You are on page 1of 24

INFORM ATION TO U SER S

This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI
films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some
thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may
be from any type of computer printer.

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the


copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality
illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins,
and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete

W
manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if
unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate
IE
the deletion.

Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by


EV

sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and


continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each
original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in
reduced form at the back of the book.
PR

Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced


xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white
photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations
appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly
to order.

A Bell & Howell Information Company


300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA
313/761-4700 800/521-0600

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
W
IE
EV
PR

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DESIGN OF PSEUDO STRAIN-HARDENING CEM ENTITIOUS
COM POSITES FOR A DUCTILE PLASTIC HINGE

by

Dhanada K. Mishra

W
IE
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment
EV
of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
(Civil Engineering)
in The University of Michigan
1995
PR

Doctoral Committee:

Professor Victor C. Li, Chair


Professor Antoine E. Naaman
Associate Professor Anthony M. Waas
Professor James K. Wight

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
OMI Number: 9527701

W
IE
EV
PR

OMI Microform 9527701


Copyright 1995, by OMI Company. All rights reserved.

This microform edition is protected against unauthorized


copying under Title 17, United States Code.

UMI
300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, MI 48103

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
W
IE
EV
PR

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
W
IE
To my Grand-Ma (Apsara)

&
EV

my sisters Narmada (Jhia) and Sharmada (Tipa)


PR

ii

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to thank the following:

Professor Victor C. Li, for being my guide and advisor during this doctoral work, and
for having given me the opportunity to undertake my doctoral work at the University of
Michigan, above all for having been a patient mentor through out the course of this
research and for all his time and effort spent towards making me a better research
scholar;

W
the members of my dissertation committee, Professor Antoine E. Naaman for lending
many of his research equipment and use of materials processing facilities, Professor
James K. Wight for help with the cyclic testing of plastic hinge specimen and Professor
IE
Anthony Waas for his support for the biaxial testing program by allowing the use of the
biaxial test facility, and above all for their continuous encouragement and helpful
comments;
EV

ACE-MRL and the Shimizu Corporation for partial financial support for this research
program;
PR

my friends and co-workers David Foremsky, Yun Mook Lim, Takashi Matsumoto,
Karthikeyan Obla, Jim Lafave, Dr. Mohemed Maleej, Dr. Yin-Wen Chan, Dr. Hwai-
Chung Wu, Dr. T. Hashida, Prof. Sudhir K. Jain for a variety of help and support;

and especially Durgesh Chandra Rai, for being there through out my graduate studies as
a friend, advisor and unselfish helping hand;

the technicians Bob Spencer, Kevin Schmidt, and especially Bob Fisher of the Civil and
Environmental Engineering Department, and Harold Eberhart of the Material Science
department for their unselfish help;

my family including my grand mother, parents, brothers and sisters for their faith in my
ability, and Anne R. Carmichael, for her encouragement and inspiration.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE OF CONTENTS

DEDICATION.................................................................................................................. ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS................................................................................................iii

LIST OF FIGURES.......................................................................................................... ix

LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................ xviii

LIST OF APPENDICES...................................................................................................xix

W
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION.............................................................................1
IE
1.1 Introduction....................................................................................................1

1.2 Overview of Background Research.............................................................. 7


EV

1.2.1 Micromechanics of FRCCs............................................................ 8


1.2.2 Material Property Characterization of FRCCs.............................. 11
1.2.3 Shear Behavior of FRCCs.............................................................. 13
PR

1.2.4 Structural Application in Cyclic Behavior of Plastic Hinge 15

1.3 Scope and Objective of Research.................................................................. 16

1.4 Organization of the Thesis............................................................................ 17

CHAPTER 2 MICROMECHANICS OF STRENGTH OF CEMENT


COMPOSITES....................................... .......................................... 25

2.1 Introduction....................................................................................................25

2.2 Micromechanics of Fiber Bridging in FRCC................................................26


2.2.1 Introduction.....................................................................................26
2.2.2 Pre-peak Bridging Stress - Displacement (Ob - 8)
Relationship....................................................................................27

iv

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
2.2.3 Post-peak Bridging Stress - Displacement (Ob - 5)
Relationship..................................................................................... 30
2.2.4 Tensile Strength of FRCC................................................................30

