ANALYSIS OF STRESS AND STATE OF STEEL FIBER REINFORCED CONCRETE BEAMS SUBJECTED TO FLEXURE AND SHEAR

R. Šalna, G. Marčiukaitis Dept of Reinforced Concrete and Masonry Structures, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saulėtekio al. 11, LT-2040 Vilnius. E-mail: gelz@st.vtu.lt Received accepted
Abstract: This paper analyses the influence of steel fiber volume and shear span ratio on the strength of fiber reinforced concrete elements in various states of stress. 36 beams with three different shear spans (a/h=1, 1,5, and 2) and three different fiber volumes (1, 1,5, and 2 percent) were tested to examine how these factors influence the behavior of such elements. Test results suggest that steel fiber volume and shear span can increase load capacity, plasticity and cracking. Experimental research showed that steel fiber volume has different influence at different shear span ratios. Regression analysis of experimental data was carried out and empirical approach showing different effect of these factors was proposed. Furthermore, test results were compared with different theoretical and empirical approaches of other authors. Keywords: Steel fiber reinforced concrete, load capacity, plasticity

1. Introduction Different building structures, such as beamless reinforced concrete slabs, footings of foundation, shear in beams, have a brittle failure mode and versatile complex stress behavior [1-3]. This failure occurs when tensile strength exceeds limit values. This failure is usually very sudden due to brittle behavior of plain concrete in tension. Steel fiber reinforced concrete (SFRC) is well known as a plastic composite material with significantly higher tensile strength, resistance to crack formation and propagation, which can replace brittle failure mode to plastic in punching shear [4-6], or shear in beams [7-12]. The research of stress-strain state shows that failure is influenced by bending moment and shear force ratio (shear span and depth ratio) [13, 14], because shear stresses have significant effect on principal stresses. Design methods of tensile strength of SFRC and its behavior in various states of stress are differently estimated by some authors [4, 7, 15, 16]. It shows that stress and strain state of fiber reinforced concrete at different bending moment and shear span ratios is not fully analyzed. That is why it is reasonable to analyze SFRC as a composite material in versatile complex stress behavior. This paper presents results of the test results in flexural steel fiber reinforced concrete beams under different bending moment and shear force (shear span and depth) ratios. Regression analysis of experimental data was carried out, and empirical approach showing different effect of these factors was proposed. Furthermore, test results were

compared with different theoretical and empirical approaches of other authors [4, 7, 15, 16]. 2. Methodology of experimental research Three series of tests with three different shear spans (a/h=1, 1,5, and 2, see Fig 2) and three different fiber volumes (1, 1,5, and 2 percent) were carried out in this experimental program. The research aimed to imitate various stress strain states with different fiber volumes ranging from simple bending elements [19, 20] to deep beams [14]. Therefore, such different shear span values were chosen. 36 specimens, including plain concrete, were tested. The cross section of specimens b × h = 100 × 200 mm, and length 500; 750;1000 mm. Water cement ratio w/c for all beams was equal to 0,51. Figure 1 shows loading configuration and layout of different gauges.

Fig 1. Loading configuration and location of gauges, where 1 is deflection gauges, and 2 is strain gauges

