Professional Documents
Culture Documents
INTRODUCTION
Fibres are discrete reinforcement that improve the post-cracking behaviour of concrete. While
common applications of fibre reinforced concrete (FRC) mainly deal with hyperstatic structures, the
use of FRC is also developed for single isostatic elements. From the economical point of view, the
goal is to replace shear reinforcement and in particular the minimum reinforcement required by
standards (Eurocode 2, ACI,...). Recently, theoretical models were developed and translated into the
new version of Model Code. The prediction of the shear capacity of beams in bending is based on
semi-empirical methods. In order to check these models, an experimental programme was carried out
on small concrete beams. In particular, the application of the models to macro synthetic fibre
reinforced concrete (SyFRC), hybrid steel fibre reinforced concrete (HySFRC) were verified.
Moreover, specific small shear span to depth ratio were also taken into account.
2 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAMME
Twenty-eight concrete beams were designed and tested under four-point bending. The beams
were designed to fail in shear according to Eurocode 2 (EN 1992-1-1). There were no stirrups in the
beams. The experimental parameters were the shear span to depth ratio (a/d), the fibre type and the
fibres dosage (Vf). For each concrete composition, three a/d were used: 0.5, 1.5 and 2.5 to reflect
(very) short beams. The beams with a very small a/d were used to check the limits of the prediction
models. The length of the beams was 2500mm with a free span of 2300mm (see Figure 1). The
cross-section (b x h) of the elements was 200 x 300 mm. In order to fail in shear, all the beams were
reinforced with two longitudinal reinforcement bars with a diameter of 20 mm, which corresponds to a
steel ratio of 1.21% for a cover of 30 mm and without stirrups. The longitudinal bars were properly
anchored. Three different types of fibre were used in the concrete. The first one was an undulated
steel fibre (UN), the second one was a steel fibre with a conical end anchorage (CF) and the last one
was a macro-synthetic fibre (Sy). The volume fractions (Vf) were 0.26% (20 kg/m) and 0.51% (40
kg/m) for the steel fibres and 0.49% (4.5 kg/m) for the macro-synthetic fibre. Synergetic effects of
steel fibres were also considered in the study by testing a mix of CF and UN fibres (at a respective
volume fraction of 0.26%). Finally, a reference series (B) with only longitudinal reinforcement but
without any fibres was also tested. Each series consists of 2 samples to improve the reliability of the
results.
B0
UN20
UN40
CF20
CF40
Sy4.5
CF20
+
UN20
Vf =0.51%
Cement [kg/m]
320
Coarse aggregate [kg/m]
1011
Fine aggregate [kg/m]
894
Water
176
High range water reducer [l/m]
1.25
w/c
0.55
Slump [mm]
> 50
Cube compressive strength
51.1
54.1
54.0
50.5
50.8
[N/mm]
NA
4.4
5.1
5.2
4.9
Flexural strength
( )
(10)
(5)
(7)
(7)
f L [N/mm] *
Residual strength at 0.5 mm
NA
2.2
4.5
3.3
4.3
CMOD
(16)
(28)
(13)
(31)
( )
f R1,m [N/mm] *
Residual strength at 2.5 mm
NA
1.7
3.7
2.8
2.9
( )
( )
CMOD * fR3,m [N/mm] *
(28)
(27)
(32)
(31)
Residual strength at 3.5 mm
NA
1.5
3.1
2.5
2.5
( )
( )
CMOD * fR4,m [N/mm] *
(22)
(30)
(29)
(48)
* The coefficient of variation (%) of residual strengths is given in brackets.
54.5
50.9
4.3
(8)
5.0
(6)
1.6
(14)
4.4
(15)
1.9
(17)
1.9
(13)
2.7
(26)
2.1
(28)
The macro-synthetic fibres (Sy) are made of a blend of polypropylene and polyethylene. This
fibrillated fibre differs substantially from the steel fibres by its lower tensile strength (ratio 1:1.8) and its
reduced elasticity modulus (ratio 1:42).
Table 2 : Nominal characteristics of the fibres
Tensile
Young
Density Length Diameter Aspect ratio
Fibre strength modulus
[kg/m] [mm]
[mm]
[/]
[N/mm] [kN/mm]
UN
1100
210
7850
50
1.0
50
CF
1100
210
7850
54
1.0
54
Sy
600
5
920
50
/
/
The characteristics of the hardened concrete were evaluated on companion samples cast together
with the beams. The average concrete compressive strength was 41.8 N/mm at 28 days measured
on cubes 150x150 mm according to EN 12390-3. The post-peak behaviour was quantified according
to the EN 14651 (based on the last RILEM recommendations) ie. by using a three-point bending test
(span=500 mm) on notched specimens with dimensions of 150x150x600mm.