2.3 Compressive Strength of FRCC......................................................................32


2.3.1 Introduction...................................................................................... 32
2.3.2 Micromechanical Model for Compressive Strength...................... 34
2.3.3 Strengthening Mechanisms of Fiber Addition............................... 38
2.3.4 Weakening Effect of Fiber Addition...............................................41
2.3.5 Combined Strengthening and Weakening Effect of Fiber
Addition........................................................................................... 42
2.3.6 Prediction of Compressive Strength...............................................43
2.3.7 Fiber/Matrix Interaction and Fiber Geometry Effect.....................44
2.3.8 Further Developments in Micromechanical Modeling of

W
Uniaxial Strength............................................................................. 45

2.4 Biaxial Compression - Compression Strength............................................... 46


IE
2.4.1 Introduction...................................................................................... 46
2.4.2 Back-ground Literature and Motivation.........................................48
EV
2.4.3 Failure Modes of Concrete and FRCCs..........................................50
2.4.4 Fracture Mechanics Based Approach for FRCCs.......................... 53

2.5 Shear Strength or Biaxial Tension - Compression Strength......................... 58


PR

2.5.1 Effect of Confining Stress on Fiber Pull-out Behavior..................58


2.5.2 Further Discussion...........................................................................64

2.6 Summary, Material Design Implications and Conclusions........................... 64


2.6.1 Summary, Material Design Implications........................................64
2.6.2 Conclusions...................................................................................... 65

CHAPTER 3 MATERIAL DESIGN AND PROPERTY


CHARACTERIZATION................................................................... 91

3.1 Introduction......................................................................................................91

3.2 Design of an ECC with Aggregates for Higher M odulus............................. 93


3.2.1 Design for Composite Ductility...................................................... 94
3.2.2 Constraints for Matrix Toughness and Interface Bond..................94

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
3.2.3 Design Guidelines............................................................................96
3.2.4 Effect of aggregates on elastic m odulus........................................ 97

3.3 Characterization of Uniaxial Compression, Tension and Fracture


Properties........................................................................................................ 99
3.3.1 Uniaxial Compression Test............................................................. 100
3.3.2 Uniaxial Tension T est......................................................................100
3.3.3 Compact Tension Fracture te s t....................................................... 101
3.3.4 Measurement of Elastic Modulus of Composites.......................... 102
3.3.5 Discussion of Matrix Test Results.................................................. 103
3.3.6 Basis for Composite Design............................................................ 104
3.3.7 Discussion of Composite Test Results............................................105

3.4 Comparative Evaluation of Material Properties of E C C ............................. 108

W
3.4.1 Compressive Strength......................................................................109
3.4.2 Tensile Strength and Strain Capacity.............................................. 110
3.4.3 Fracture Toughness.......................................................................... 111
IE
3.5 Characterization of Biaxial Strength............................................................. 112
* — 3.5.1 Experimental Program.....................................................................114
EV

3.5.2 Experimental Results.......................................................................119


3.5.3 Failure M odes.................................................................................. 122
3.5.4 Failure Envelopes.............................................................................124
PR

3.5.5 Stress Vs. Strain Behavior.............................................................. 126


3.5.6 Theoretical Correlation....................................................................126
3.5.7 Experimental Results of Tension-Compression Tests................... 130

3.6 Summary and Conclusions............................................................................. 135


3.6.1 Design of Mortar Matrix for Pseudo Strain-Hardening E C C 135
3.6.2 Comparative Evaluation of Material Properties of SPECC...........136
3.6.3 Biaxial Failure Envelope of SPECC............................................... 137

CHAPTER 4 STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE OF ECCS IN PSEUDO­


