See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/259641909

Structural Design Methodologies for Concrete Pipes with Steel and Synthetic
Fiber Reinforcement

Article  in  Aci Structural Journal · January 2014

DOI: 10.14359/51686432

CITATIONS READS

25 4,175

3 authors, including:

Amirpasha Peyvandi
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc
36 PUBLICATIONS   468 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Amirpasha Peyvandi on 18 October 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL TECHNICAL PAPER
Title No. 111-S08

Structural Design Methodologies for Concrete Pipes with

Steel and Synthetic Fiber Reinforcement
by Amirpasha Peyvandi, Parviz Soroushian, and Shervin Jahangirnejad
Improved structural designs were developed and experimentally
verified for concrete pipes. These designs make effective use of
discrete synthetic fiber reinforcement to lower the reinforcing
steel ratio, and thus allow for increasing the protective cover
of concrete on steel for improved durability. The new concrete
pipe design also enhances the toughness and damage resistance
of pipes. The work reported herein covers theoretical modeling,
design, and experimental verification of concrete pipes with
synthetic fiber and conventional steel reinforcement. The focus of
the theoretical models was on the flexural strength and load-car-
rying capacity of concrete pipes. These models account for the
contributions of fibers to the tensile behavior of concrete via
fiber pullout or rupture. These models were used to develop new
concrete pipe designs, which made complementary use of synthetic Fig. 1—Concrete pipe external loads, flexural cracks, and
fiber (polyvinyl alcohol [PVA]) and conventional steel reinforce- flexural reinforcement system: (a) vertical and horizontal
ment. Full-scale pipes embodying the new design were fabricated loads; (b) flexural cracks; and (c) reinforcement system.
and experimentally evaluated. The experimental results were used
to refine the theoretical models and design procedures. Test results
confirmed that the number of steel reinforcement layers in concrete
pipes can be reduced with the use of synthetic fibers. This allows
for increasing the protective cover of concrete on steel, which is a
major advantage towards increasing the service life of concrete in
aggressive environments, including sanitary sewers, where micro-
bial-induced corrosion is a major concern.

Keywords: concrete cover; concrete pipes; steel reinforcement; structural

design; synthetic fibers.

INTRODUCTION
Sewer systems account for approximately half of the
infrastructure investment in the United States.1 Concrete
is the primary material used for construction of the sewer
infrastructure due to its satisfactory performance over
long-term periods. It offers a desired balanced of struc-
tural performance, barrier qualities, durability, and cost.
Concrete, however, provides relatively small tensile
strength and toughness. Steel reinforcement of concrete is
thus necessary for meeting structural performance require-
ments. Susceptibility of steel to corrosion and other degrada-
tion phenomena limit the service life of the concrete-based
sewer infrastructure.
Advances in fiber-reinforced concrete provide a new
basis for design of more efficient concrete pipes with
reduced amount of steel reinforcement.2-9 Existing rein-
forced concrete pipe designs have not yet taken advan-
tage of discrete fibers as complementary reinforcement for
enhancing structural efficiency and resolving some critical
performance issues.9-13 Pipes are subjected to earth pressures
(Fig. 1(a)) which generate transverse bending moments
in pipe walls (Fig. 1(b)). The transverse (circumferen-
tial) reinforcement is introduced in concrete pipes to resist
Fig. 2—Location of crown, invert, and springlines.
bending moments (Fig. 1(c)). Under external loads, pipes
first develop vertical cracks (on interior surfaces [crown and
invert]), and then horizontal cracks (at mid-height on exte-
rior surfaces [spring lines]). Figure 2 shows the locations of
crown, invert, and spring lines. Under the effect of trans-
verse bending moments, pipes behave as rectangular rein-
forced concrete sections.
The use of two layers of steel reinforcement in traditional
pipe designs (Fig. 3(a)) reduces the concrete cover thickness
over the reinforcement, which compromises the durability of
pipes in the highly corrosive environment of a sanitary sewer.
The new design developed here (Fig. 3(b)) makes effective
ACI Structural Journal, V. 111, No. 1, January-February 2014.
MS No. S-2012-017.R1, doi:10.14359.51686432, was received October 7, 2012, and
reviewed under Institute publication policies. Copyright © 2014, American Concrete
Institute. All rights reserved, including the making of copies unless permission is
obtained from the copyright proprietors. Pertinent discussion including author’s
closure, if any, will be published ten months from this journal’s date if the discussion
is received within four months of the paper’s print publication.

ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2014 83

Fig. 3—Reinforcement configurations for two different design methods: (a) traditional design; and (b) new design.
towards experimental verification of the new pipe materials
and systems. Industrial-scale production and structural eval-
uation of concrete pipes embodying the new materials and
structural design principles were also implemented.

