fibers

Article
Investigation on the Mechanical Properties and
Post-Cracking Behavior of Polyolefin Fiber
Reinforced Concrete
Suman Kumar Adhikary * , Zymantas Rudzionis , Arvind Balakrishnan and
Vignesh Jayakumar
Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Kaunas University of Technology, LT-44249 Kaunas, Lithuania;
zymantas.rudzionis@ktu.lt (Z.R.); arvind.balakrishnan@ktu.edu (A.B.); Avicky5593.1@gmail.com (V.J.)
* Correspondence: sumankradk9s@gmail.com; Tel.: +91-820-724-6551




Received: 29 November 2018; Accepted: 18 January 2019; Published: 20 January 2019


Abstract: This paper deals with the behavior of concrete’s self-compatibility in a fresh state and its
compressive and flexural strength in a hardened state with the addition of polyolefin macro fibers.
Four different amounts (3 kg/m3 , 4.5 kg/m3 , 6 kg/m3 , and 9 kg/m3 ) of polyolefin macro fibers were
mixed into the concrete mixture to observe the differences in workability and strength properties
between the concrete specimens. As a partial replacement of cement, class C type of fly ash was added
to make up 25% of the total cement mass. The water-binder ratio (W/B) of the concrete mix was 0.36.
Superplasticizer was added to the concrete mixture to achieve self-compacting properties. The slump
test was carried out in the fresh state for determining the flowability. On the 7th and 28th days of the
curing process, compression strength tests were performed, and on the 28th day, flexural strength tests
and crack mouth opening displacement (CMOD) analyses were carried out to determine the strength
properties and post-cracking behavior of the concrete samples. Bending strength and post-cracking
behavior of the samples were improved by the addition of fibers. The fiber concentration in the
concrete mixture greatly influenced the slump flow and self-compaction properties.

Keywords: polyolefin fiber; CMOD test; post cracking behavior; bending strength; fly ash concrete

1. Introduction
In the construction industry, self-compacting concrete is widely used because of its various
beneficial properties. In 1988, the concept of self-compacting concrete was developed to obtain
more strength and durable properties [1]. Self-compacting concrete is a special type of concrete
which provides high flowability without any segregation [2]. This type of concrete is very useful for
difficult casting conditions and reduces the overall construction cost. To obtain higher flowability
and workability in self-compacting concrete, superplasticizers or chemical admixtures are necessary;
superplasticizers can change the concrete viscosity. To increase concrete viscosity, different types of
fillers such as fly ash, silica fume, quartzite filler, and stone powder, etc., are used [3]. Partial amounts
of fly ash can be used as a replacement of cement. Fly ash has various benefits such as increasing
the workability, decreasing the permeability, and increasing the cohesiveness of concrete [4]. It has
been found that a 20% replacement of fly ash by cement mass in concrete gives higher compressive
strength [5]. In the past few years, use of fibers in concrete mixture has been gaining considerable
attention. Due to environmental exposure, poor construction and presence of chloride ions in concrete
leads to corrosion, micro cracks, degradation, and steel corrosion. Fibers are becoming a very useful
material to overcome these types of problems because of its various benefits. Normal conventional
standard concrete and self-compacted concrete both have good compressive strength with low tensile

Fibers 2019, 7, 8; doi:10.3390/fib7010008 www.mdpi.com/journal/fibers

Fibers 2019, 7, 8 2 of 8
Fibers 2019, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW  2  of  8 