STATIC SHEAR................................................................................ 178

4.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................178

4.2 Experimental Program................................................................................... 182

vi

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
4.2.1 Material Mix Design....................................................................... 183
4.2.2 Specimen Casting............................................................................ 185

4.3 Design and Testing of Ohno Shear Beam s....................................................186


4.3.1 Design of The Ohno Shear B eam ................................................... 186
4.3.2 Instrumentation of the Ohno Shear Beam.......................................187
4.3.3 Testing of the Ohno Shear Beam....................................................188
4.3.4 Determination of Material Properties.............................................188

4.4 Discussion of the Results............................................................................... 188


4.4.1 Shear Strength................................................................................. 189
4.4.2 Shear Strain Capacity...................................................................... 189
4.4.3 Cracking Behavior........................................................................... 191
4.4.4 Material Properties.......................................................................... 192

W
4.5 Analytical Approach.......................................................................................193
IE
4.6 Conclusions.....................................................................................................194

CHAPTER 5 STRUCTURAL APPLICATION FOR DUCTILE HINGE


EV
ACTION............................................................................................. 219

5.1 Introductions.................................................................................................. 219


5.1.1 General............................................................................................ 219
PR

5.1.2 Detailing for R/C Plastic Hinging Zone......................................... 220


5.1.3 Use of Fiber Reinforced Concrete................................................. 223

5.2 Structural Performance Requirements...........................................................224


5.2.1 Criteria for Ductile Behavior..........................................................225

5.3 Desirable Cementitious Material Properties for Plastic H inge.....................226

5.4 Experimental Program................................................................................... 229


5.4.1 Materials Used for the Plastic Hinge Zone.................................... 230
5.4.2 Design of Test Specimen................................................................230
5.4.3 Fabrication, Casting and Curing of Specimen............................... 232
5.4.4 Loading Sequence...........................................................................233
5.4.5 Testing Set-up, Instrumentation and Data Acquisition..................233

vii

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
5.5 Discussion of the Results.............................................................................. 235
5.5.1 Behavior of Control Specimen........................................................235
5.5.2 Behavior of ECC Hinge Specimen................................................ 237
5.5.3 Comparison of Load-Deflection Hysterisis Response...................238
5.5.4 Comparison of Failure Modes and Damage Evolution..................240
5.5.5 Comparison of Energy Absorption and Stiffness
Degradation..................................................................................... 241
5.5.6 Comparison of Moment-Curvature and Shear Stress-Shear
Strain Capacity................................................................................ 242

5.6 Summary and Conclusions............................................................................244

CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................... 281

W
6.1 Introduction................................................................................................... 281

6.2 Summary of the Research............................................................................. 282


IE
6.3 Major Findings and Conclusions..................................................................283

6.4 Recommendation for Future Research......................................................... 287


EV

6.4.1 Theoretical Modeling, Material Design and Property


Characterization.............................................................................. 287
6.4.2 Structural Application Issues..........................................................288
PR

APPENDICES.............................................................................................................. 290

REFERENCES............................................................................................................. 313

viii

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1a Example of the Performance Driven Approach for Structural


Durability after Li (1992a). 20

Figure 1.1b The Performance Driven Design Approach for cyclic behavior of
plastic hinge Zones. 21

Figure 1.2 Schematic comparison of the tensile stress vs. strain response of plain
concrete (PC), fiber reinforced cement composites (FRCC) and
engineered cement composites (ECC). 22

W
Figure 1.3 Broad outline and scope of research. High lighted topics identify the
thrust of this thesis. 23

Figure 1.4 Specific research topics and their inter-relationship. This dissertation
IE
focuses on the topics in bold. 24

