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

net/publication/330390364

Modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratio of fiber-reinforced concrete in

Colombia from ultrasonic pulse velocities

Article  in  Journal of Building Engineering · May 2019

DOI: 10.1016/j.jobe.2019.01.016

CITATIONS READS

3 299

3 authors, including:

Julian Carrillo Juan Lizarazo Marriaga

Nueva Granada Military University National University of Colombia
156 PUBLICATIONS   352 CITATIONS    48 PUBLICATIONS   172 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Electrical characterization of building materials View project

CEER - Thin Wall Project View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Julian Carrillo on 22 January 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratio of fiber-reinforced concrete in

Colombia from ultrasonic pulse velocities

Julian Carrillo a,1, Julieth Ramirezb, Juan Lizarazo-Marriagac

a
Full professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Nueva Granada Military University, UMNG, Bogotá, Colombia,

wjcarrillo@gmail.com
b
Research assistant, Structures and Earthquakes Research Group, Nueva Granada Military University, UMNG, Bogotá,

Colombia, estructuras.sismica@unimilitar.edu.co
c
Associate professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, National University of Colombia,

jmlizarazom@unal.edu.co

Abstract

Modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s ratio are the main mechanical properties of concrete for assessing the

flexural and shear stiffness of concrete elements. Although steel fibers are beginning to be accepted in modern

building codes, equations for estimating the elasticity modulus and Poisson’s ratio of Fiber Reinforced Concrete

(FRC) are not provided in such building codes. Even though the direct measurement of the modulus of elasticity

and the Poisson’s ratio is adequately established, the use of non-destructive methods such the Ultrasonic Pulse

Velocity (UPV) test offers an economical and easy alternative that must be explored. The aim of this paper is

to propose empirical relationships for estimating the dynamic modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratio of

concrete reinforced with steel, synthetic and hybrid fibers, using results measured during the UPV tests. The

research is also intended to assess results of models reported in a literature review, to evaluate the effect of test

setup (direct, semi-direct and direct), and to establish a relationship between the dynamic modulus of elasticity

of FRC and the characteristics of steel, polypropylene/polyethylene and hybrid fibers. The experimental

program included dynamic non-destructive tests and static destructive tests of 29 concrete specimens. The

variables included in the experimental program were the fiber type (steel, synthetic and hybrid), the fiber

1
Corresponding author. Tel.: +57 1 6500000 Ext. 1705; fax: + 57 1 6370557. Cra. 11 No. 101-80, E-mail:

wjcarrillo@gmail.com
content and the ultrasonic pulse velocity setup (direct and semi-direct). The length, diameter and aspect ratio

of fibers were 50 mm, 1.05 mm and 48 for the steel fibers, and 50 mm, 0.68 mm and 74 for the

polypropylene/polyethylene synthetic fibers. Fiber volume fractions in the concrete varied between 0.17% and

0.93%. The study also compared the results obtained in the static tests with the dynamic results, in order to

identify the differences between static and dynamic behavior.

Keywords: fiber reinforced concrete; modulus of elasticity; Poisson’s ratio; non-destructive test; ultrasonic

pulse velocity test.

1. Introduction

Flexural and shear stiffness should be computed for assessing not only the lateral displacements but also the

deflections of concrete elements. Steel fibers provide great advantages in the field of high-rise concrete

buildings and long span concrete bridges subjected to earthquake demands. Modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s

ratio are the main mechanical properties of concrete for assessing the flexural and shear stiffness of concrete

structures. Story drifts at service limit state and vertical deflections depend directly on the elastic stiffness of

the concrete elements. Most building codes specifies empirical equations for estimating modulus of elasticity

of plain concrete (without fibers) and assume that Poisson’s ratio is equal to 0.20. Kumar et al. [1] stated that

fibers are added to concrete to improve toughness, ductility and residual strength at the material level; and yield

capacity, post-cracking capacity, energy absorption, rotational capacity and yield strength at the structural level.

Nowadays, steel fibers comprise several applications in the construction industry such as in high or ultra-high-

performance concrete structures [2]. Parra-Montesinos [3] argued that high performance fiber reinforced

concrete is suitable to be used in structural members where an adequate seismic behavior is required. Two of

the European code developments of fiber reinforced concrete include the RILEM TC 162-TDF [4] and the FIB

Model Code 2010 [5]. Although ACI in America does not have a particular code for fiber concrete design, there

are great advances developed by the ACI 544 committee; for instance, ACI 544.4R [6] includes design

considerations for flexure and shear. The ACI-318 American Building Code [7] and the NSR-10 Colombian

Code for Earthquake-resistant Construction [8] accept the use of this type of reinforcement to replace the

minimum shear reinforcement of concrete beams. However, Correal et al. [9] and Carrillo et al. [10] argued
that the use of Fiber-Reinforced Concrete (FRC) in Colombia is essentially limited to industrial floors and

tunnel linings.

Although steel fibers are beginning to be accepted in modern building codes, especially for contributing

to the shear and flexural strength of concrete beams, equations for estimating the elasticity modulus and

Poisson’s ratio of FRC are not provided in such building codes. Considering that the elastic parameters data of

FRC is fundamental for structural design, an in-deep knowledge about their measurement methods is required.

Destructive and non-destructive tests are commonly used for assessing the dynamic and static elastic properties

of concrete. Non-destructive tests are low-cost experiments where the evaluated elements are not damaged and,

therefore, tests can be performed repeatedly. Non-destructive tests are mainly used to assess the uniformity of

the material in a structure, the modulus of elasticity and strength of concrete, the thickness of a concrete layer,

the defects of structural systems, and the evolution over time of properties such as curing and hardening of

concrete. Ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) test is widely used to evaluate concrete structures due to its

simplicity, versatility and repeatability. Hassan and Jones [11] pointed out that the UPV test is the most reliable,

easy and portable non-destructive method that can be used for assessing elastic properties of materials. The

UPV method aids at detecting not only discontinuities in deep elements, but also extremely small

discontinuities due to the high sensitivity of the test. Additionally, the test can be performed having access to

only one of the surfaces of the element. The accuracy of the method is greater than that of other non-destructive

tests, since it allows to determine the position, size, orientation, shape and nature of the discontinuities.

According to Blitz and Simpson [12], the test equipment for the ultrasonic pulse velocity test must generate a

pulse that can be transmitted to concrete by means of a transmission and a reception transducer, thus turning

mechanical energy into new impulses of the same frequency. These emitter and receiver transducers can

configured using three setups: direct, semi-direct and indirect [13]. The direct method is one of the most

satisfactory method, since the maximum energy of the pulse is sent and received. The semi-direct method is

satisfactory, but its configuration must be performed with greater caution in order to avoid losing the signal.