with low tensile strength. The addition of a small quantity of fibers can decrease shrinkage cracking 
strength. The addition of a small quantity of fibers can decrease shrinkage cracking [6] and also
[6] and also increase toughness and tensile strength [7]. Nowadays in the market, different types of 
increase toughness and tensile strength [7]. Nowadays in the market, different types of fibers are
fibers are available in different geometrical shapes. Fibers can be manufactured using various kinds 
available in different geometrical shapes. Fibers can be manufactured using various kinds of materials
of materials like steel, carbon, palm, polypropylene, glass, synthetic, and natural materials [8,9]. Steel 
like steel, carbon, palm, polypropylene, glass, synthetic, and natural materials [8,9]. Steel fibers
fibers are the most widely used fibers because of its high modules of elasticity and tensile strength. 
are the most widely used fibers because of its high modules of elasticity and tensile strength. Steel
Steel fibers are used to decrease the thickness, obtaining higher strength properties, and it is applied 
fibers are used to decrease the thickness, obtaining higher strength properties, and it is applied in
in  road 
road construction, 
construction, pre‐cast 
pre-cast concrete, 
concrete, tunnels, 
tunnels, airports, 
airports, and building
and the the  building  industry. 
industry. Over  recent 
Over recent years,
years,  extensive  studies  have  been  done  on  steel  fiber  reinforced  concrete  to  increase 
extensive studies have been done on steel fiber reinforced concrete to increase mechanical properties mechanical 
properties and durability [10–15]. Steel fibers have various benefits, but it leads to steel corrosion and 
and durability [10–15]. Steel fibers have various benefits, but it leads to steel corrosion and cracks in
cracks  in 
certain certain  environmental 
environmental conditions.conditions.  Various 
Various studies werestudies 
carriedwere  carried 
out and out are
studies and  studies 
still being are  still 
carried
being carried out to reduce the problem of steel corrosion [16–20]. Polyolefin fibers are widely used 
out to reduce the problem of steel corrosion [16–20]. Polyolefin fibers are widely used nowadays
nowadays because of significant benefits such as increasing concrete strength and decreasing the unit 
because of significant benefits such as increasing concrete strength and decreasing the unit weight of
weight of concrete [21]. Polyolefin fibers have a greater influence in terms of strength, ductility, and 
concrete [21]. Polyolefin fibers have a greater influence in terms of strength, ductility, and flexibility
flexibility compared to steel fibers [22,23]. Polyolefin fibers are lighter in weight than steel fibers and 
compared to steel fibers [22,23]. Polyolefin fibers are lighter in weight than steel fibers and they have
they have no reactions with water. Polyolefin fiber reinforced concrete show better results in terms 
no reactions with water. Polyolefin fiber reinforced concrete show better results in terms of steel
corrosioncorrosion 
of  steel  and cracksand  cracks 
[24]. [24].  Polyolefin 
Polyolefin fibers havefibers  have 
better better 
boding boding  properties 
properties with concrete with  concrete 
because of
because of its shape and rough design. Polyolefin fiber reinforced concrete also gives higher bending 
its shape and rough design. Polyolefin fiber reinforced concrete also gives higher bending strength.
strength. 
From the From  the years,
past few past  few  years,  researchers 
researchers have beenhave  been  conducting 
conducting experimentalexperimental 
studies onstudies  on  the 
the beneficial
beneficial aspects of polyolefin fibers in normal conventional concrete, lightweight concrete, foamed 
aspects of polyolefin fibers in normal conventional concrete, lightweight concrete, foamed concrete,
concrete, and high‐performance concrete [25–27]. 
and high-performance concrete [25–27].

2. Used Materials 
2. Used Materials
In this study, 2 mm and 4 mm sizes of local sand (fine aggregate), local coarse aggregate, and 
In this study, 2 mm and 4 mm sizes of local sand (fine aggregate), local coarse aggregate, and
ordinary Portland cement satisfying EN 197‐1:2011 [28] of grade CM I 42.5 (Rocket cement M‐600, AB 
ordinary Portland cement satisfying EN 197-1:2011 [28] of grade CM I 42.5 (Rocket cement M-600,
Cementa, 
AB Cementa, Stockholm,  Sweden) 
Stockholm, Sweden) were  used. 
were The 
used. class 
The C  C
class type 
typeof offly 
flyash 
ashwas 
wasused 
used in 
in the  concrete 
the concrete
mixture. Masterglenium SKY 8700 [29] superplasticizer was added to the concrete mix to achieve the 
mixture. Masterglenium SKY 8700 [29] superplasticizer was added to the concrete mix to achieve the
self‐compatibility  properties.
self-compatibility properties.  Four 
Four different  amounts  of
different amounts of rough-surface-designed
rough‐surface‐designed  polyolefin
polyolefin  macro
macro 
fibers were used in the concrete mixture. The properties of the polyolefin macro fiber is shown in 
fibers were used in the concrete mixture. The properties of the polyolefin macro fiber is shown in
Figure 1. 
Figure 1.