DESIGN EQUATIONS FOR ULTIMATE

FLEXURAL STRENGTH OF STEEL REINFORCED
CONCRETE PIPES
The moments generated in pipes under load in the three-
edge bearing test (Fig. 4) are related to the weight of pipe Wp
and the total three-edge bearing load Wt as follows14-16

S
M = (Cm1 Wp + Cm 2 Wt ) (1)
2

where S = Di + h; Di is pipe internal diameter; h is the pipe

wall thickness; and Cm1 and Cm2 are constant coefficients
which are introduced in the following sections.
Fig. 4—Schematics three-edge bearing test setup. For circular pipes, the moments generated in the three-
edge bearing test vary as shown in Fig. 5. The critical condi-
use of corrosion-resistant synthetic fiber reinforcement to
tions for design in flexure occur at the crown and the invert,
reduce the number of reinforcement layers from two to one.
with the invert moment used for development of design
This approach is enabled by the structural value offered by
equations. While the invert moment caused by the test load
synthetic reinforcement to compensate for the loss of steel
is slightly less than the crown moment, the moment caused
ratio in concrete pipes. This would increase the protective
by the pipe weight is substantially greater at invert, making
concrete cover thickness over steel without compromising
the combined moment approximately the same at crown
the pipe structural performance.
and invert.
The increased cover thickness would enhance the service
At invert, coefficients Cm1 and Cm2 for calculating moment
life of pipes in aggressive sewer environment, and would
in the elastic range are14-16
reduce their maintenance requirements. Polyvinyl alcohol
(PVA) fibers suit the targeted application in concrete pipes,
Cm1 = 0.75Cm2, Cm2 = 0.07
due to their relatively high acid resistance, elastic modulus,
and bond strength to concrete.
The moment equation can thus be simplified as follows
RESEARCH SIGNIFICANCE
0.14
The objective of this research was to investigate the value M= (0.75 Wp + Wt )( Di + h ) (2)
of synthetic fibers in concrete pipes towards reduction of 40
the number of steel reinforcement layers. The resulting rise
in concrete cover thickness over reinforcement benefits the Defining DL as (Wt /Di) × 12, the moment equation can be
durability of the concrete pipes. To achieve the objective expressed as follows
of the research, new design procedures were developed for
making effective use of corrosion-resistant synthetic fibers  9Wp  D
to reduce the number of reinforcement layers from two to M = 0.14  + DL  i ( Di + h ) (3)
 Di  480
one. Comprehensive experimental studies were undertaken

84 ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2014

Fig. 5—Moment distributions in three-edge bearing test loading: (a) weight of pipe; (b) uncracked; (c) first-stage cracking;
(d) second-stage cracking; and (e) ultimate flexural capacity.
Equation (3) can be expressed in the following simplified of Cmp over the load, which causes first yield in the inner
form reinforcement. Cmp is equal to 1.10 for circular pipes with
two concentric cages and 1.25 for pipes with one cage.14-16
 9Wp  Cm is the coefficient corresponding to flexural first-yield and
M = 2.925 × 10 −4  + DL  Di ( Di + h ) (4) is equal to 1.0 for circular cages. The load DL = (Wt /Di) × 12
 iD 
corresponding to ultimate flexural strength can be calculated
using the following equation
Equation (4) can be used towards calculation of the ulti-
mate load of concrete pipes in three-edge bearing tests as  a
described in the following equations. 3419Cm Cmp As f y  d − 
 9Wp   2
The flexural strength of reinforced concrete sections can  DL + D  = Di ( Di + h)
(8)
be expressed as i

 a
M U = As f y  d −  (5) DESIGN EQUATIONS FOR 0.025 cm (0.01 in.)
 2
CRACK WIDTH FLEXURAL STRENGTH OF STEEL-
REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPES
Using the above equation for flexural strength in the The 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) crack width is an arbitrarily chosen
moment Eq. (4) yields test criterion commonly used in design and evaluation of
concrete pipes. It is not a serviceability criterion, but can
 a  9Wp  be viewed as a design criterion other than ultimate strength
As f y  d −  = 2.925 × 10 −4  + DL  Di ( Di + h ) (6)
 2  Di  which reflects on the cracking behavior of concrete pipes.
The nominal stress in transverse steel reinforcement under
moment M at a critical section can be calculated as follows
Hence,
M
 a fs = (9)
3419 As f y  d −  As × j × d
 9Wp   2
 DL + D  = Di ( Di + h)
(7)
i
where j is the coefficient for moment arm at service load
and is considered to be 0.9. The moment corresponding to
Before a pipe reaches its collapse state in the three-edge 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) crack width (M.01) can be calculated
bearing test, its (inner) transverse steel reinforcement yields as follows
crown and invert, and its outer reinforcement yields spring
lines. The final moment distribution at a pipe cross section fs = l × fs.01 (10)
is shown in Fig. 5(e). The load capacity increases by a factor

ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2014 85

where l is a reduction factor for variability in test results
and is 0.9. Equations (9) and (10) yield the following value
for M.01
M.01 = 0.9fs.01 × As × 0.9d (11)
The expression for M.01 in terms of applied loads is
 9Wp 
M.01 = 2.925 × 10 −4  + DL  Di ( Di + h )
 Di 
Equations (11) and (12) yield
 −4 
9Wp  
 2.925 × 10  D + DL  Di ( Di + h ) 
 i 
0.9 fs.01 =  (13)
 0.9 As d 
 
 
Solving the aforementioned equation for DL at 0.025 cm
(0.01 in.) crack width (DL.01) yields
 9Wp   2769 As fs.01 d 
 DL.01 + D  =  D ( D + h) 
i i i
DESIGN EQUATIONS FOR CONCRETE PIPES
WITHOUT STEEL REINFORCEMENT
Flexural design of plain concrete pipes is governed by the
tensile (flexural) strength limit state. Plain pipe must be designed
so that the highest flexural stress around the pipe circumfer-
ence produced by a combination of moment and thrust is less
than the flexural tensile strength of concrete (usually taken as
the modulus of rupture of concrete fmr). The governing loca-
tion for the highest combined flexural tension is commonly at
the invert. The modulus of rupture can be obtained using two
alternative methods. One method determines the modulus of
rupture from results of a three-edge bearing test
 4.8φ mr DLut × Di ( Di + h ) 
fmr =  
 h2
where DLut is the test D-load that cracks the pipe.
The second method estimates the modulus of rupture
using the following equation
fmr = kmr φ mr fc′
The maximum value of fmr (0.85) produces service load
conditions which are close to those obtained from the three-
edge bearing test results. The coefficient kmr in Eq. (16)
varies with wall thickness,15 and the minimum value of kmr
for any wall thickness is 201. Based on many three-edge
bearing tests, it has been concluded that kmr increases with
decreasing wall thickness, varying from approximately 228
86
(12)
Fig. 6—Flexural stress distribution at ultimate condition in
singly reinforced fiber concrete section with predominant
fiber rupture.
for 10 cm (4 in.) walls, up to 322 or more for 5 cm (2 in.)
walls. The modulus of rupture of concrete pipe without steel
reinforcement was calculated using Eq. (15).
(14)
MODIFICATION OF DESIGN EQUATIONS TO
ACCOUNT FOR EFFECTS OF SYNTHETIC FIBERS
The ability of fiber-reinforced concrete to carry tensile
stress increases the flexural load-carrying capacity of
fiber-reinforced concrete at different stages of behavior.
Hence, the equations for the flexural strength of pipes have
to be modified to account for the structural contributions of
fibers. A semi-empirical approach was followed to derive
design equations for concrete pipes with fiber reinforcement.
They were developed based on theoretical concepts which
were modified to account for experimental results.
Ultimate flexural strength of steel-reinforced
concrete pipes with fiber reinforcement
Fibers in a cementitious matrix can exhibit two types of
behavior at cracks: pullout or rupture. The synthetic (PVA)
fibers used in this investigation show a stronger tendency
towards rupture, especially for fibers of finer diameter
(15)
and higher aspect ratio. The hydrophilic nature and strong
bonding of PVA fibers to the cementitious matrix explain
this behavior. The tendency towards fiber pullout increases
with increasing fiber diameter and decreasing fiber aspect
ratio. Other methods to promote fiber pullout involve the use
of an oiling agent and modifying the matrix to reduce chem-
ical and frictional bonds to PVA fibers.
(16)
Design equations when fiber rupture dominates
The fiber concrete tensile stress distribution at flexural
failure is assumed to be triangular,17,18 with the tension zone
starting at the neutral axis and ending at the level of steel
reinforcement. It is assumed that, at the ultimate stage, the
crack width below steel reinforcement is wide enough to
have already caused rupture of fibers. These assumptions,
together with the equilibrium considerations in Fig. 6, yield
ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2014
the nominal flexural strength of a singly reinforced fiber-
reinforced concrete section as follows

  a    σ (d − c)  a 2(d − c)  
M n =  As f y  d −   +  t bc − +
3  
   (17)
 2   2 2

where a is the depth of the compressive stress block (refer to

Fig. 6) and the fibrous concrete tensile strength (st) is calcu-
lated as follows

st = NU

where N is the number of fibers per unit area; and U is the

ultimate tensile force of a single fiber. An expression for st
is as follows
Fig. 7—Flexural stress distribution at ultimate condition in
 
singly reinforced fiber concrete section with predominant
 0.5V f   σ fu πd 2f 
σt =    (18) fiber pullout.
 πd f
2
 4 
  0.5V f τ f l f
4 σt = (23)
df