Figure 2. la Schematic diagram showing the various states of stress in a material


element under the general multi-axial state of loading. 68
EV

Figure 2. lb Schematic diagram showing the various stages of matrix crack


propagation and bridging effect of the fibers. 69

Figure 2. lc Schematic diagram showing a typical Cb - 8 relationship with the


PR

different stages of fiber bridging shown. 69

Figure 2. Id Schematic diagram showing a typical failure modes of FRCCs in


uniaxial tension, (after Li and Leung, 1992) 70

Figure 2.2a Compressive strength of various fiber reinforced cementitious


composites relative to the matrix compressive strength, as a function of
fiber volume fraction. 71

Figure 2.2b Compressive strength of various fiber reinforced cementitious


composites relative to the matrix compressive strength, as a function of
fiber volume fraction. 72

Figure 2.3 Wing-crack growth induced by sliding of microcrack as the basic


mechanism of compressive failure in brittle solids. 73

Figure 2.4. Normalized compression load required to drive a wing-crack of length


£, for four different initial damage level D0. Calculated for p. = 0.5. 74

ix

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Figure 2.5a. Strengthening effect of fibers: normalized compression load required
to drive a wing-crack of length i, for five different fiber volume
fractions. Parametric values used are £0* = 20; Da = 0.0005; a = 0.1; c
= 800; K0 = 0.0002; = 0.01. 75

Figure 2.5b. Strengthening effect of fibers: predicted compressive strength


increases with fiber volume fraction, when no fiber induced damage
effect is included. Parametric values used are £0* = 20; D0 = 0.0005;
a = 0.1; c = 800; Ka = 0.0002; s0= 0.01. 76

Figure 2.6a. Damage effect of fibers: normalized compression load required to


drive a wing-crack of length £, for five different fiber induced damage
index k ( Vf= 0.01). Parametric values used are £0* = 20; D0 = 0.0005;
a = 0.1; c = 0; K0 = 0.0002; s0= 0. 77

Figure 2.6b. Damage effect of fibers: predicted compressive strength decreases with
fiber volume fraction due to fiber induced damage effect. Parametric
values used are £0* = 20; D0 = 0.0005; a = 0.1; c = 0; Ka = 0.0002; s0=

W
0. 78

Figure 2.7a. Combined strengthening and damage effect of fibers: same as Fig. 2.6a
and k =100. Parametric values used are £0* = 20 D0 = 0.0005; a =0.1;
IE
c = 800; K0 = 0.0002; s0= 0.01 79

Figure 2.7b. Combined strengthening and damage effect of fibers: predicted


compressive strength change with fiber volume fractions, for different
EV

fiber induced damage index k. Parametric values used are £0* = 20; D0
= 0.0005; a = 0.1; c = 800; K0 = 0.0002; s0= 0.01. 80

Figure 2.8. Model predictions for the krenit fiber reinforced composite. 81
PR

Figure 2.9. Compressive strength increase with fiber reinforcement index s. The s
- values have been normalized by the reference magnitude of s such
that s0 = 0.01 and c = 800 as used in all the preceding calculations.
Other parametric values used are £0* = 20; D0 = 0.0005; a = 0.1; c =
800; Ko = 0.0002; s0= 0.01. 82

Figure 2.10a Failure mode of plain matrix in uniaxial compression, vertical splitting
(plane YZ). 83

Figure 2.10b Failure mode of plain matrix in biaxial compression, vertical splitting
(plane XY). 83

Figure 2.10c Competing effect of crack propagation in XY and YZ planes that


determines the failure mode. 84

Figure 2.11a Failure mode of FRCC in uniaxial compression, shear faulting (plane
YZ). 84

Figure 2.11b Failure mode of FRCC in biaxial compression, shear faulting (plane
XY). 85

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Figure 2.12 Effect of fiber volume fraction and confining stress on the compressive
strength of FRCC (Yin, 1991). 86

Figure 2.13a Effect of transverse compression on the compressive failure strength. 87

Figure 2.13b Fracture mechanics based modeling of shear faulting in YZ plane. 88

Figure 2.14 Schematic diagram showing the effect of confining pressure on fiber
pull-out. 88