 
Figure 1. Properties of polyolefin macro fibers.
Figure 1. Properties of polyolefin macro fibers. 

Four types of concrete were prepared with various amounts of fiber content. The samples were
Four types of concrete were prepared with various amounts of fiber content. The samples were 
named S-1, S-2, S-3, and S-4, which contains 3 kg/m3 ,3 4.5 kg/m33, 6 kg/m33, and 9 kg/m33 of macro
named  S‐1,  S‐2,  S‐3,  and  S‐4,  which  contains  3  kg/m ,  4.5  kg/m ,  6  kg/m ,  and  9  kg/m   of  macro 
polyolefin fibers in concrete matrix, respectively. Class C type of fly ash was added by 25% of total
polyolefin fibers in concrete matrix, respectively. Class C type of fly ash was added by 25% of total 
cement mass in the concrete as a partial replacement of cement. A 0.36 water-binder (cement + fly ash)
cement mass in the concrete as a partial replacement of cement. A 0.36 water‐binder (cement + fly 
ratio was maintained for each of the concrete samples. In every type of concrete sample, the quantity
ash)  ratio  was  maintained  for  each  of  the  concrete  samples.  In  every  type  of  concrete  sample,  the 
aggregates, cement, fly ash, water-binder ratio, and quantity of superplasticizer was the same, and
quantity  aggregates,  cement,  fly  ash,  water‐binder  ratio,  and  quantity  of  superplasticizer  was  the 
only the quantity of fibers were changed to observe the behavior of the concrete with varying levels of
same,  and  only  the  quantity  of  fibers  were  changed  to  observe  the  behavior  of  the  concrete  with 
fiber concentration. The mixing proportions of all concrete samples are given in Table 1. After mixing
varying  levels  of  fiber  concentration.  The  mixing  proportions  of  all  concrete  samples  are  given  in 
the concrete sample, the slump test was performed for each type of concrete sample, and thereafter, all
Table 1. After mixing the concrete sample, the slump test was performed for each type of concrete 
sample,  and  thereafter,  all  samples  were  molded.  Cubes  of  10  cm  ×  10  cm  ×  10  cm  in  size  were 
Fibers 2019, 7, 8 3 of 8

Fibers 2019, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW  3  of  8 

samples were molded. Cubes of 10 cm × 10 cm × 10 cm in size were prepared for the compressive
prepared for the compressive strength test while 40 cm × 10 cm × 10 cm sized prisms were prepared 
strength test while 40 cm × 10 cm × 10 cm sized prisms were prepared for the crack mouth opening
for the crack mouth opening displacement (CMOD) analysis. After the molding process, all types of 
displacement (CMOD) analysis. After the molding process, all types of samples were kept at room
samples  were  kept  at  room  temperature  for  24  h  for  the  hardening  process.  After  the  process,  all 
temperature for 24 h for the hardening process. After the process, all samples were demolded and
samples  were  demolded  and  kept  immersed  in  water  in  a  climatic  chamber  until  the  day  of  the 
kept immersed in water in a climatic chamber until the day of the concrete destructive tests.
concrete destructive tests. 
Table 1. Mixing proportions of concrete.
Table 1. Mixing proportions of concrete. 
Materials Used for Concrete Mixture Preparation
Materials Used for Concrete Mixture Preparation  Quantity of the Materials for 1 m3 Concrete
Quantity of the Materials for 1 m 3 Concrete 