The indirect method turns out to be the least satisfactory since the signal is relatively low [13].
 The aim of this paper is to propose empirical relationships for estimating the dynamic modulus of elasticity

and Poisson's ratio of concrete reinforced with steel, synthetic and hybrid fibers, using results measured during

the UPV tests. This research is also intended to assess results of some models reported in a literature review,

to evaluate the effect of test setup (direct, semi-direct and direct), and establish a relationship between the

dynamic modulus of elasticity of FRC and the characteristics of steel, polypropylene/polyethylene and hybrid

fibers. The experimental study shown in this paper includes dynamic non-destructive tests and static destructive

tests. The dynamic properties were analyzed based on variables such as fiber type, fiber content and test setup.

The length, diameter and aspect ratio of fibers were 50 mm, 1.05 mm and 48 for the steel fibers, and 50 mm,

0.68 mm and 74 for the polypropylene/polyethylene synthetic fibers. Fiber volume fractions in the concrete

varied between 0.17% and 0.93%. The non-destructive dynamic tests used the ultrasonic pulse velocity and

were performed on 15 prismatic specimens (beam type) of height, width and length of 150, 150 and 300 mm,

respectively. The static destructive tests comprised compressive strength, modulus of elasticity and Poisson's

ratio, and were performed on the 15 prismatic specimens (beam type) that were previously used in the non-

destructive tests, and on 12 cylindrical specimens of 150 mm diameter and 300 mm height. In the case of

dynamic tests, two test setups were used; direct and semi-direct. The recorded pulse rates allowed calculating

the dynamic values of the modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratio. The study also compared the results

obtained in the static tests with the dynamic results, in order to identify the differences between static and

dynamic behavior. The paper is organized as follows: The next section discusses the background regarding

concrete properties estimated with results from UPV method. Then, variables, testing matrix and tests setup of

the experimental study is described. Finally, the results obtained from the destructive and non-destructive

method are discussed and compared with results reported in the literature review. Equations to estimate the

dynamic modulus of elasticity and the dynamic Poisson's ratio of FRC using data measured from UPV tests are

also proposed in this paper.

2. Concrete properties with the ultrasonic pulse velocity method

Velocity of ultrasonic pulses depends on the elastic properties and density of the tested material [13]. These

pulses are generated by means of vibratory excitations having longitudinal or compressive waveforms,
transverse or shear waves, and surface waves such as Rayleigh and Lamb waves. Each of these waves is

characterized by its direction, velocity and input energy. For instance, compressive waves depend on the elastic

properties and usually travel in homogeneous, isotropic and elastic medium. It is also possible to apply

compressive waves to heterogeneous medium such as concrete, which move very fast and help to get useful

information of structures [11].

A literature review evidenced measured data and equations proposed in several studies on destructive

and non-destructive tests on plain and Fiber-Reinforced Concrete (FRC) [14, 15, 16, 17, 11, 18]. Benaicha et

al. [14] conducted a research to assess the curing time of FRC by means of non-destructive tests. These authors

proposed a relationship between compressive strength, flexural strength, modulus of elasticity and ultrasonic

pulse velocity. These authors argued that the addition of fibers does not improve the compression behavior of

the specimens, and their addition in excess causes disorder in the matrix promoting a distributed crack

propagation. Benaicha et al. [14] argued that the flexural strength increases with the fiber content added to

concrete. In the case of ultrasonic pulse velocity tests, Benaicha et al. stated also that the velocity recorded in

FRC is faster than that of plain concrete, because fibers allow the wave to travel faster through the specimen.

These authors also observed that the velocity depends on the modulus of elasticity because the higher the

stiffness, the higher the velocity. In this way, Benaicha et al. [14] proposed Eq. (1), shown in Table 1, to

estimate the dynamic modulus of elasticity (Ed).

Tsioulou et al. [15] studied concrete reinforced with high-strength steel fibers using tensile and

compression static tests, ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) dynamic tests, and the non-destructive rebound

hammer tests. These authors propose calculating the compressive strength of plain concrete and concrete

reinforced using a fiber volume content (Vf) of 1% and 3%, by means of Eqs. (2), (4) and (6), respectively (see

Table 1). Additionally, Tsioulou et al. proposed to compute the static modulus of elasticity (E) of the plain

concrete and concrete having a volume fraction of fibers (Vf) equal to 1% and 3%, by means of Eqs. (3), (5)

and (7), respectively (see Table 1). These authors concluded that although steel fibers improve the compressive

strength of concrete by approximately 5%, fibers do not affect the modulus of elasticity of concrete.
 Table 1. Equations available in the literature review

Author Equation Vf (%) No.

Benaicha et al.
1.016 10 1.156 3210  N/A (1)
(2015)

.
′ 0.06007   (2) 
0%
.
0.1143 (3)
Tsioulou et al. ′ 0.2245 .
  (4)
(2017) 1%
0.0151 35.271 (5)
.
′ 0.534   (6)
.
3%
0.5518   (7)
Vp is the direct velocity in m/s, f’c is the compressive strength in MPa, and E is the modulus of elasticity in MPa.

Qixian and Bungey [16] conducted an experimental study to assess the dynamic modulus of elasticity

and the dynamic Poisson’s ratio of concrete. These authors observed that the values of the dynamic modulus

of elasticity obtained by means of the surface velocity of the Rayleigh wave (Vr) varied between 21 and 40

GPa, and the values of the Poisson's ratio (d) varied between 0.21 and 0.28. Qixian and Bungey [16] also

observed that values of the elasticity modulus obtained through the shear waves varied between 25 to 37 GPa

while the Poisson’s ratio varied between 0.24 to 0.28. In this way, these authors argued that velocity of the

primary waves (Vp) and the Rayleigh waves (Vr) can be used to obtain the dynamic modulus of elasticity and

the dynamic Poisson’s ratio, since the values recorded using the two setup are relatively close.

Petro and Kim [17] conducted a research to detect the delamination of two concrete slabs by using

results from the ultrasonic pulse velocity test. The experimental study included the direct and indirect pulse

transmission setups applied to two slabs with different thickness. The transit time in the direct transmission test

for the 150 mm slab was, on average, 34.1 s in the control area, while in the delamination zone, the maximum

transmission time value occurred in the center and it did not vary significantly. The average time in the control

area of the 300 mm slab was 65.2 s, which was twice the value recorded in the 150 mm slab. However, a

similar behavior was observed in the two slabs, since the maximum travel time for the two slabs was recorded

in the delamination zone. The transmission times obtained in the study served as a basis for calculating the P

wave velocities and allowed to find Young's dynamic modulus of 39 GPa and a Poisson's ratio of 0.24 for the
two types of slabs. Petro and Kim [17] also carried out static compression tests in two cylinders following the

ASTM C-469 [19] standard. Results showed that the static Young's modulus was, on average, 41 GPa, which

showed that there were no significant differences compared to Young's modulus dynamic values.