Hence,
At 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) crack width, considering the contri-
st = 0.5Vfsfu (19) bution of fibers, the stress level in steel reinforcement should
be less than that of the nonfibrous concrete. The stress in
where Vf, df, and sfu are fiber-volume fraction, diameter, and steel reinforcement can be determined by the aforementioned
ultimate tensile stress, respectively. equation for fs.01, and multiplying by a decreasing index that
accounts for fiber effects. Using geometric relationships
Design equations when fiber pullout dominates for strain distribution, the maximum concrete stress can be
When fiber pullout dominates, the fiber concrete tensile determined, and subsequently, the moment corresponding to
stress distribution is assumed to be uniform.19,20 This assump- 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) crack width can be determined.
tion, together with equilibrium considerations in Fig. 7, For the pipes under consideration (Class IV wall C with
yields the following equation for nominal flexural strength Di = 68 cm [27 in.], defined in the experimental section),
of singly reinforced fibrous concrete sections the steel reinforcement will develop stresses beyond its yield
stress, implying that the 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) crack strength
  a    a (d − c)   will be equal to the ultimate strength. This prediction was
M n =  As f y  d −   + (σ t (d − c])b)  c − + (20)
  
2    2 2   confirmed by test results.

Flexural strength of fiber-reinforced concrete
The tensile stress in fibrous concrete (st) is equal to
pipes without steel reinforcement
st = NF, where F can be calculated as follows when fiber
The stress distribution under ultimate moment in concrete
pullout dominates
pipes with fiber reinforcement (but no steel reinforcement) is
assumed to be linear19 (Fig. 8), with tensile stresses covering
 τ f πd f l f  the full area below the neutral axis (the expressions for st
F = (21)
 4  were introduced in a previous section). Simple equilibrium

considerations yield the expression for flexural strength in
where tf is shear strength in fibrous concrete. Fig. 8.
Hence,
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
 
Materials
 0.5V f  lf 
σt =    τ f πd f  (22) The materials used in concrete mixture were: 19 mm
 πd f
2
 4 (0.7 in.) maximum size natural stone, natural sand (2NS),
  portland cement (Type I), fly ash (ASTM Class F), plasti-
4
cizer, and set-retarding admixture. The concrete mixture
design considered in this investigation, which is commonly
or
used in dry-mixed concrete pipe production, is shown in

ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2014 87

Table 1—Concrete mixture formulations
Materials common to all mixture
formulations Proportion*
Aggregate (all natural stone) 2.21
Sand (2NS) 2.42
Plasticizer 6.83
Retarder 6.16
Fly ash 0.26
Water 0.44
Cement 0.74
*
Proportions are per unit weight of cementitious materials (cement + fly ash), except
for additives (plasticizer and retarder), which are in mL/kg of cementitious materials.