SFRC / Fu .In the tests reported.79) 77.26) 39.46(1.56) 90 80 70 y1 60 50 40 30 20 y1 = 1. Specimens were reinforced with three volume fractions: 1. plastic strains can be observed at higher load capacity values: when a / h = 1. During the test. Failure of specimens ( a / h = 1. the greatest influence on load capacity is observed at shear span ratio a / h = 1 .55).86) a / h = 1. MPa Average load capacities of beams Fu . For example. Fig 4.55…0. It is clearly seen that load capacity. 3. when a / h = 1.95 41.89 times.46) 29.Concrete ) a/h =1 0% 1% 1. the growth of both deflections and load capacity is observed. This case reminds the case of deep beam in the way that principal stresses are strongly influenced by shear stresses.292V 3 f 0 1 Fu .65…0.20 42. plasticity and cracking of the element.302V f 10 y = 0. After increasing fiber volume from 1 to 2 percent.4…0.4(1.78) Fu .5 Fig 3.5 kg/m3.5% 2% 46.20(1. whereas at low values of ratio a / h .5% 1% } }y 2 Concrete y2 } } 3 } 1.54 times. Besides. the increase from 1. Influence of fiber volume V f and shear span ratio a / h on load capacity of tested beams As the curves on Fig 2 show. 5 and a / h = 2 . load capacity grows from 1.cube . deflections significantly grow with a small rise in load capacity. this influence is different.23(1. With the increase of V f . when a / h = 1 .kN { 2% 1.993 + 0.% f c . Besides. Load deflection curves with various fiber volumes V f and shear span ratios a / h The analysis of tension and compression strains showed (Fig 5) that with increasing a / h . 1. These dimensions correspond to the aspect ratio of l / d = 50 /1 = 50 Nominal yield strength of steel fibers was f yk = 1100 MPa.29 45.021 + 0.62 to 1. is influenced by V f .54) 26.14 to 1. Fiber volume has significant influence on plasticity and compression zone of the element.5 ) Fiber volume V f and shear span ratio a / h have significant influence on deflection. 1.50(1. fiber volume . tensile and compression strain. and 157 kg/m3. (0. where fiber length was 50 mm and fiber diameter was 1 mm.5 and 2 percent (78. respectively. kN ( y = Fu . is observed.14) 27. in variation of V f at different a / h . depending on these factors.56 and 1.996 + 0. fiber type MPZ50/1. the increase of load capacity is not so significant.62) 74. Art.585V f y2 = 0.00) 67.1010 (Metalproducts Ltd) was applied. with different V f and a / h .30(1. midspan deflections. a/h = 2 19.8 kg/m3. At high values of ratio a / h . as well as strain in the tension zone near the crack of the beams.00) 21. Table 1 Summary of test program V f . 5 a/ h Fig 2. compression zone plastic hinge is formed like one in simple bending beam. three different groups of elements can be defined in respect of load capacity as well as deflections. respectively. normal crack destroys compression zone in nearly the same manner as in the concrete element.30 45.65) and (0. 117.13(1.40(1. As the curves presented on Fig 4 show.10(1. were measured. Average load capacities of tested beams are presented in Table 1. Typical failure of specimens is demonstrated in Fig. No.9(1.00) 33. The load was applied to the beams through a 100x100x10 mm steel plate. ductile strain appears at failure loads (0.49) 41.90(1.14(1. With small V f . 2.5 and 2. At higher values of shear span ratio. and their graphical expression is shown on Fig.26 to 1. respectively).

σt . 015V 1. 1.5 % 1. εc is tension and compression strains.00 { 1% 1. at fiber volume V f =1. } } λ SFRC = λ c 1 − 0. State of strain and stress - - 0 0.5 a/ h= 2 2 % 1 . was equal to 68-72.5 a / h = 1 . compared with methods [4. Cracking of elements with various fiber volumes V f and shear span ratios a / h 3.8) and (0. The analysis of experimental data showed that the position of neutral axis depends on the elasticity and plasticity of material. method [15] most closely corresponds to test results. 2c). (2a) ⎨ ⎩σt = Ec εt ν SFRC Fig7. respectively (Fig 7). because fiber volume was evaluated using SFRC structure modeling and not empirical coefficients. 5% 1.50 1. Using the hypothesis of plain sections (Eq 2a) and state of strain and stress. though having different characters. The character of curves in methods [15. 1.5 and 2 percent. the influence of V f is overestimated in some cases and even exceeds test results. with the variation of V f . Comparing theoretical and test results.a. cracks appear at failure loads (0. 5% 1% 1% 0. 7. εt . .u ⎩ (2b) σc λ SFRC x + 0.5 % 1% 2% } } / a /h = 1 εc x σc xλ SFRC x n. (0. 5% 1% 2% 1. However. (2c) After simple calculations the position of neutral axis can be described by this equation: x 2 ( 0. at different a / h .5 and 2.8…0.85) Fu . the influence of shear stresses on principal stresses and fiber volume effect on the height of compression zone are the main factors determining load capacity. h a / h = 1 . is not similar (they are not parallel).00 0. and ν SFRC = 1 − λ SFRC is the coefficient of elasticity.5 (1 + λ SFRC ) − ν SFRC ) + x ( 2hν SRFRC ) − ν SFRC h 2 = 0 . When a/h=1. 5% Concrete h−x εt h−x σt Concrete 2% }a h=2 1% 1. 16] better correspond to test results.7). In SFRC beams it was noticeably greater: the average height of compression zone. respectively.5 Fu . and σc are tension and compression stresses. respectively.6…0. kN 2% 1 . Methods [4. The coefficient of plasticity of SFRC can be expressed by the following equation based on regression analysis: These factors also influence the cracking of elements.5 . 72-75 and 76-78 mm. 16] are more conservative. f ( ) (1) } where λ c is the coefficient of plasticity of plain concrete. Comparing theoretical methods.50 ε ⋅ 10 −3 (mm / mm ) 1. ⎨ ⎪εt = εt .50 80 70 60 50 Fu. In conclusion. Comparison and analysis of theoretical and experimental results The comparison of theoretical and experimental results. is εt x ⎧ ⎪εc = h− x . the curves in methods [15. (3) where Ec is the modulus of elasticity. However. 5 Tension and compression strains with various fiber volumes V f and shear span ratios a / h has significant influence on the height of compression zone. The character of curves is similar in empirical methods [4. 7] (curves are parallel). all authors estimate fiber volume as a linear function.50 Fig 6.5σc ( x − λ SFRC x ) − σt ( h − x ) = 0 .00 Fig.7…0. shown in Fig 6 (Eq 2b. presented on Fig 8. was equal to 64-65 mm in conventional concrete element. Experiments show that the average height of compression zone at 0. the position of neutral axis can be expressed as follows (3): ⎧σc = Ec εc .a/ h=1 { { - 2% 1. 7]. 16].