The limit of
proportionality fL, the residual flexural tensile strengths fR1, fR3 and fR4 for a crack mouth opening
displacement (CMOD) of 0.5, 2.5 and 3.5 mm, respectively, were measured for each series. These
properties will be used to calculate the shear capacity with the help of two analytical models (RILEM
and fib) described later in this paper. Six specimens per FRC type were used for these bending tests.
The average results are given in Table 1.
The average curves of the bending tests exhibit residual strengths of more than 40% of the peak
(the flexural strength, here) up to a mid-span deflection = 3 mm that correspond to a CMOD of 3.5
mm (see Figure 2). This value of the crack mouth opening displacement is generally associated with
the ultimate limit state (ULS) for SFRC while a value of CMOD of 0.5 mm is more representative for
the serviceability limit state (SLS). All the specimens showed a drop of the load after exceeding the
limit of proportionality (strain-softening in bending). This drop depends on the fibre dosage and fibre
type. Logically, the mixtures with 40 kg/m performed the best. The SyFRC presented the largest drop
of the load after the peak and the lowest residual resistance at SLS-level. But after 2 mm of
deflection, this mixture developed higher residual strengths than the mixture UN20 and showed also a
large plateau. Finally, the coefficient of variation of the different series ranged from 13% up to 48%
which is quite high but common for this type of test.
20
15
CF20
Load [kN]
10
UN40
CF40
UN20
UN20CF20
Sy4.5
0.5
1.5
2
2.5
Mid-span Deflection [mm]
3.5
Figure 2: Load-deflection curves of the 3-point bending tests for the different types of FRC
2.2 Instrumentation and testing
The test set-up is shown in figure 1. The deflections of the beam were measured at the supports,
at , and of the span by help of linear variable differential transformers (LVDT) with a range of
25 mm. The tests were performed between 28 and 37 days after casting the beam. At different load
levels, the load was kept constant to measure crack openings. The visual observation of the crack
pattern was used to determine the load corresponding to the formation of the first diagonal crack. The
ultimate shear capacity was associated with the maximum load carried by the specimen before failure.
2.3 Experimental results
As an example, the load versus mid-span deflection curves are given in Figure 3 for the UN20-1
(a/d=0.5) and CF20-2 (a/d = 0.5). Some creep occurs during the measurement of the cracks when the
load was kept constant. The repeatability between two samples of each series was good. The results
of the tests are given in Table 3. All the beams with a/d = 0.5 failed by compression of the strut
between the support and the load application point.
1000
Load [kN]
800
UN20-1 (a/d=0.5)
600
400
CF20-2 (a/d=2.5)
200
4
6
8
Mid-span deflection [mm]
10
12
(1)
For the cases a/d=0.5, 1.5 and 2.5, this factor is 0.25, 0.75 and 1.0, respectively.
The first series without fibres and for a/d=0.5 gave the highest ultimate loads of the testing
programme. Moreover, these beams presented a shear strength that was almost two times the shear
strength developed by the samples tested at a/d=2.5. This shear capacity for a/d=0.5 was not in line
with the theoretical prediction for concrete without fibres (see further) nor comparable with the other
results for the same span to depth ratio (the shear capacity was always less, even with fibres). It
seems that the direct transfer of the forces between the load and the support was so pronounced that
even the factor did not take this effect properly into account. According to this, the second series
without fibres (B-2) was used as a reference for checking the increase of the ultimate shear capacity
(average shear strength) for the other beams with fibres.