Hassan and Jones [11] determined that the dynamic modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratio from the

ultrasonic pulse velocity tests were 48 GPa and 0.24, respectively. Using resonance tests, these authors also

determined that the average dynamic elasticity modulus was 51 GPa. In terms of Poisson's ratio, the values

were very close to those of plain concrete, which varied between 0.18 to 0.20. Finally, these authors observed

that pulse velocities measured in FRC were higher than that measured in plain concrete.

Lastly, Katzer and Kobaka [18] compared the experimental performance of concrete reinforced with

steel fibers having volume fractions varying between 0% and 2.8%. These authors observed that the dynamic

modulus of elasticity was 39.3 GPa for the plain concrete, and 33 GPa for the concrete having 2.8% of fibers.

Based on trends of measured results, Katzer and Kobaka [18] proposed Eq. (8) to calculate the dynamic

modulus of elasticity in GPa, in terms of the volume content in percentage (Vf) of steel fiber. These authors

finally concluded that the dynamic modulus of fiber reinforced concrete decreases approximately 25%

compared to that of the plain concrete.

39.3 6.5 1.5 (8)

A literature review revealed there is a large amount of data on pulse velocity models to determine the

dynamic elastic mechanical properties of plain concrete. However, the research reported in this paper is focused

in developing some experimental models applicable to concrete mixtures using steel,

polypropylene/polyethylene and hybrid fibers. Models and data of dynamic properties of fiber reinforced

concrete are not abundant in the literature and corresponds to the gap in the knowledge that this research wants

to overcome.

3. Experimental study

The experimental study carried out in this research included destructive and non-destructive tests to determine

the compressive strength, the modulus of elasticity and the Poisson's ratio of concrete. The non-destructive tests

were carried out by means of the ultrasonic pulse velocity method.

3.1 Variables and testing matrix

The variables included in this research were the fiber type (steel, synthetic and hybrid), the fiber content and

the ultrasonic pulse velocity setup (direct and semi-direct). Twenty-nine concrete specimens were built: 16

prismatic and 13 cylindrical specimens. From the 29 specimens, 2 were of plain concrete (PC), 12 of Steel

Fiber-Reinforced Concrete (SFRC), 10 of Polypropylene/Polyethylene Fiber-Reinforced Concrete (PFRC), and

5 of Hybrid Fiber-Reinforced Concrete (HFRC). Table 2 shows the real fiber volume content (Vf), which was

calculated by using Eq. (9). The real dosage (Df-real) was obtained through the fiber weight measured in three

cylindrical specimens measuring 15×30 cm for each fiber type and content.

(9)

Dynamic non-destructive tests using the ultrasonic pulse velocity (UPV) method and the static

destructive tests were performed to determine the dynamic and static values of the modulus of elasticity and

Poisson's ratio. The matrix of specimens intended for dynamic non-destructive tests and static destructive tests

is shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Study variables and testing matrix

FRC
Plain
concrete Steel, S Polypropylene/Polyethylene, P Hybrid
Parameter
RL-45/50-BN
** Tuf Strand, P S+P S+P S+P
hooked-end, S
Length (mm) ** 50 50 ** ** **
Diameter (mm) ** 1.05 0.68 ** ** **
Aspect ratio ** 48 74 ** ** **
Nominal dosage
0 15 30 60 3 5 9 15+0.30 30+0.60 60+1.20
(kg/m3)
Real dosage (kg/m3) 0 13.5 31.5 65.2 3.9 5.1 9.0 13.73+0.25 27.72+0.54 63.52+1.09

Volume fraction 0.17+0.02 0.35+0.06 0.81+0.12

0 0.17 0.40 0.83 0.42 0.56 0.98
(%) 0.20 0.41 0.93
f'c and UPV tests in
1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1
15×15×30cm beams
f'c, E, and ʋ tests in
1 2 2 2 2 1 2 & 2 &
15×30 cm cylinders
3.2 Description and labeling of specimens

The experimental study included four types of concrete mixtures. The nominal compressive strength of concrete

was 21 MPa and the nominal maximum aggregate size was 38.1 mm. The difference among three of the four

mixtures was the fiber type added (steel, polypropylene/polyethylene and hybrid, see Table 2), while the fourth

type of mixture did not contain any type of fiber (plain concrete). With the four types of mixtures, 16 prismatic

specimens (beam type) of 150150300 mm and 13 cylindrical specimens of 150 mm diameter and 300 mm

height were cast. A specific labeling system for the specimens was planned to simplify the data identification

and the analysis of results. By taking SFRCD3 as an example, the first part determines the type of mixture

(SFRC = Steel Fiber-Reinforced Concrete, PFRC = Polypropylene/Polyethylene Fiber-Reinforced Concrete,

HFRC = Hybrid Fiber-Reinforced Concrete, PC = Plain Concrete), the second part defines the type of test

method (D = dynamic non-destructive using Direct setup, SD = dynamic non-destructive using Semi-Direct

setup; in case neither "D" nor "SD" is identified, it corresponds to a destructive static test). Finally, the third

part is the number that identifies the nominal fiber content in kg/m3.

3.3 Setup of dynamic and static tests

According to ASTM C-597 [22], available test equipment limits path lengths to approximately 50-mm

minimum and 15-m maximum, depending, in part, upon the frequency and intensity of the generated signal.

The upper limit of the path length depends mainly on surface conditions and on the concrete characteristics of

the specimen. For the shorter path lengths where loss of signal is not the governing factor, ASTM C-597 [22]

recommends to use resonant frequencies of 50 kHz or higher to achieve more accurate transit-time

measurements and hence greater sensitivity. The non-destructive UPV tests were carried out using a Pundit PL-

200 equipment, which features an emitter transducer and a receiver transducer with frequency of 54 kHz.

Two setups of the UPV test were used in this study; direct and semi-direct setup, which are standardized

by the BS-1881 standard [20]. Fig. 1a shows the setup of the direct method, in which the transducer emitter

was located in the middle of the face of the specimen having 300 mm and the transducer receiver in the middle

of the opposite face, in such a way that the transducers were 150 mm apart from each other. Fig. 1b shows the

setup of the semi-direct method, where one of the transducers was located on the face having 300 mm, at 50
mm from one of the sides having 150 mm, and the other transducer is located in the middle of the other adjacent

face having 300 mm, with a diagonal spacing between transducers of 125 mm. The distances indicated were

chosen to fulfill recommendations provided by ASTM C-597 [22] and to facilitate the use of the method in

practical engineering cases.