and a / h can be expressed as one function. was proposed.000 + 0 .t . Table 3 presents how differently authors estimate the influence of fiber volume on load capacity. the increase from 1. quite good results can be achieved with a more simple function. 1. These factors determine the difference between theoretical results.165V f y = 1.2 and V f = 1. Test Rabinovic [ Stepanova [ Harralji [ ] Narayan [ ] 15] 16] estimated by the same equations. 634 . h = −0. 9. 3. SFRC behaves differently in shear.039) β= Fu . the influence of shear span ratio and fiber volume on load capacity can be estimated with reliability of the function equal to 0.972 + 0 . and variation factor is 0.966. 249 = ⎜1. and variation factor exceeds 0. 16].5 ⎟ . because such values can exist.14. empirical equation.62 to 1. therefore such great difference occurs.Concrete y = 0 . load capacity grows from 1. At higher values of shear span ratio.953(0.26 to 1.505V f y = 1.. evaluating steel fiber volume and plastic properties of plain concrete.075) Equations in Table 3 show that the influence of V f can be expressed by linear function (reliability is high and variation factor is low).021 + 0 .067.312V f0. is observed. An empirical equation for the coefficient of plasticity of SFRC.955 (0. c = 1.5 % 2% ..585V f y = 0 . 2).5 a/h=2 y = 0 .913 + 0.067) 0. (12) 2 ⎜ ⎟ (a / h) ⎝ ⎠ −1 [15] ( y = 0. Reliability of polynomial function is 0. Load capacity of tested beams. 498 . 1. when a / h = 1.999 (0.168) 0. because reliability is only 0. anchorage of fibers in concrete matrix and concrete strength characteristics are estimated differently. 218 .098) 0.049) 0.202V f f Reliability of function (variation factor) 0..953 (0.83. 2.058) 0. This function cannot be expressed as a linear function.Concrete ⎜ ⎝h⎠ ⎝h⎠ ⎜ ⎟ 2 ⎛a⎞ ⎜ ⎛a⎞ 2 ⎟ ⎜ +i ⎜ h ⎟ V f + + j ⎜ h ⎟ V f ⎟ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ where a ' = 3.158 − − 0. Besides. i = 0.(11) ⎟ Fu . clearly show different influence of V f on load capacity at different a / h . evaluating these factors. this effect for SFRC is . Table 3 The ratio of SFRC and concrete specimens load capacities in variation of V f Method y = Fu . When a / h = 1 . Influence of shear span ratio on load capacity at various fiber volume V f .292V f 0. the influence of these factors can be demonstrated by the following polynomial function: 2 ⎛ ⎞ a ⎛a⎞ 2 a b cV d ' + + + ' ⎜ f ⎜ ⎟ + eV f + ⎟ h ⎝h⎠ ⎜ ⎟ 3 ⎜ ⎟ Fu .t < f c .14 to 1. For example. 5 and a / h = 2 .993 + 0 .560 .5 2 a/h Fig 8. 7. but it could not be applied to method [15] (Eq.613 (0. d ' = 3. distribution of steel fibers in principal section.996 + 0 .001) 0.331 . 13].54 times.56 and 1.816 . SFRC Fu . However. Based on regression analysis of experimental data.Concrete ⎛ ⎞ 0.167V f In this equation. Experimental researches show that fiber volume and shear span ratio is very important. After regression analyses of 36 beams. in variation of volume fraction at different a/h. but bending with shear. f = −2. Test results show that plastic strains are greatly influenced by steel fiber volume.2% . SFRC / Fu .90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Fu. e = 0.. is expressed through empirical coefficients by many authors [8. The ratio of SFRC and concrete specimens load capacities is expressed by equations. The difference between plain concrete and SFRC is clearly illustrated on Fig 3. Conclusions 1.. was proposed. V f . at which f SFRC . y = 1. the so-called “arch action”.195 .913 + 0 . in deep beams influenced not only by bending. can also be expressed in the following way: 4 7 Concrete 1 1.097. However.021 + 0 . 248 .89 times. is different. SFRC ⎛a⎞ ⎛a⎞ β= = ⎜ + f ⎜ ⎟ V f + g ⎜ ⎟ + hV f3 + ⎟ . g = −0. The increase of load capacity within the range of a / h = 1. 4.937 . analyzing reinforced concrete behavior in shear.kN SFRC 1 % .906 (0.991 (0. compared with plain concrete. the increase of load capacity is not so significant. and j = 0.06V ) 3 [16] [4] [7] Regression analysis a/h=1 a/h=1. This influence. The table also shows empirical expressions provided by regression analysis of test results. The analysis of theoretical methods demonstrates that fiber volume. 4.928 (0. Empirical expressions. 403 .302V f y = 0 . Linear function is applied in methods [4. respectively. b = −5.92 and variation factor equal to 0. This effect can be explained by decreasing ratio a / h . provided by regression analysis. This expression β and those two mentioned above parameters can be expressed as a surface function.