Ultimate load
Pmax [kN]
Shear
strength
VRd,exp [kN]
Series
a/d
B-1-1
0.5
280
813.1**
103.5
B-1-2
0.5
270
960.6**
122.0
B-2-1
2.5
90
132.6*
68.2
B-2-2
2.5
110
117.2*
60.5
CF20-1-1
0.5
320
774.3**
98.7
CF20-1-2
0.5
420
797.2**
101.5
CF20-2-1
2.5
120
195.3*
99.5
CF20-2-2
2.5
120
177.4*
90.6
UN20-1-1
0.5
320
823.5**
104.8
10
UN20-1-2
0.5
250
746.3**
95.2
11
UN20-2-1
2.5
90
158.9*
81.3
12
UN20-2-2
2.5
90
240.1*
121.9
13
UN40-1-1
0.5
320
833.6**
106.1
(493.2)**
14
UN40-1-2
0.5
360
15
UN40-2-1
2.5
120
241.1
122.4
16
UN40-2-2
2.5
90
218.8
111.3
17
CF40-1-1
1.5
NA
369.8
140.1
18
CF40-1-2
1.5
NA
392.0
148.4
19
CF40-2-1
2.5
NA
206.0
104.9
242.2
123.0
CF40-2-2
2.5
NA
21
UN20CF20-1-1
1.5
NA
442.6
167.4
352.0
133.4
22
UN20CF20-1-2
1.5
NA
23
UN20CF20-2-1
2.5
NA
242.2
123.0
24
UN20CF20-2-2
2.5
NA
195.0
99.4
25
Sy4.5-1-1
1.5
NA
337.8
128.1
26
Sy4.5-1-2
1.5
NA
429.8
162.6
27
Sy4.5-2-1
2.5
NA
207.2
105.5
2.5
NA
232.2
118.0
Sy4.5-2-2
Increase in
Shear
capacity
[%]
112.7
64.3
(REF.)
100.1
56%
95.1
48%
100.0
56%
101.6
58%
106.1
65%
113.9
77%
106.1
65%
116.9
82%
150.4
134%
111.2
73%
145.3
126%
111.7
74%
20
28
Average
Shear
strength
VRdm,exp
[kN]
(*)
Shear bond failure mode
(**) Deep beam failure mode
Note: the value in bracket indicates a problem during the test. This result was not taken into account for further analysis.
Fibres improve the concrete toughness and its contribution to shear capacity by their bridging effect
between the crack sides. Other mechanisms are also improved by the presence of fibres:
confinement of the aggregate interlock, dowel action of the longitudinal reinforcement at the bottom
chord, etc...The theoretical ultimate shear capacity of the beams was estimated by using two
analytical methods: the RILEM and the fib model.
3.1 RILEM Model
The first model was published by RILEM [1]. The design value of the shear capacity of beams with
longitudinal reinforcement but without stirrups is given by:
VRdf = VRd,c + Vfd
(2)
with:
VRd,c : shear capacity of the beam reinforced with with longitudinal reinforcement but without
stirrups, see EN 1992-1-1 ;
: shear resistance provided by the fibres. This contribution is given by:
Vfd
Vfd = 0.7kf kl fd bw d
with:
kf
: factor for taking the contribution of the flanges of a T-section into account:
h h
k f = 1 + n f f and
b w d
with :
hf
bf
bw
(3)
k f 1.5
(4)
n=
bf b w
3
hf
kl = 1+
with :
d
fd
200
d
and
(d in mm)
3b w
hf
k2
and
(5)
(6)
fd = 0.12 fR4,k
(7)
fm = 0.18 fR4,m
with:
fR4,k
fR4,m
(8)
0,18
. . 100. . 1 + 7,5.
.
1
3
+ 0,15. . .
with:
k =1+
fFtuk
fctk
cp
bw
200
(9)
l=
.
: characteristic value of the ultimate flexural residual tensile strength of the fibre
reinforced concrete by considering wu=1.5 mm [MPa] ;
: characteristic value of the tensile strength for the concrete matrix [MPa] ;
: average stress acting on the cross-section due to an axial force (loading or
prestressing action) ;
: smallest width of the cross-section in the tensile area.
To determine the value of fFtuk in the above equation, two approaches can be followed to describe
the post-peak behaviour of the fibre reinforced concrete. These approaches are based on two
distinctive stress-crack opening constitutive laws in tension: the linear elastic model and the rigidplastic model (see Figure 5).
(a)
(b)
Figure 5: Simplified post-cracking constitutive laws: stress-crack opening (continuous and dashed
lines refer to softening and hardening post-cracking behaviour respectively)
The linear elastic model (b) defines the residual strength significant at ultimate limit state fFtu by:
f FTu = f Fts
wu
(f FTs 0.5f R 3 + 0.2f R1 ) 0
CMOD3
(10)
with fRj the residual flexural tensile strength corresponding with CMOD = CMODj:
f R, j =
Fj
b
hsp
fFTs
3 Fj l
2 b hsp2
(11)
(12)
wu
is the crack opening corresponding to the ultimate limit state. A value of wu=1.5 used
in the following, is considered on the safe side.