150 mm
50 mm

300 mm

a) b)

Figure 1. Types of ultrasonic pulse velocity measurement: a) direct-transmission method, b) semi-direct transmission

method.

This way, the P-wave velocity (Vp, Vps) and the S-wave velocity (Vs, Vss) were obtained from the direct

and semi-direct methods. The P-wave velocity was registered by the Pundit PL-200 equipment, while the S-

wave velocity was obtained from the PL-Link software included in the Pundit PL-200 equipment. This software

also records the signal from the emitter to the receiver transducer, and then allowing to compute the P, S and

R wave velocities at any point of the recorded signal. Finally, four values of the P and S waves pulse velocity

were recorded in the test of each specimen. The mean value of P- and S-waves was computed from four

different values recorded. After running the testing, the measured values of the (P) primary wave velocities by

the direct (Vp) and semi-direct (Vps) method, and the (S) secondary wave velocities by the direct (Vs) and semi-

direct (Vss) method, allowed estimating the dynamic Poisson ratio by means of Eq. (10) pointed out by

Villaverde [21].

(10)

where the velocities Vp, Vps, Vs and Vss are expressed in m/s. Then, the value of the dynamic Poisson's ratio

allowed to estimate the dynamic modulus of elasticity through Eq. (11) proposed by ASTM C-597 [22], where
Ed is the dynamic modulus of elasticity,  is the density of the material, vd is the dynamic Poisson’s ratio, and

Vp is the velocity at which the wave propagates. It is worth to mention that, due to the ultrasonic pulse velocity

is very sensitive to environmental factors such as noise or vibrations, it was avoided performing the test when

handling heavy machinery, or when performing a test with high noise or vibration impact.

(Pa) (11)

The destructive tests for assessing the compressive strength of concrete cylinders were carried out

based on the procedure indicated in ASTM C-39 [23]. As shown in Table 2, compressive strength tests were

performed on 12 cylindrical specimens and 15 prismatic specimens. The final damage stage of the prismatic

and cylindrical specimens is shown in Figs. 2a and 2b, respectively. Tests of the modulus of elasticity and

Poisson's ratio were based on the procedure reported by ASTM C-469 [19] (see Fig. 2c).

a) b) c)

Figure 2. Destructive tests: a) compressive strength of cylindrical specimen, b) compressive strength of prismatic

specimen, c) elasticity modulus and Poisson's ratio.

4. Results and discussion

This section presents the analysis of the results obtained from the non-destructive method. Comparison between

results from non-destructive and destructive tests is also presented and discussed. Results measured in this

research are compared with results reported in the literature review. Finally, equations are proposed to estimate

the dynamic modulus of elasticity and the dynamic Poisson's ratio of fiber reinforced concrete using data

measured from UPV tests.

 The data measured during tests were analyzed using statistical parameters such as the mean value (X), the

coefficient of variation (CV) and the correlation coefficient (r). Here, the variation of the data was defined in

terms of the CV value; for example, slight variation was defined for CV values lower than 10%, moderate

variation for CV values between 10% and 35%, and high variation for CV values higher than 35%. Data and

regression trends were assessed from the correlation coefficient (r); for example, weak correlation for r values

lower than 0.5, moderate correlation for r between 0.5 and 0.8, and strong correlation for r between 0.8 and 1.

4.1 Dynamic non-destructive tests

Tables 3 and 4 show the statistical results of the velocities and densities recorded. In the tables, Vp and Vs are

the P- and S-waves velocities, respectively, measured during direct method; and Vps and Vss are the P- and S-

waves velocities, respectively, measured during the semi-direct method. The Ed parameter is the dynamic

modulus of elasticity and ʋd is the dynamic Poisson's ratio related to the direct method. On the other hand, Eds

and ʋds are the dynamic modulus of elasticity and the dynamic Poisson’s ratio, respectively, related to the semi-

direct method. The values of the modulus of elasticity were normalized with the square root of the concrete's

compressive strength (f’c), in order to compare the results with data published in the literature review. The f’c

value used in for normalizing is the average of the results obtained from compressive strength static tests

performed on the cylindrical specimens (see Table 5).

Table 3. Results from UPV tests using the direct setup

Vp (m/s) Vs (m/s) Ed /f’c (MPa) ʋd ρ 

Specimen 3
X CV (%) X CV (%) X CV (%) X CV (%) (kg/m )
CSD 4298 0.0 2753 0.4 6238 0.4 0.15 3.1 2300
SFRCD15 4020 1.6 2601 2.4 5598 4.1 0.14 7.3 2378
SFRCD30 3971 0.2 2590 0.4 5534 0.6 0.13 3.4 2348
SFRCD60 3880 0.3 2542 2.2 5205 1.7 0.12 25.0 2407
PFRCD3 4063 1.3 2628 0.8 5876 2.1 0.14 5.8 2333
PFRCD5 3975 0.6 2600 1.2 5730 1.7 0.13 6.7 2348
PFRCD9 3901 2.0 2580 1.7 5474 3.6 0.11 6.1 2307
HFRCD15 3736 0.4 2456 0.3 4815* 0.6* 0.12 7.3 2363
HFRCD30 4049 0.2 2635 0.5 5633 0.6 0.13 4.5 2304
HFRCD60 3852 0.3 2552 0.4 5097 0.5 0.11 6.3 2370
* Data not considered because it was outside the range of values measured in the specimens.
 Table 4. Results from UPV tests using the semi-direct setup

Vps (m/s) Vss (m/s) Eds /f’c (MPa) ʋds ρ 

Specimen 3
X CV (%) X CV (%) X CV (%) X CV (%) (kg/m )
CSSD 4549 0.2 2536 0.4 5851* 1.6* 0.27* 0.9 2300
SFRCSD15 3553 0.8 2162 0.6 4102 1.2 0.21 4.3 2378
SFRCSD30 3520 1.1 2179 2.7 4122 3.9 0.19 10.5 2348
SFRCSD60 3338 3.0 2137 2.8 3773 5.6 0.15 9.8 2407
PFRCSD3 3649 0.5 2194 1.0 4371 1.7 0.22 2.9 2333
PFRCSD5 3620 1.5 2160 1.4 4291 2.8 0.22 3.3 2348
PFRCSD9 3503 1.1 2174 1.9 4146 3.0 0.19 5.8 2307
HFRCSD15 3617 0.2 2139 0.3 4024 0.2 0.23 1.3 2363
HFRCSD30 3550 0.9 2264 1.5 4257 2.2 0.16 6.8 2304
HFRCSD60 3465 1.0 2150 0.7 3860 1.2 0.19 6.0 2370
* Data not considered because it was outside the range of values measured in the specimens.