Table 2—Properties of produced pipes Series I

Pipe Steel reinforcement Fiber content Fig. 8—Stress distribution at flexural failure in fiber-rein-
1 Two layers 0% forced concrete section.
2 One layer 0% 1100 MPa (159 ksi). The other PVA fiber was even coarser,
3 One layer 1.0% fine fiber* with a 0.3 mm (0.01181 in.) diameter, 15 mm (0.5905 in.)
4 One layer 1.5% fine fiber length and 900 MPa (130 ksi) tensile strength. This coarser
5 One layer 0.75% coarse fiber† fiber was used in concrete at a 2% volume fraction.
6 One layer 2% coarser fiber‡
Pipe production and experimental evaluation
7 One layer 2% coarser fiber
Two distinct categories of pipes were produced: 1) with
Fine PVA fiber (length = 6 mm [0.25 in.]; diameter = 0.026 mm [0.001 in.]).
*
one layer of steel reinforcement and fiber reinforcement; and
Coarse PVA fiber (length = 12 mm [0.5 in.]; diameter = 0.1 mm [0.004 in.]).
†
2) without steel reinforcement, but with fiber reinforcement.
Coarser PVA fiber (length = 15 mm [0.59 in.]; diameter = 0.3 mm [0.012 in.]).
‡
Control pipe with two layers of steel reinforcement and no
Table 3—Properties of produced pipes Series II fibers was also produced and tested. In the first category,
synthetic fibers were used to lower the steel ratio (from
Pipe Steel reinforcement Fiber content
two layers to one layer), and thus increase the protective
1 Two layers 0%
cover of concrete over steel while preserving the load-car-
2 One layer 0% rying capacity of the pipe. In the second category, synthetic
3
No steel
0.5% fine fiber*
fibers fully replaced the structural steel. All pipes fabricated
reinforcement and tested in the project had an internal diameter of 68 cm
No steel (27 in.) (ASTM C7623 Class IV, C-wall pipe), and a wall
4 0.5% coarse fiber†
reinforcement thickness of 10 cm (4 in.). The pipes were produced in 2.8 m
No steel (8.5 ft) lengths. The reinforcing steel cage was 3 x 6 - W 2 x
5 2% coarser fiber‡
reinforcement W 2.5 (W 2 circumferential and W 2.5 longitudinal) welded
Fine PVA fiber (length = 6 mm [0.25 in.]; diameter = 0.026 mm [0.001 in.]).
*
wire fabric. The pipes produced and tested in the first and
Coarse PVA fiber (length = 12 mm [0.5 in.]; diameter = 0.1 mm [0.004 in.]).
†
second series of experiments are introduced in Tables 2 and
Coarser PVA fiber (length = 15 mm [0.59 in.]; diameter = 0.3 mm [0.012 in.]).
‡
3, respectively (the control pipe with two layers of steel
reinforcement is also included in these tests).
Table 1.21 Concrete materials were mixed following ASTM
C192/C192M22 recommendations, though steam curing
Three-edge bearing test procedures
was used in lieu of moist curing in these series of tests.
In the three-edge bearing test, the pipe is supported on
The concrete used in the experimental program provided
a lower bearing of two parallel longitudinal strips, and the
34.5 MPa (5000 psi) compressive strength. The steel
load is applied uniformly along the pipe length using an
reinforcement used in the project had a yield strength of
upper bearing strip. Both lower and upper bearing strips
491 MPa (71 ksi).
are extended the full length of the pipe. Figure 4 shows the
Concrete pipes were produced with different PVA fiber
three-edge bearing test configuration.
types and volume fractions. The primary PVA fibers used
In this test, the load corresponding to 0.025 cm (0.01 in.)
in the experimental work had an elastic modulus of 43 GPa
crack width and also the peak load-carrying capacity of
(6237 ksi) and were relatively fine with a 0.026 mm
concrete pipes are determined.
(0.001 in.) diameter, 6 mm (0.2362 in.) length and 1600 MPa
(232 ksi) tensile strength. Then fibers were used at 0.5, 1.0,
Experimental results
and 1.5% volume fraction. Two other PVA fiber types
Figure 9 presents the load deflection relationships (in three-
were also considered. One was relatively coarse with 0.1
edge bearing tests) for the first series. In this figure, all pipes
mm (0.0039 in.) diameter and 12 mm (0.4724 in.) length
have one layer of steel reinforcement, except for control pipe 1,
of 0.5 and 0.75% volume fraction with tensile strength of

88 ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2014

 Table 4—Loads corresponding to 0.025 cm
(0.01 in.) crack widths and peak capacity of
different pipes of first series
Load at 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) Load-carrying capacity,
Pipe crack width, kg (lb) kg (lb)
1 20,792 (45,838) 33,448 (73,740)
2 20,340 (44,842) 20,792 (45,838)
3 25,312 (55,803) 25,312 (55,803)
4 28,476 (62,779) 28,476 (62,779)
5 26,668 (58,793) 26,668 (58,792)
6 27,255 (60,088) 27,346 (60,287)
7 25,990 (57,298) 26,080 (57,497)