Figure 2.15a Effect of coefficient of friction on the shear strength of fiber reinforced
composite (g = 2.3, Lf= 6 mm, df= 0.15 mm, x0 = 1.93 MPa). 89

Figure 2.15b Effect of coefficient of friction on the shear strength of fiber reinforced
composite (g = 2.0, L f = 12.7 mm, df = 0.038 mm, To= 0.7 MPa). 89

Figure 2.16 Effect of transverse stress on biaxial tension-compression strength of


plain matrix (compressive failure mode). 90

Figure 2.17 Effect of transverse stress on biaxial tension-compression strength of

W
plain matrix (tensile failure mode). 90

Figure 3.1 Different tensile failure modes in cementitious composites. 145

Figure 3.2.
IE
Effect of matrix fracture toughness and interfacial bond strength on
critical fiber volume fraction (Ef= 117 GPa, Lf= 12.7 mm, df= 0.038
mm, g = 2.0, Em = 25 GPa). 145
EV

Figure 3.3 Effect of s/c ratio and w/c ratio on matrix elastic modulus, Age = 28
Days, 0 - indicates matrix chosen for Mix II and III. 146

Figure 3.4a Schematic diagram of the uniaxial compression test set-up. 146
PR

Figure 3.4b Photograph of the uniaxial compression test set-up. 147

Figure 3.4c Schematic diagram of the uniaxial tension test set-up. 148

Figure 3.4d Photograph of the uniaxial tension test set-up. 149

Figure 3.4e Dimensions of compact tension specimen. 150

Figure 3.4f Photograph of compact tension specimen. 150

Figure 3.5 Effect of s/c Ratio and w/c ratio on matrix tensile strength. O -
represent the mix proportions selected as matrix for Mix II and III. 151

Figure 3.6 Effect of s/c ratio and w/c ratio on matrix fracture toughness. O -
represent the mix proportions selected as matrix for Mix II and III. 151

Figure 3.7 Tensile stress-strain behavior of composite Mix I, age = 28 days. 152

Figure 3.8 Tensile stress-strain behavior of composite Mix II. 152

xi

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Figure 3.9 Tensile stress-strain behavior of composite Mix Ilia (w/o plasma
treatment). 153

Figure 3.10a Tensile stress-strain behavior of composite Mix m b (with plasma


treatment). 153

Figure 3.1 la Comparison of tensile stress vs. strain behavior of various composites. 154

Figure 3.11b Photograph of the multiple cracking failure mode of ECC in tension. 154

Figure 3.12 Effect of matrix fracture toughness and interfacial bond strength on
critical fiber volume fraction (£ /= 117 GPa, Lf= 12.7 mm, dt= 0.038
mm, g = 2.0, Em = 25 GPa). 155

Figure 3.13 Compressive stress vs. strain behavior of matrix MR#5 used in Mix
Ilia and b. 155

Figure 3.14 Compressive stress vs. strain behavior of Mix I. 156

Figure 3.15 Compressive stress vs. strain behavior of Mix EL 156

W
Figure 3.16 Compressive stress vs. strain behavior of Mix m a. 157

Figure 3.17a Comparison of the strain gage, LVDT and head displacement in
compression test.
IE 157

Figure 3.17b Comparison of the strain gage, LVDT and head displacement in
tension test. 158
EV

Figure 3.17c Comparison of the elastic modulus for the different materials tested., 158

Figure 3.18a Comparative evaluation of the compressive strength of SPECC. 159


PR

Figure 3.18b Comparative evaluation of the tensile strength of SPECC. 159

Figure 3.18c Comparative evaluation of the tensile strain capacity of SPECC. 160

Figure 3.18d Comparative evaluation of the fracture toughness of SPECC. 160

Figure 3.19a Schematic diagram of the biaxial test set-up. 161

Figure 3.19b Schematic diagram of biaxial stress paths and failure envelopes. 162

Figure 3.19c Photograph of the biaxial test set-up. 162

Figure 3.20a Displacement loading Vs. time during a typical biaxial test along 1: 0.5
path. 163