Malhotra and Carino [13] argued that the direct setup of UPV test guarantees the transmission of the

maximum pulse energy and, therefore, Vp and Vs characterize 100% of the emitted wave signal. This behavior

is observed in the data presented in Tables 3 and 4, since the velocities obtained by means of the direct setup

are greater than those obtained by the semi-direct setup, for both Vp and Vs. As shown in Table 4, an exception

of this trend was observed for the plain concrete (PC), which reached the maximum velocity by the semi-direct

method. Although, from a theoretical point of view, the transmission of the maximum energy during the semi-

direct method is not guaranteed, results obtained in this study from this setup showed a high proportion of the

velocities obtained from the direct setup. In the case of Vps, the average value was 3535 m/s, which is equivalent

to 82% of the maximum velocity reached by the P-wave (Vp). Likewise, the average value of Vss was 2210 m/s,

which is equivalent to 80% of the maximum velocity reached by the S-wave (Vs).

Regarding both the direct and semi-direct setups, Tables 3 and 4 also show that the S-wave velocity is

lower than the P-wave velocity. Therefore, the data measured concur with the theoretical trends: for example,

Elnashai and Di Sarno [24] state that S-waves travel at a velocity that varies between 50% to 60% of the P-

wave velocity. Results of this study showed that, in the case of the direct setup, the mean value of the S-wave

velocity (Vs) was 2594 m/s, which is equivalent to 65% of the mean value of the P-wave velocity. In the case

of the semi-direct setup, the mean value of Vss was equivalent to 61% of the mean value of the P-wave velocity.
 Modulus of elasticity and dynamic Poisson's ratio were calculated from Eqs. (11) and (10),

respectively, using the measured data of Vp, Vps, Vs and Vss. Tables 3 and 4 show that the highest values of the

dynamic modulus of elasticity are associated to concrete reinforced with the lowest contents of

polypropylene/polyethylene (0.42%) and steel (0.17%) fibers. Tables 3 and 4 also show that the lowest values

are associated to the highest contents of steel (0.83%), synthetic (0.98%) and hybrid (0.93%) fibers. This trend

evidences that the amount of fibers directly affects the dynamic modulus of elasticity, which causes the modulus

of elasticity to decrease with the increase of fiber content.

Tables 3 and 4 also show that the normalized values of the modulus of elasticity from the direct setup

are greater than those associated with the semi-direct setup; for example, the Ed/f’c values vary between 5097

and 6238 in MPa, while the Eds/f’c values vary between 3773 and 5851 in MPa. Table 3 shows that the

normalized values of modulus of elasticity of plain concrete from the direct setup decreases between 6% and

18% when steel, synthetic and hybrid fibers are added to the mixture. According to Katzer and Kobaka [18],

the dynamic modulus of elasticity of the plain concrete decreases 25%, on average, when 2.8% content of steel

fibers are used. The decrease of modulus of elasticity observed by Katzer and Kobaka [18] is higher than the

decrease recorded in this study (see Table 3), because the maximum fiber content used by these authors (2.8%)

was significantly higher than that used in this study (0.83%). On the other hand, Tables 3 and 4 show that the

coefficient of variation of the dynamic modulus of elasticity from the direct and semi-direct setups was lower

than 6% for the PC and for the FRC. Therefore, this low variation aids to demonstrate that the direct and semi-

direct setups are reliable methods to obtain the dynamic modulus of elasticity of the concrete studied herein.

In terms of the dynamic Poisson's ratio, Tables 3 and 4 show that fiber added to the mixture has a

greater effect on the Poisson's ratio than on the dynamic modulus of elasticity; for example, the differences in

Poisson's ratio between concretes vary between 7% and 15% for the direct setup, and between 0% and 30% for

the semi-direct setup. Table 3 shows that the dynamic Poisson's ratio of the plain concrete obtained from the

direct setup decreased, on average, by 13% when steel fibers were used, 16% with synthetic fibers, and 20%

with hybrid fibers. Table 4 shows that the dynamic Poisson's ratio of the plain concrete obtained from the semi-

direct setup decreased, on average, by 32% when adding steel fibers, 22% with synthetic fibers and 28% with
hybrid fiber. These lower percentages showed that fiber addition causes a decrease in the dynamic Poisson's

ratio of concrete for all types of fiber and for all volume contents. On the other hand, Tables 3 and 4 show that

the variation of data of the dynamic Poisson’s ratio is, in general, moderate (CV between 0.9 and 11%), which

is considered an accepted variation.

Figs. 3a and 3b show the relationship between both the dynamic modulus of elasticity and the dynamic

Poisson's ratio from the direct and semi-direct setups, and of the parameter Vf(lf/df) (fiber volume content in %

× fiber aspect ratio). From a dimensional analysis and several iterations with the measured data, this parameter

was selected for observing distinctly the trends of the data measured. The porosity of the concrete is triggered

by the air content added to the concrete mixture during mixing of fibers; for instance, the higher fiber volume

content, the higher air content in the mixture. Therefore, the effect of the porosity on the ultrasonic pulse

velocity is also considered using the parameter Vf(lf/df). This parameter is also commonly used to assess the

relationship of the properties of fiber-reinforced concrete. As stated in section 3.1, the results of concrete

reinforced with steel, synthetic and hybrid fibers from the direct setup are shown in Fig. 3 using the labels

SFRCD, PFRCD and HFRC, respectively; and the results from the semi-direct setup are indicated using the

labels SFRCSD, PFRCSD and HFRCSD conventions, respectively.

7500 0.3 SFRCD PFRCD

CRFAD CRFSD CRFHD
HFRCD SFRCSD
r=0.88
SFRCSD PFRCSD HFRCSD PFRCSD HFRCSD
r=0.36
Ed/ f''c (MPa)

6000 0.2
r=0.99

r=0.99
d

r=0.98 r=0.99
r=0.89
4500 0.1 r=0.75
r=0.99 r=0.98

r=0.62
r=0.92

3000 0
0 25 50 75 0 25 50 75
(a) ⁄ (b) ⁄

Figure 3. Relationship of the mechanical properties with the fiber parameters: a) dynamic modulus of elasticity, b)

dynamic Poisson's ratio.