Fig. 9—Load-deflection curves in three-edge bearing tests Table 5—Loads corresponding to 0.025 cm
on first series of pipes with steel reinforcement (refer to (0.01 in.) crack width and peak capacity of
Table 2). (Note: 1 kg = 2.2 lb; 1 mm = 0.039 in.) different pipes of second series
which has two layers of steel. Pipes 1 and 2 with two and one Load at 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) Load-carrying capacity,
Pipe crack width, kg (lb) kg (lb)
layer of steel, respectively, were not fiber-reinforced. Adding
1 20,792 (45,838) 33,448 (73,740)
fiber with certain fiber types and volume fractions is observed
2 20,340 (44,841) 20,566 (45,340)
to improve ductility and load-carrying capacity of pipes. Table
3 23,504 (51,817) 23,504 (51,817)
4 presents loads corresponding to 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) crack
4 22,600 (49,824) 22,600 (49,824)
width and also the peak load of the pipes in series I. The ulti-
5 24,182 (53,312) 24,182 (53,312)
mate load capacity of the control pipe (pipe 2) with one layer of
steel was 21,000 kg (46,297 lb), which increased to 28,000 kg
load-carrying capacity and ductility levels which compared
(61,729 lb) for pipe 4 with 1% volume fine PVA fibers (33%
well with those of control pipe 2 with one layer of steel rein-
improvement). Fiber-reinforced pipe 4 also exhibited improved
forcement (and no fibers). The coarse fiber with a relatively
ductility when compared with the control pipe 2. Although
low aspect ratio of 50 and a relatively high volume frac-
lower ductility was observed for pipes 6 and 7, which used
tion of 2% did not produce favorable results. This could be
coarser fiber (2% volume), improvement in load capacity for
attributed to the damaging effect of such a high fiber volume
these two pipes was observed. The coarser PVA fibers used in
fraction on fresh mixture workability and fiber dispersion.
pipes 6 and 7 at a relatively high volume fraction (2%) actu-
Pipes 3 and 4 with 0.5% volume of higher aspect ratio fibers
ally lowered the ductility of the concrete pipes. This could be
and no steel reinforcement compared well against the control
attributed to the damage for workability of fresh concrete and
pipes with two layers of steel, in terms of ductility and loads
dispersion of fibers introduced by the high volume fraction of
at 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) crack width.
coarser fibers. These coarser fibers also had a relatively low
aspect (length-diameter) ratio (50 for coarser fibers versus 230
Comparing theoretical predictions with
for fine fibers), which lowers their reinforcement efficiency in
experimental results
concrete. The best balances of properties (strength and ductility)
Figures 11 and 12 compare the experimental and theoret-
were produced by pipe 4 (with 1.5% volume fine fiber) and pipe
ical values of ultimate load for different pipes considered in
5 (with 0.75% volume coarse fiber, which had an intermediate
the experimental program. Figures 13 and 14 also compare
coarseness with an aspect ratio of 120). It seems that 0.75%
the theoretical value of loads at 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) crack
volume of PVA fiber with an aspect ratio of 120 produces a
width for pipe series I and II, respectively. Theoretical
deserved balance of reinforcing effects and economy.
predictions were made based on observations of the predom-
This preferred fiber reinforcement condition yields
inance of either fiber rupture or pullout, as described below.
concrete pipes with one layer of steel reinforcement that
In series I tests, pipes 3 and 4 with finer fibers with an
compare well with pipe 2, with two layers of steel reinforce-
aspect ratio of 230, fiber rupture dominated, and thus equa-
ment in terms of load at 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) crack width
tions corresponding to fiber rupture were used in theoretical
and ductility. Pipe 1 actually exhibits better ductility when
investigation. In the case of pipes 5 and 7 (series I) and pipe
compared with pipe 1 at large deflection. It should be noted
3 (series II), with fibers of medium aspect ratio (120), some
that the peak load (generally neglected in designs) of pipe 1
fiber pullout was observed but fiber rupture was still preva-
is somewhat greater than that of pipe 4. Figure 10 presents
lent. In pipe 4 (series II), which incorporated coarse fibers
the load-deflections curve for pipes of series II without steel
of relatively low (120) aspect ratio, a bond strength t of
reinforcement (with fibers) as well as control pipes 1 and 2
10  MPa (1450 psi) yielded a satisfactory theoretical predic-
with two layers of steel reinforcement (and no fibers). The
tion of experimental results. (Using Eq. (20) and (22) with
load at 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) crack width as well as the ulti-
the experimental results could provide basis for the value
mate load test results for pipes of series II is presented in
of t.) Pipe 5 (series II) also contained coarse fibers which
Table 5. Reinforcement with 0.5% vol. fine and coarse fibers
exhibited predominantly pullout behavior. Fiber rupture was
(with aspect ratios of 230 and 120) produced pipes with
assumed to be prevalent in pipe 6 (Series I).

ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2014 89

Fig. 10—Load-deflection curves in three-edge bearing tests
on the second series of pipes without steel reinforcement
(refer to Table 3). (Note: 1 kg = 2.2 lb; 1 mm = 0.039 in.)
Fig. 11—Experimental and analytical predictions of ulti-
mate loads for tested pipes Series I (refer to Table 2). (Note:
1 kg.m/m = 2.2 lb.in./in.)
The experimental results are observed in Fig. 11 and 12 to
occur within ±10% of theoretical predictions. This finding
suggests that the theoretical models provide a reasonable
basis for predicting the ultimate load-carrying capacity of
concrete pipes with synthetic fiber reinforcement used alone
or in combination with conventional steel reinforcement.
CONCLUSIONS
To explore the potential for enhancement of service life
through refinement of structural design, PVA fibers of high
elastic modulus and desirable bonding to concrete were chosen
for use in concrete pipes. Concrete pipes were produced at
an industrial scale with different combinations of PVA fiber
and steel reinforcement. Fibers with different aspect ratios
(50-230) were used with volume fractions varying from 0.5%
to 2%. Three-edge bearing tests were conducted on pipes, and
their load-deflection behavior and those loads corresponding
to 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) crack width were obtained. Proper use
of synthetic fibers enabled reduction of steel reinforcement
and thus increased the protective cover of concrete over steel.
Depending on load-bearing requirements, synthetic fibers can
reduce the amount of steel reinforcement in concrete pipes by
50% or more. PVA fibers with aspect ratios of 120 to 230,
when used at a volume fraction of 0.5% to 0.75% in concrete
produced particularly desirable gains in the load-carrying
characteristics and durability of concrete pipes. Theoretical
models were developed for predicting the flexural strength
90
Fig. 12—Experimental and analytical predictions of ultimate
loads for tested pipes Series II (refer to Table 3). (Note:
1 kg.m/m = 2.2 lb.in./in.)
Fig. 13—Experimental and analytical predictions of loads
at 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) crack width for tested pipes Series I
(refer to Table 2). (Note: 1 kg.m/m = 2.2 lb.in./in.)
and load-carrying capacity of concrete pipes reinforced with
secondary synthetic fibers, with or without conventional steel
reinforcement. The models developed here account for the
contribution of fibers to the tensile load-carrying capacity of
concrete through pullout or rupture modes of failure at cracks.
The models were verified using outcomes of experiments on
pipes with different combinations of steel and synthetic fiber
reinforcement, and were found to provide a reasonable basis
for prediction of the load-carrying capacity of concrete pipes.
AUTHOR BIOS
Amirpasha Peyvandi is currently with HNTB Corporation as a Struc-
tural/Bridge Engineer. He received his BS and MS in civil and structural
engineering from the University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. He also received
his PhD in civil and environmental engineering at Michigan State Univer-
sity, East Lansing, MI. His research interests include application of nano-
technology in cementitious material and development of environmentally
friendly and energy-efficient construction materials and systems.
Parviz Soroushian, FACI, is a Professor of civil and environmental engi-
neering at Michigan State University. He received his BS from the Univer-
sity of Tehran and his MS and PhD from Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. His
research interests include materials science and engineering and environmen-
tally friendly and energy-efficient construction materials and systems.
Shervin Jahangirnejad is a PhD Candidate in the Civil and Environ-
mental Engineering Department at Michigan State University. He received
his BS in civil engineering from Azad University, Najafabad, Isfahan, Iran,
in 2000, and his MS in civil engineering from Michigan State University in
2005. His research interests include civil engineering materials and pave-
ment engineering.
ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2014
 3. Mirsayah, A. A., and Banthia, N., “Shear Strength of Steel Fiber-Re-
inforced Concrete,” ACI Materials Journal, V. 99, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 2002,
pp. 473-479.
4. Naaman, A. E., “Pull-Out Mechanism in Steel Fiber-Reinforced
Concrete,” Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, V. 102, No. 8, 1976,
pp. 1537-1548.
5. Batson, G., “Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete,” Materials Science and
Engineering, V. 25, 1976, pp. 53-58.
6. Soroushian, P., and Lee, C. D., “Distribution and Orientation of Fibers
in Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete,” ACI Materials Journal, V. 87, No. 5,
Sept.-Oct. 1990, pp. 433-439.
7. Olivito, R. S., and Zuccarello, F. A., “An Experimental Study on the
Tensile Strength of Steel Fiber Reinforced Concrete,” Composites. Part B,
Engineering, V. 41, No. 3, 2010, pp. 246-255.
8. Bencardino, F.; Rizzuti, L.; Spadea, G.; and Ramnath, N. S., “Stress-