Figure 3.20b Loading vs. time during a typical biaxial test along 1: 0.5 path. 163

Figure 3.20c Strain gage reading vs. time during a typical biaxial test along 1: 0.5
path. 164

Figure 3.21a Effect of Teflon sheets and grease on PC compressive strength. 165

Xll

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Figure 3.21b Effect of Teflon sheets and grease on ECC compressive strength. 165

Figure 3.21c Failure mode of plain concrete specimen under uniaxial compression
w/o teflon sheets. 166

Figure 3.2 Id Failure mode of plain concrete specimen under uniaxial compression
with teflon sheets. 166

Figure 3.22a Comparison of failure envelope of plain concrete with other studies. 167

Figure 3.22b Comparison of failure envelope of SPECC with other studies of FRC. 167

Figure 3.22c Failure envelope of SPECC compared with plain concrete from
experiments. 168

Figure 3.23a Stress vs. strain response of the plain concrete along stress path 1.0:
0.0. 169

Figure 3.23b Stress vs. strain response of the plain concrete along stress path 1.0:
0.2. 169

W
Figure 3.23c Stress vs. strain response of the plain concrete along stress path 1.0:
0.5. 170

Figure 3.23d
IE
Stress vs. strain response of the pain concrete along stress path 1.0:
1.0. 170

Figure 3.24a Stress vs.strain response of the SPECC along stress path 1.0: 0.0. 171
EV

Figure 3.24b Stress vs.strain response of the SPECC along stress path 1.0: 0.2. 171

Figure 3.24c Stress vs.strain response of the SPECC along stress path 1.0: 0.5. 172
PR

Figure 3.24d Stress vs.strain response of the SPECC along stress path 1.0: 1.0. 172

Figure 3.25a Failure mode of PC in uniaxial compression. 173

Figure 3.25b Failure mode of PC in biaxial compression. 173

Figure 3.26a Failure mode of ECC in uniaxial compression. 174

Figure 3.26b Failure mode of ECC in biaxial compression. 174

Figure 3.27 Photograph of biaxial tension-compression (pure shear) test set-up. 175

Figure 3.28a Loading record of the biaxial tension-compression test. 176

Figure 3.28b Loading record of the biaxial tension-compression test. 176

Figure 3.29a Biaxial failure envelope in the biaxial tension-compression region for
plain concrete and ECC. 177

Figure 3.29b Biaxial failure envelope in the biaxial tension-compression region for
PC, FRC and ECC. 177

xiii

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Figure 4.1 Specimen geometry and dimensions. 198

Figure 4.2a Reinforcement layout of PC, and DRFRC specimen. 199

Figure 4.2b Reinforcement layout of PC, and DRFRC specimen. 200

Figure 4.3a Reinforcement layout of RC specimen. 201

Figure 4.3b Reinforcement layout of RC specimen. 202

Figure 4.4a Reinforcement layout for FRC and SPECC specimen. 203

Figure 4.4b Reinforcement layout for FRC and SPECC specimen. 204

Figure 4.5 Photograph of the flexural, shear and end-block reinforcement in


plexi-glass mold before casting. 205

Figure 4.6 Ohno shear specimen showing the instrumentation. 206

Figure 4.7 Photograph of the RC specimen with the OPTOTRACK targets. 207

W
Figure 4.8 Photograph of a RC specimen showing the rosette of strain gage. 207

Figure 4.9 Comparison of average shear stress vs. shear strain of five systems. 208
IE
Figure 4.10 Comparison of load-deflection response at the internal load point. 209

Figure 4.11 Photograph of the failure mode of PC specimen. 210


EV

Figure 4.12 Photograph of the failure mode of RC specimen. 210

Figure 4.13 Photograph of the failure mode of FRC specimen. 211


PR

Figure 4.14 Photograph of the failure mode of SPECC specimen. 211

Figure 4.15 Photograph of the failure mode of DRFRC specimen. 212

Figure 4.16 Comparison of first crack strength and ultimate shear strength for
different systems. 213