MARČIUKAITIS.. 157-163. F. R. ASCE Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering. p. 1974. SHARMA. 105-112. MARCIUKAITIS. 8(2). 624628. Steel and Synthetic Fibers as Shear Reinforcement. Shear strength of steel fibers – reinforced concrete beams without stirrups. MAALEJ. Lacer . M. 506 p.. p. S.. Shear Strength Prediction of Separate Categories of Simple Beams Test. 134 p. Researches of Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete in Gradient of Stress State.. Punching Behaviour of High Performance Concrete Columns with Fibre Cocktails. 8. 530538. S. VAINIŪNAS. p. MAALEJ. Cement and Concrete Composites. 2. (in Russian).. A. p. M. Flexural/Tensile Strength ratio in Engineering Cementitious Composites. 7. N. (in Russian). H. 28 p. S. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management. Mazzolani. CHO.. KHATIB. Composite material based on the fiber reinforced concrete. G. 1992.. 6(4). Advanced Cement Based Materials. KUTZING. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management. A. 18. 2003. ŠALNA. 84(4). 6. Moscow: Publishing Office ASV. Farmington Hills. G. KONING. 10(2). N. 1987. p. R. 3. Michigan. HAMZA. 77–82. 16. 1992. MARČIUKAITIS. KIM. Stepanova. 5. ACI Journal. R. F. 138-143. Summary of Doctoral thesis. 1993.. 1971. (in Lithuanian). Structures and Technique. Shear strength prediction by Modified Plasticity Theory for Short Beams. 253–260. p. ACI Material Journal. 17. J. Institute of Civil Engineering. S.. structures. DARWISH. S. V. 2004. 390406. 68(2). technology. M. KIM. Vilnius: Technika. H.. ŠALNA. p. S. American Concrete Institute. p. V. 157(SB2). I. V. Analysis of resistance to punching shear of beamless reinforced concrete floor slabs. Rabinovich. C.. 216-227. G. LI. LI. p. ACI Structural Journal. 513-527. On the Shear Behaviour of Engineered Cementitious Composites. The Principles of Creation and Prognoses of Structures Composites. p. Punching Shear Behavior Analysis of RC Flat Floor Slab-to-Column Connection. design. MAGNAT. The questions of theory. Use of Steel Fibers as Shear Reinforcement.. ed E. 19. 2000. MAALOUF. Estimation of Factors Influencing Punching Shear Strength of RC Floor Slabs. 11. C. ACI Structural Journal. KWAK.. p.References 1. V. POPOVAS. 4. ACI Structural Journal. Vilnius. 84(3). LI.. 137142. F.. ASHOUR. 12. V. G. 1994. Flexural Strength of Fiber Cementitious Composites. In Proc of the 8th International Conference Modern Building Materials. Zavadskas. Shear Strength of Steel Fibers Reinforced beams. C. 14. S. S.. SWAMY. Sankt-Peterburg. In Fiber reinforced concrete. 1998. D. 6(3). 1986. VAINIŪNAS. P.5. p. Vainiūnas and F. P. 17. NARAYANAN. M. 499-508. Vilnius. C. RAO. ZSUTTY T. K. 1994. WAFA. Selected papers. G. The Mechanics of Fiber Reinforcement of Cement Matrices. 2002. G. G. 9. Y. 615-619.. P. ACI Structural Journal. R. 2004. Technika. JARMOLAJEV. A. p. LI. Strength of steel fiber reinforced concrete ground slabs. Special Publication No 44. CHEN. p. L. 176-184. 1-28. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers . K. C. 10. p. 1975. V. p. HARAJLI. P. 142-149. 2004. M. 89(5). 2002. R. K. A. 1. 2004. W. HASSANAIN. ACI Journal. 161-170. Y. Effect of Fibers on the Punching Shear Strength of Slab Column Connections. Shear Behavour of High-Strength Fiber Reinforced Concrete beams. 1995. . 13. K. P. VAINIŪNAS. 15.. Monograph. 19-22 May 2004. 99(4). 100(1). 89(2). H. p.. WARD. ASCE Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering. 20..Structures & Buildings.