3
3
(13)
a/d=1.5. The average underestimation is 30% which is quite large but not so bad if we recall that the
models were actually not developed for a/d<2.5 (the models treat only shear diagonal tension failures).
The comparison between all the experimental results and the fib MC10 and the RILEM models are
graphically illustrated in Figure 8 and Figure 9, respectively.
Table 4 : Comparison between average experimental results and theoretical models
Series
a/d
B-2
CF20-2
UN20-2
CF20-1
UN20-1
Sy4.5-1
Sy4.5-2
CF40-2
CF40-1
UN20CF20-2
UN20CF20-1
UN40-2
UN40-1
2.5
2.5
2.5
0.5
0.5
1.5
2.5
2.5
1.5
2.5
1.5
2.5
0.5
VRdm,exp
VRdc
Vfd,m
VRdf,RILEM
VRdf,MC10
[kN]
VRdf,RILEM
VRdm,exp
VRdf,MC10
VRdm,exp
[kN]
[kN]
[kN]
[kN]
64.3
101.6
100
111.7
145.3
150.4
111.2
100.1
95.1
106.1
116.9
113.9
106.1*
64.3
64.3
66.6
65.5
66.0
64.1
64.3
64.1
64.1
63.9
64.4
64.7
66.3
0.0
18.4
18.4
23.4
23.4
25.8
25.8
30.7
30.7
30.7
30.7
38.1
38.1
64.3
82.7
85.0
88.9
89.3
89.9
90.2
94.8
94.8
94.7
95.2
102.8
104.5
64.3
85.8
87.5
88.1
88.5
94.9
95.0
95.3
95.3
96.2
96.5
102.4
103.4
1.00
0.81
0.85
0.80
0.61
0.60
0.81
0.95
1.00
0.66
0.84
0.88
0.98
1.00
0.84
0.87
0.79
0.61
0.63
0.85
0.95
1.00
0.67
0.85
0.88
0.97
(*) This result indicates that only one test result was taken into account for the average.
1.02
VRd,f,m
RILEM/fib Ratio
1.00
0.98
0.96
0.94
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
fR3/fR4
Figure 6: A larger difference between fR3 and fR4 results in a bigger variation between the models
10
VRdm,exp / VRdf,RILEM
1.75
1.5
1.25
1
1
1.25
1.5
1.75
VRdm,exp / VRdf,MC'10
Figure 7: The analytical models tend to predict the experimental results the same way (all results)
180
BBRI Experiments
KUL Experiments
fib MC'10
VRdm,exp
[kN] 160
140
SAFE
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
fRm,3 [MPa]
Figure 8: Experimental results versus fib MC10 prediction as a function of fR3,m
(solid marks indicate results for a/d=2.5)
11
180
VRdm,exp
[kN] 160
BBRI Experiments
KUL Experiments
RILEM
SAFE
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
fRm,4 [MPa]
Figure 9: Experimental results versus RILEM prediction as a function of fR4,m
Twenty-eight beams were tested in four-point bending to compare the experimental ultimate shear
capacity with the analytical models published by RILEM and fib (MC10). The use of fibres with a
volume fraction Vf = 0.26% gave an increase of the shear capacity of minimum 48% for a/d between
0.5 and 2.5. The type of anchorage of the steel fibre in the matrix (end cone or undulation along the
length) does not seem to influence the ultimate shear capacity. The mixtures with macro synthetic
fibres performed as good as the steel fibre mixtures with the same Vf in terms of ultimate shear
capacity. Finally, the models as referred to in this study provide almost the same results with a
maximum difference of less than 10%. They both underestimate the experimental results presented in
this paper by 30%, in average. As foreseen, they tend to be less accurate for a/d<2.5. Specific
models should be developed to predict the behaviour of beams presenting this configuration.
AKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The financial support of the Federal Service Economy (Project FRC07-09) and the Public Service
of Wallonia (BEFIME project) are gratefully acknowledged.
REFERENCES
[1] RILEM TC 162-TDF, Test and design methods for steel fibre reinforced concrete Recommandations for the s-e design method. Materials and Structures, 33, 75-81 (2000).
[2] Di Prisco, M., G. Plizzari, and L. Vandewalle. "MC2010: Overview on the shear provisions for
FRC." in Shear and punching shear in RC and FRC elements workshop., 15-16 October 2010,
Salo (Italy). Fdration internationale du Bton (fib), 2010.
12