Figure 4.17 Comparison of first crack strain and ultimate shear strain. 213

Figure 4.18a Schematic comparison of failure modes and cracking of different


systems. 214

Figure 4 .18b Schematic comparison of failure modes and cracking of different


systems. 215

Figure 4.19 Cracking behavior of different material systems. 216

Figure 4.20 Strain gage data for DRFRC system indicating some pseudo strain-
hardening type of behavior without visible multiple cracking. 217

xiv

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Figure 4.21 Comparison of analytical predictions of shear strength with test data
from Ohno shear test. 217

Figure 4.22 Photograph of the panel zone of the SPECC specimen showing
multiple cracking. 218

Figure 5.1 Plan and elevation of a typical multi-story building with shear wall and
moment frames. 249

Figure 5.2 Typical member force distribution due to gravity and lateral loads. 250

Figure 5.3a Schematic of cantilever beam failure under cyclic loading. 251

Figure 5.3b Photograph of severe damage due to spalling of ordinary R/C


cantilever beam failure under cyclic loading (Bertero et al., 1974). 252

Figure 5.4 Compressive behavior of ECC, FRCC and PC. 253

Figure 5.5 Tensile behavior of ECC, FRCC and PC. 253

W
Figure 5.6 Shear behavior of SPECC, RC and FRCC. 254

Figure 5.7a Plastic hinge location and subassembly for a typical multi-story
building with moment frames. 255
IE
Figure 5.7b Schematic of the experimental set-up. 256

Figure 5.7c Photographic view of the experimental set-up. 257


EV

Figure 5.8a Back-prediction of experimental moment vs. curvature diagram of a


R/C section (Maalej and Li, 1994). 258

Figure 5.8b Predicted moment vs. curvature diagram for R/C section and ECC
PR

section to be used in the present experimental program. 259

Figure 5.9 Moment distribution vs. section moment capacity used in specimen
design. 260

Figure 5.10 Test configuration and reinforcement layout of proposed Test. 261

Figure 5.11a Photographic view of the strain-gagged rebar cage. 262

Figure 5.1 lb Photographic view of the rebar cage in plywood mold ready for
casting. 262

Figure 5.12a Schematic diagram of loading sequence. 263

Figure 5.12b Experimental data of loading sequence used in the test. 263

Figure 5.13 Position of displacement and strain transducers. 264

Figure 5.14a. Load vs. deflection response of specimen#! with PC plastic hinge. 265

XV

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Figure 5.14b. Comparison of the head displacement with potentiometer data for
specimen# 1 with PC plastic hinge. 266

Figure 5.15a. Photograph of cracking pattern of specimen# 1 with PC plastic hinge alt
the end of loading cycle #4. 267

Figure 5.15b. Photograph a large diagonal crack in the plastic hinge zone of
specimen#l at the end of loading cycle #10. 267

Figure 5.15c. Photograph of the final failure in the plastic hinge zone of specimen#l
at the end of loading cycle #12. 268

Figure 5.16a. Load vs. deflection response of specimen#2 with ECC plastic hinge. 269

Figure 5.16b. Comparison of the head displacement with potentiometer data for
specimen#2 with ECC plastic hinge. 270

Figure 5.17a. Photograph of early cracking pattern of specimen#2 with ECC plastic
hinge at the end of loading cycle #4. 271

W
Figure 5.17b. Photograph diagonal multiple micro-cracking in the plastic hinge zone
of specimen#2 at the end of loading cycle #12. 271

Figure 5.17c. Photograph of the final failure in the plastic hinge zone of specimen#2
IE
at the end of loading cycle #20 272

Figure 5.18a. Comparison of the load vs. displacement envelope for positive
excursions. 273
EV

Figure 5.18b. Comparison of the load vs. displacement envelope for negative
excursions. 273

Figure 5.19a. Strain gage data from a typical longitudinal bar near the column face
PR

in specimen#l. 274

Figure 5.19b. Strain gage data from a typical longitudinal bar near the column face
in specimen#2. 274

