) water and the second term (capillary isotherm) represents the capillary water. αLightweight + International  c . Correlating Flexural and Higashiyama. M. & Chiam.188 α s + 0. & Jojagha. J. K. 99 (4): 530-538. & Jojagha. 105 (3): 251-257. SP-105. D.-K. = age-dependent sorption/desorption isotherm Gao..22α s G c s   − 1 − 1      e 10     ∞ − α h  g αc c 1     (6) e  10  g αc − αc h − ∞ 1 1 The material parameters kcvg and ksvg and g1 can be calibrated by fitting experimental data relevant to free (evaporable) water content in concrete at various ages (Di Luzio & Cusatis 2009b). found to describe the sorption isotherm of normal Shin.