Figs. 3a and 3b showed that the modulus of elasticity and the Poisson's ratio obtained from the direct and

semi-direct setups for all the mixtures tend to decrease with the increment of Vf(lf/df). Fig. 3a shows that the

dynamic modulus of elasticity obtained from the direct setup is higher than that obtained from the semi-direct
setup. In contrast, it is observed in Fig. 3b that the dynamic Poisson ratio obtained from the direct setup is lower

than that obtained from the semi-direct setup. Figs. 3a and 3b also show that the linear regression analysis

correlate suitably the measured data of the modulus of elasticity and the dynamic Poisson's ratio with Vf(lf/df),

since the correlation coefficients vary between 0.62 and 0.99, approximately. Figs. 3a and 3b also show that

the highest values of the modulus of elasticity and the dynamic Poisson's ratio are associated with synthetic

fiber-reinforced concrete.

A relationship between Vf(lf/df) and the Ed/f’c from the direct and semi-direct setups was observed for all

mixes; the higher the lf/df and Vf values, the lower the Ed/f’c. This observation was in agreement with the results

reported by Yap et al. [25]. The increase in the aspect ratio and volume fraction produces a reduction in both

the dynamic modulus of elasticity to compressive strength ratio and the dynamic Poisson's ratio. As discussed

earlier, it is hypothesized here that dynamic modulus of elasticity tends to decrease when a higher amount of

fibers is used because the porosity could increase. A lower value of the Poisson's ratio reflects the ability of

fibers to confine the concrete matrix and reduce the lateral deformations of the specimen.

4.2 Static and dynamic properties

Table 5 shows the values of (peak) compressive strength, modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratio measured

during destructive static tests. These tests were carried out to compare the values obtained with the data on the

modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratio associated with dynamic non-destructive tests.

The results of compressive strength of the cylindrical specimens shown in Table 5 reflect that the fiber

and the volume content have a minor effect on the peak concrete compressive strength. For instance, the

compressive strength of plain concrete (41.7 MPa) fits within the range of the results obtained for the fiber-

reinforced concrete (38.3 and 42.8 MPa). For instance, the maximum difference between the peak compressive

strength of the four types of mixture and the different volume contents was 11%.

Results shown in Table 5 allow concluding that fiber added to concrete does not significantly affect

the static modulus of elasticity, since the difference between the value of the static modulus of elasticity of the

plain concrete and that of concrete with different types and content of fibers was lower than 20% (5410/26100).

As already mentioned in section 4.1, the difference between the dynamic modulus of elasticity of plain concrete,
from the direct setup and that of the fiber-reinforced concrete varied between 8% and 15%. As a result, it is

evident that the value of the modulus of elasticity estimated by the direct setup is neither affected considerably

by the fiber added to the mixture. Instead, the results obtained by the semi-direct setup showed that fiber

addition does affect the dynamic modulus of elasticity, since a 30% average difference was registered. On the

other hand, results of the study reported herein demonstrated that the static modulus elasticity of the concrete

with the highest fiber volume contents (0.83% of steel fiber and 0.98% of synthetic fiber), is similar to that of

the plain concrete; for example, the value of the static modulus of elasticity of the CRFS9 was only 4%

(0.74/127.8) lower than that of the plain concrete. Regarding the static and dynamic Poisson’s ratio, it was

observed that fibers do affect the Poisson's ratio, since there are differences as high as 44% between the plain

concrete and the fiber reinforced concrete.

Table 5. Results measured during static tests

Beam
Cylinder 15×30 cm
15×15×30cm
Description f'c (MPa) E/f’c (MPa) v f'c (MPa)
X CV (%) X CV (%) X CV (%) X CV (%)
CS 41.7 § 4042 § 0.16* § 40.2 §
CRFA15 41.9 3.0% 4457 1.1 0.20 15.2 30.1 3.7
CRFA30 40.6 0.8% 4260 1.3 0.18 24.8 30.6 5.3
CRFA60 41.5 1.0% 4299 4.0 0.20 18.2 26.5 1.4
CRFS3 41.2 2.1% 4565 6.8 0.18 13.0 28.7 1.0
CRFS5 37.1 § 3014* § 0.30* § 27.1 7.4
CRFS9 38.3 14.4% 4018 12.1 0.17 19.3 33.7 1.6
CRFH15 - - - - - - 25.8 §
CRFH30 42.8 5.9% 4816 5.8 0.19 10.7 31.7 §
CRFH60 - - - - - - 29.8 §
- tests for those concretes were not performed.
* data not considered because it was outside the range of values measured in the specimens.
§ CV is not computed because only one specimen was tested.

Results shown in Tables 3 and 4, and in Figs. 3a and 3b revealed that the fiber type does not

significantly affect the values of the dynamic modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratio. For example, the

maximum difference of the normalized value of the dynamic modulus of elasticity obtained from the direct

setup (Ed/f’c) for concrete reinforced with the lowest steel and synthetic fiber volume content (0.17 and 0.42%)

was 5%. Likewise, the maximum difference among the normalized modulus of elasticity of concrete reinforced
with contents of 0.40%, 0.56% and 0.41% of steel, synthetic and hybrid fiber, respectively, was 3%. In the case

of the highest volume fractions, that is, 0.83% of steel fiber, 0.98% of synthetic fiber and 0.93% of hybrid fiber,

a maximum difference of 7% was registered. On the other hand, the maximum differences among the

normalized modulus of elasticity estimated from the semi-direct setup varied between 2% and 10%, for the

different fiber types and volume fractions. With respect to the Poisson's ratio estimated from the direct setup,

the maximum difference between the values of concrete reinforced with 0.42% of synthetic fibers and that

reinforced with 0.20% of hybrid fibers was 14%. Finally, regarding the dynamic Poisson’s ratio estimated from

the semi-direct setup, the average difference between the three types of fibers was 14%. In this way, Figs. 4a

and 4b show a comparison between the modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratio from the static destructive

tests (E and v) with those from the dynamic tests using the direct and semi-direct setups (Ed, Eds, vd and vds).

6500 0.3
Ed vd
Eds vds
r=0.66 E vd
3900√f'c
r=0.20 v=0.2(NSR-10)
4700√f'c
E / f'c (MPa)

5500 0.2
r=0.61


4500 r=0.17 0.1 r=0.79

r=0.20

3500 0
0 25 50 75 0 25 50 75
(a) ⁄ (b) ⁄

Figure 4. Comparison of the results of static and dynamic tests: a) modulus of elasticity, b) Poisson’s ratio.

Fig. 4a shows two horizontal lines that symbolizes the equations proposed by NSR-10 to calculate the

modulus of elasticity of normal density plain concrete (without fibers). In the main body of NSR-10 it is

proposed to calculate the modulus of elasticity of plain concrete using the equation 4700f’c, which is the same

equation proposed by the ACI-318 American Building Code [7]. However, in the commentary section of the

NSR-10 Colombian Building Code [8], the equation 3900f’c is proposed when the type of coarse aggregate

and the concrete density is unknown. Fig. 4b shows a horizontal line that symbolizes the value of the Poisson's

ratio recommended by the NSR-10 for plain concrete.