Figure 5.19c. Typical strain gage data from a shear stirrup in the plastic hinge zone
of specimen# 1. 275

Figure 5.19d. Typical strain gage data from a shear stirrup in the plastic hinge zone
of specimen#2. 275

Figure 5.20 Comparison of crack widths at different stages of loading. 276

Figure 5.21a Comparison of energy absorption vs. deflection of ECC hinge vs. the
control. 278

Figure 5.21b Comparison of cumulative energy absorption vs. deflection of ECC


hinge vs. the control. 278

Figure 5.22 Comparison of stiffness degradation of ECC hinge vs. the control. 279

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Figure 5.23a Comparison of moment vs. curvature envelope of ECC hinge vs. the
control. 279

Figure 5.23b Comparison of average shear stress vs. shear strain envelope of ECC
hinge vs. the control. 280

Figure 5.24 Load vs. deflection response of a R/C cantilever beam with ductile
detailing (after Bertero et al., 1974). 280

W
IE
EV
PR

xvii

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1 Typical properties of some ordinary and high performance FRCCs
compared to ordinary concrete matrix. 19

Table 2.1 Fiber and matrix characteristics of the FRCCs tested in uniaxial
compression (Fig. 2a and b). 67

Table 3.1 Matrix mix proportions. 139

Table 3.2 Matrix test results. 139

W
Table 3.3 Composite mix proportions. 140

Table 3.4 Composite test results. 140


IE 141
Table 3.5a Mix proportions.

Table 3.5b Summary of material test results. 141


EV

Table 3.6 Summary of biaxial testing of PC & FRCC. 142

Table 3.7 Mix proportions of materials used in the biaxial tests. 143

Table 3.8a Failure stresses along different load paths for plain concrete. 143
PR

Table 3.8b Failure stresses along different load paths for SPECC. 144

Table 3.9 Failure stresses along different load paths for SPECC. 144

Table 4.1 Mix proportions. 197

Table 4.2 Summary of Ohno shear test results. 197

Table 5.1a Material mix proportions. 247

Table 5.1b Material properties. 247

Table 5.2 Specimen configuration parameters and design capacities. 248

Table 5.3 Comparison of analytical and experimental results for section


properties. 248

xviii

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
LIST OF APPENDICES

A. Stress Field on an Inclined Crack under Biaxial Stress 291

B. Results of Material Tests 294

C. Design Calculations for R/C Section Properties 301

D. Computer Program for Moment Vs. Curvature Relationship 306

W
IE
EV
PR

xix

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

A chronological review of the important developments in the subject of fiber reinforced

cementitious composites (FRCC) reveals that the concept of fiber reinforcement itself

W
has roots in ancient history. For example, the use of straw to improve the brittle

cracking of sun dried mud bricks, or clay walls is still prevalent in many tropical
IE
countries, and has been since time unknown. In more modem times, the patent of

Joseph Lambot claims the idea of adding continuous fibers in form of meshes to create
EV

new building materials. This led to the development of ferrocement and reinforced

concrete (Naaman, 1985). However, The modem idea of reinforcement of cementitious

materials such as concrete, with short randomly oriented fibers, in order to improve the
PR

brittle nature of the matrix under tensile loading is attributed to Ramualdi et al. (1963).

Since then research into the various aspects of fiber reinforced cementitious composite

or fiber concrete has been widespread. The development of new types of fibers such as

steel, polymer, glass, carbon, natural fiber, etc. made in a variety of shapes and sizes,

and the availability of many new products to enhance matrix properties and the fiber

matrix interface, have further stimulated such research. Several of the recently invented

‘high performance’ FRCCs are listed in Table 1.1, along with some of their important

properties as reported in literature. In this case ‘high performance’ is taken to mean a

distinctly superior performance in any category or categories of material properties

compared to what are known as conventional FRCCs. Typical properties of some of the

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.