Strain Behavior of Steel Fiber-Reinforced Concrete in Compression,”
Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, ASCE, V. 20, No. 3, 2008,
pp. 255-263.
Fig. 14—Experimental and analytical predictions of loads 9. Peyvandi, A.; Soroushian, P.; Balachandra, A. M.; and Sobolev, K.,
at 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) crack width for tested pipes Series II “Enhancement of the Durability Characteristics of Concrete Nanocomposite
Pipes with Modified Graphite Nanoplatelets,” Construction and Building
(refer to Table 3). (Note: 1 kg.m/m = 2.2 lb.in./in.) Materials, V. 47, 2013, pp. 111-117.
10. Heger, F. J., “Structural Behavior of Circular Reinforced Concrete
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Pipe-Development of Theory,” ACI Journal, V. 60, No. 11, Nov. 1963,
The authors wish to acknowledge the support of Northern Concrete Pipe, pp. 1567-1614.
Inc. in Charlotte, MI, toward performance of the pipe tests. The support of 11. Peyvandi, A., and Soroushian, P., “Structural Performance of
the U.S. EPA (Contract 68-0-03-065) for the project is also acknowledged. Dry-Cast Concrete Nanocomposite Pipes,” Materials and Structures, Oct.
2013, DOI: 10.617/s11527-013-0196-0.
12. Haktanir, T.; Ari, K.; Altun, F.; and Karahan, O., “A Comparative
NOTATION Experimental Investigation of Concrete, Reinforced-Concrete and Steel-
As =
steel reinforcement area Fibre Concrete Pipes Under Three-Edge-Bearing Test,” Construction and
a =
depth of compressive stress block Building Materials, V. 21, No. 8, Aug. 2007, pp. 1702-1708.
C =
neutral axis depth in concrete section 13. Banthia, N.; Bindiganavile, V.; Jones, J.; and Novak, J., “Fiber Rein-
Cm1 =
defined constant coefficient forced Concrete in Precast Concrete Applications: Research Leads to Innova-
Cm2 =
defined constant coefficient tive Products,” PCI Journal, Summer 2012, pp. 33-46.
Di =
internal diameter of pipe 14. American Concrete Pipe Association, “Standard Installations and
DLut =
test load that cracks pipe Bedding Factors for the Indirect Design Method,” Design Data 9, Oct.
d =
effective depth of concrete section 2007, pp. 1-11.
d f =
fiber diameter 15. ASCE 27-00, “Standard Practice for Direct Design of Precast
F =
mean fiber frictional bond resistance Concrete Pipe for Jacking in Trenchless Construction,” ASCE, Reston, VA,
fs.01 =
maximum stress in reinforcement when maximum crack width 2000, 62 pp.
is 0.025 cm (0.01 in.) 16. ASCE 15-98, “Standard Practice for Direct Design of Buried Precast
fy = reinforced steel yield stress Concrete Pipe Using Standard Installations,” ASCE, Reston, VA, 2000,
h = pipe wall thickness 50 pp.
j = coefficient for moment arm at service load stress 17. Hulatt, J.; Hollaway, L.; and Thorne, A., “The Use of Advanced
Kmr = coefficient that varies with wall thickness of pipe Polymer Composites to Form an Economic Structural Unit,” Construction and
Lf = length of fiber Building Materials, V. 17, No. 1, 2003, pp. 55-68.
M = moment at different pipe’s section 18. Prudencio, L.; Austin, S.; Jones, P.; Armelin, H.; and Robins, P.,
MU = ultimate flexural strength of reinforced concrete “Prediction of Steel Fibre Reinforced Concrete Under Flexure From an
N = number of fibers per unit area Inferred Fibre Pull-Out Response,” Materials and Structures, V. 39, No. 6,
S = internal diameter of pipe 2006, pp. 601-610.
U = ultimate tensile force of single fiber 19. Ezeldin, A. S., “Optimum Design of Reinforced Fiber Concrete
Vf = fiber volume fraction Subjected to Bending and Geometrical Constraints,” Computers & Struc-
Wp = weight of pipe tures, V. 41, No. 5, 1991, pp. 1095-1100.
Wt = total load of three-edge bearing test 20. Yang, J. M.; Min, K. H.; Shin, H. O.; and Yoon, Y. S., “Effect of
fmr = strength reduction factor for flexural tension Steel and Synthetic Fibers on Flexural Behavior of High-Strength Concrete
l = redaction factor for variability in test results Beams Reinforced with FRP Bars,” Composites Part B: Engineering,
sfu = ultimate tensile stress tolerated by fibers V. 43, No. 3, Apr. 2012, pp. 1077-1086.
st = tensile stress in fibrous concrete 21. Soroushian, P.; Chowdhury, H.; and Tewodros, G., “Evaluation
tf = shear strength in fibrous concrete of Water-Repelling Additives for Use in Concrete-Based Sanitary Sewer
Infrastructure,” Journal of Infrastructure Systems, V. 15, No. 2, pp. 2009,
REFERENCES pp. 106-110.
1. Shook, W. E., and Bell, L. W., “Corrosion Control in Concrete Pipe 22. ASTM C192/C192M-07, “Standard Practice for Making and Curing
and Manholes,” Technical Presentation, Water Environmental Federation, Concrete Test Specimens in the Laboratory,” ASTM International, West
Orlando, FL, 1998, pp. 1-5. Conshohocken, PA, 2007, 8 pp.
2. Fuente, A.; Escariz, R. C.; Figueiredo, A. D.; Molins, C.; and Aguado, 23. ASTM C76-12, “Standard Specification for Reinforced Concrete
A., “A New Design Method for Steel Fibre Reinforced Concrete Pipes,” Culvert, Storm Drain, and Sewer Pipe,” ASTM International, West Consho-
Construction and Building Materials, V. 30, 2012, pp. 547-555. hocken, PA, 2012, 11 pp.

ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2014 91

 NOTES:

92 ACI Structural Journal/January-February 2014

View publication stats