It is observed in Fig. 4 that a single trend was obtained for the values of modulus of elasticity and

Poisson's ratio associated with the three types of fibers (steel, synthetic and hybrid) and, therefore, trends are
presented for each type of setup (direct and semi-direct). Figs. 4a and 4b show that the normalized values of

the static and dynamic elasticity modules (E, Ed and Eds), as well as the dynamic Poisson's ratio (vd and vds) of

concrete with the three types of fibers (steel, synthetic and hybrid) tend to decrease linearly as a function of

Vf(lf/df).

Figs. 4a and 4b evidence that the trends of the normalized value of the dynamic modulus of elasticity and

the dynamic Poisson's ratio estimated by the semi-direct setup are similar to the trends of the static test results.

For example, the differences between the normalized value of the modulus of elasticity obtained from the static

tests and the dynamic modulus from the semi-direct setup varied between 3% and 12%. With respect to the

Poisson's ratio, the difference between the values of the static and dynamic tests from the semi-direct setup was

13%, on average. This 13% difference was obtained as the average of the differences between the static and

dynamic results of the concrete with the same characteristics. Based on the trends of the data in Figs. 4a and

4b, and the differences stated above, the normalized values of the modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratio

obtained from the dynamic semi-direct setup are comparable to the results obtained from the static tests. Finally,

Fig. 4a shows that the normalized values of the modulus of elasticity obtained from the semi-direct setup and

those obtained from the static tests fit within the range of values prescribed by the NSR-10 (3900f’c and

4700f’c). In particular, the values recorded in the study reported herein are very similar to the 3900f’c value

proposed for the case the type of coarse aggregate and the concrete density is unknown, since the maximum

difference with the proposed value is 12%. Regarding the dynamic Poisson’s ratio obtained from the semi-

direct setup, Fig. 4b shows that this is also close to the Poisson's ratio proposed by the NSR-10, with a maximum

difference of 20%.

4.3 Models proposed to estimate modulus of elasticity and Poisson's ratio

In this section, empirical models are proposed to estimate the dynamic modulus of elasticity and the dynamic

Poisson’s ratio of fiber reinforced concrete. Initially, predictive models available in the literature are assessed.

Fig. 5 shows the relationship between the normalized values of the dynamic modulus of elasticity (Edf’c) and

the direct pulse velocity (Vp) reported by Qixian and Bungey [16], Hassan and Jones [11], and Katzer and

Kobaka [18]. Results measured in the study reported herein are also included in the figure. Fig. 5 shows that
results measured in this study fit within the data trend reported in the literature review. The variations between

results shown in the figure are attributed to the differences values of the concrete compressive strength of the

concretes. For instance, compressive strength values in this study and in the studies reported by Qixian and

Bungey [16], Hassan and Jones [11], and Katzer and Kobaka [18] varied between 38 and 43 MPa, 25 and 54

MPa, 141 and 149 MPa, respectively.

7500

6500
MPa

5500 r = 0.49
/

Qixian and Bungey (1996)

4500
Hassan and Jones (2012)
Katzer and Kobaka (2006)
This study
3500
3400 3900 4400 4900
m ⁄s

Figure 5. Comparison between the results of the dynamic modulus of elasticity measured in this study with the results

from other studies.

The empirical models proposed in this research were obtained from the observed trends of the measured

data of the modulus of elasticity and the dynamic Poisson's ratio versus the parameter Vf(lf/df) (see Figs. 4a and

4b). An iterative linear regression analysis was carried out for deriving the empirical equations of this study.

Investigation of existing trends between residuals (prediction errors) and model parameters helped to improve

the forms of the equations. As stated in the previous section, the slight differences between the values of the

modulus of elasticity and the dynamic Poisson's ratio for the different types of fiber evidenced that it is

unpractical to propose an empirical model depending of the type of fiber. Therefore, based on the trends of the

measured results in Figs. 4a and 4b, Eqs. (12) and (13) are proposed here to estimate the dynamic modulus of

elasticity and the dynamic Poisson's ratio from the direct setup of UPV test. According to these equations,

dynamic modulus of elasticity and dynamic Poisson's ratio from the direct setup for plain concrete are 6000f’c

and 0.15, respectively. It is observed in Figs. 4a and 4b that the correlation coefficients associated to Eqs. (12)

and (13) are equal to 0.66 and 0.79, respectively. The values of these coefficients demonstrate that the correlation
between the measured data of the dynamic modulus elasticity is moderate but suitable, because the r values

varied between 0.5 and 0.8. On the other hand, the correlation coefficient of the Poisson's ratio shows a strong

correlation, since the values varied between 0.5 to 0.8.

5920 9.4 / ′ (MPa) (12)

/
0.14 (13)

In addition, Eqs. (14) and (15) are proposed to estimate the dynamic modulus of elasticity and the

dynamic Poisson's ratio from the semi-direct setup of UPV tests. According to these equations, dynamic modulus

of elasticity and dynamic Poisson's ratio for plain concrete from the semi-direct setup are 4230f’c and 0.20,

respectively. As shown in Figs. 4a and 4b, these equations are associated with a correlation coefficient of 0.21.

This correlation coefficient demonstrates that the correlation between the measured data of the dynamic modulus

of elasticity and the dynamic Poisson's ratio is weak because the data is just slight dependent with the parameter

Vf(lf/df). Considering that the values of the modulus of elasticity and Poisson ratio from the semi-direct setup of

UPV dynamic tests were comparable to those from static tests (see Figs. 4a and 4b), Eqs. (14) and (15) may be

also used for estimating the values of the modulus of elasticity and Poisson ratio related to static destructive

tests.

4170 1.7 / ′ (MPa) (14)

/
0.21 (15)

5. Conclusions

In this paper, empirical equations have been developed to estimate the dynamic values of the modulus of

elasticity and the Poisson's ratio of concrete reinforced with steel, polypropylene/polyethylene and hybrid fiber

from the ultrasonic pulse velocities (UPV) test. Results of analytical models available in a literature review,

test observations, fundamentals of FRC behavior were also considered to define the functional form of the

model equations. The results of the study showed that it is essential to select the setup of dynamic test that

should be applied (direct or semi-direct), since the expected results depend on this setup. It is also necessary to

identify the wave types logged by the test equipment, because Vp, Vs or Vr velocities must be known for
determining the modulus of elasticity or the Poisson's ratio of fiber reinforced concrete. However, whenever

possible it is recommended to use the direct test setup, since this method guarantees the transmission of the

maximum pulse energy.

The measured results obtained showed that the type and the volume content of fibers affect the dynamic

values of the modulus of elasticity and the Poisson's ratio, since the differences between the dynamic modulus

of elasticity and the dynamic Poisson's ratio of concrete with different fiber types (steel,

polypropylene/polyethylene and hybrid) and volume contents were lower than 17%. Results also showed that

the direct setup of dynamic UPV tests can be used to determine the dynamic modulus of elasticity and dynamic

Poisson's ratio of plain concrete and concrete reinforced with steel, synthetic and hybrid fiber. This research

also showed similarities between the trends of the results of the dynamic test estimated by the semi-direct setup

and the results of the static test, and the differences between the results varied 13%, on average. These slight

differences demonstrate the similarity between the static and dynamic values of the modulus of elasticity and

the Poisson's ratio of fiber-reinforced concrete estimated by the semi-direct setup of UPV tests. In this way,

results of the study demonstrated that the static modulus of elasticity and the static Poisson's ratio measured

during destructive tests can be computed using the same equations obtained from the results measured during

the semi-direct setup of UPV tests. The results obtained in this study are limited to concrete with compressive

strength lower than 43 MPa, with or without fibers. For fiber reinforced concrete, the fibers can be hooked end

steel fibers, or polypropylene/polyethylene or hybrid fiber (steel and synthetic), the fiber volume content should

vary between 0.17% and 0.98%, and the aspect ratio of fiber must be less than 80. Data obtained through this

research can contribute effectively to the formulation and standardization of alternative methods to evaluate

the mechanical properties of FRC.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge Vicerrectoría de Investigaciones at the Universidad Militar Nueva Granada

(UMNG, Colombia) for financing the research project IMP-ING-2130. The donation of concrete, steel fibers,

and synthetic fibers from Argos-Colombia (Diego Velandia), Bekaert-Colombia (Liliana Cardona), and Euclid-
Toxement-Colombia (Juan C. Acero), respectively, is greatly appreciated. The views expressed in this paper

are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflects the views of the sponsor.

References

[1] Kumar P. and Monteiro P. (2014). Concrete Microstructure, Properties and Materials, 4th Ed., McGraw-Hill

Education, New York.

[2] Abbass W., Khan M. and Mourad S. (2018). Evaluation of mechanical properties of steel fiber reinforced concrete

with different strengths of concrete. Construction and Building Materials 168:556-569.

[3] Parra-Montesinos G. (2005). High-performance fiber-reinforced cement composites: An alternative for seismic

design of structures. ACI Structural Journal 102(5):668-675.

[4] RILEM TC 162-TDF (2003). Test and design methods for steel fibre reinforced concrete: σ-ε design method - Final

recommendation. Materials and Structures 36:560-567.

[5] CEB-FIP (2010). Fib Model Code for Concrete Structures. International Federation for Structural Concrete, FIB.

ISBN 978-3-433-03061-5.

[6] ACI Committee 544 (1999). Design considerations for steel fiber reinforced concrete, ACI 544.4R-88(09).

American Concrete Institute, ACI, Farmington Hills, USA.

[7] ACI Committee 318 (2014). Building code requirements for structural concrete and commentary. American

Concrete Institute, ACI, Farmington Hills, USA.

[8] NSR-10. Colombian Building Code for Earthquake-Resistant Construction. Colombian Association of Earthquake

Engineering, AIS, Colombia.

[9] Correal J., Herrán C., Carrillo J., Reyes J. and Hermida G. (2018). Performance of hybrid fiber-reinforced concrete

for low-rise housing with thin walls. Construction and Building Materials 185:519-529.

[10] Carrillo J., González G. and Aperador W. (2013). Correlations between mechanical properties of steel fiber

reinforced concrete. Ingeniería, Investigación y Tecnología 14(3): 435- 450.

[11] Hassan A. and Jones S. (2012). Non-destructive testing of ultra-high performance fibre reinforced concrete

(UHPFRC): A feasibility study for using ultrasonic and resonant frequency testing techniques. Construction and

Building Materials 35:361-367.

[12] Blitz J. and Simpson G. (1996). Ultrasonic methods of non-destructive testing. Chapman & Hall, London.

[13] Malhotra V. and Carino N. (2004). Nondestructive testing of concrete, 2nd Ed. CRC PRESS, New York.
 [14] Benaicha M., Jalbaud O., Alaoui A. and Burtschell Y. (2015). Correlation between the mechanical behavior and

the ultrasonic velocity of fiber-reinforced concrete. Construction and Building Materials 101:702-709.

[15] Tsioulou O., Lampropoulos A. and Paschalis S (2017). Combined non-destructive testing (NDT) method for the

evaluation of the mechanical characteristics of ultra-high performance fibre reinforced concrete (UHPFRC).

Construction and Building Materials 131:66-77.

[16] Qixian L. and Bungey J. (1996). Using compression wave ultrasonic transducers to measure the velocity of surface

waves and hence determine dynamic modulus of elasticity for concrete. Construction and Building Materials

10(4):237-242.

[17] Petro J. and Kim J. (2012). Detection of delamination in concrete using ultrasonic pulse velocity test. Construction

and Building Materials 26: 574-582.

[18] Katzer J. and Kobaka J. (2006). Ultrasonic pulse velocity test of SFRC. The 2nd Central European Congress on

Concrete Engineering “Concrete Structures for Traffic Network”.

[19] ASTM C-469 (2014). Standard test method for static modulus of elasticity and Poisson’s ratio of concrete in

compression. American Society for Testing and Materials. ASTM, 5 pp.

[20] BS-1881 (1996). Testing concrete, Part 203. Recommendations for measurement of velocity of ultrasonic pulses

in concrete. BSI standards, United Kingdom.

[21] Villaverde R. (2009). Fundamental concepts of earthquake engineering. 1st Ed., Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

Boca Raton.

[22] ASTM C-597 (2016). Standard test method for pulse velocity through concrete. American Society for Testing and

Materials. ASTM, 4 pp.

[23] ASTM C-39 (2018). Standard test method for compressive strength of cylindrical concrete specimens. American

Society for Testing and Materials. ASTM, 5 pp.

[24] Elnashai A. and Di Sarno L. (2008). Fundamentals of earthquake engineering, 1st Ed., John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

United Kingdom.

[25] Yap S., Alengaram U. and Jumaat M. (2016). The effect of aspect ratio and volume fraction on mechanical

properties of steel fibre-reinforced oil palm shell concrete. Civil Engineering and Management 22(2): 168–177.

View publication stats