2 mm 
2 mm 160.5 kg 
160.5 kg
Fine aggregate
Fine aggregate 
4 mm 
4 mm 696.8 kg 
696.8 kg
Coarse aggregate 
Coarse aggregate 827.9 kg 
827.9 kg
Cement 
Cement 400 kg 
400 kg
Water 
Water 181.6 kg (W/B ratio 0.36) 
181.6 kg (W/B ratio 0.36)
Fly ash 
Fly ash 100 kg (25% of cement mass) 
100 kg (25% of cement mass)
Super plasticizer 
Super plasticizer 7.5 kg (1.5% of cement mass) 
7.5 kg (1.5% of cement mass)
S‐1  3 kg 
S-1 3 kg
S‐2  4.5 kg 
Polyolefin fibers  S-2 4.5 kg
Polyolefin fibers S‐3  6 kg 
S-3 6 kg
S‐4  9 kg 
S-4 9 kg

3. Mechanical Properties Evolution 
3. Mechanical Properties Evolution
For the first step, the concrete was mixed carefully according to the designed proportions. After 
For theprocedure, 
the  mixing  first step, the concrete
the  was mixed
slump  flow  carefully
test  was  according
performed  to theto 
according  designed
the  EN proportions.
12,350‐2:2009  After
[30] 
the mixing procedure, the slump flow test was performed according to the EN 12,350-2:2009 [30]
standard. For each type of sample, the slump flow test was performed three times and the mean value 
standard.
was  taken For
as each
the  type
final of sample,
result.  theslump 
The  slumpflow 
flow value 
test was
of performed three
the  concrete  times anddecreased 
specimens  the mean value
with 
was taken as the final result. The slump flow value of the concrete specimens decreased
increasing amounts of polyolefin fibers in the concrete mixture. Segregation and bleeding were not  with increasing
amounts
observed offor 
polyolefin
any  type fibers in the concrete
of  sample.  Sample mixture. Segregation
S‐4  showed  and bleeding
a  very  low  wereand 
slump  value  not observed for
lost  its  self‐
any type of sample. Sample S-4 showed a very low slump value and lost its self-compacting
compacting properties. Figure 2 shows the variations of slump flow values according to the sample  properties.
Figure
types.  2 shows the variations of slump flow values according to the sample types.

Slump test of concrete 
80 73 68
Slump in cm

60
42
35
40
20
0
S‐1 S‐2 S‐3 S‐4
Type of concrete samples 
 
Figure 2. Slump value of concrete specimens. 
Figure 2. Slump value of concrete specimens.

Concrete compressive tests 

Concrete  compressive  tests was 
was performed 
performed on  on the 
the 7th 
7th and 
and 28th 
28th days 
days of 
of the 
the curing 
curing process, 
process,
satisfying the EN 196-1:2016 [31] standard. For each type of concrete sample, three tests were conducted
satisfying  the  EN  196‐1:2016  [31]  standard.  For  each  type  of  concrete  sample,  three  tests  were 
for compressive
conducted  strength and
for  compressive  flexuraland 
strength  test, and the
flexural  mean
test,  and value was taken
the  mean  value as thetaken 
was  final as 
result. The
the  final 
peak force on CMOD analysis was considered to be the flexural strength of the concrete
result. The peak force on CMOD analysis was considered to be the flexural strength of the concrete  samples. The
compressive strength of concrete samples on the 7th day increased with increasing amounts
samples.  The  compressive  strength  of  concrete  samples  on  the  7th  day  increased  with  increasing of fiber
content in the concrete mixture, and then it decreased. The same phenomenon was observed on the
amounts of fiber content in the concrete mixture, and then it decreased. The same phenomenon was 
observed on the 28th day for the compressive strength test. Sample S‐3 achieved higher compressive 
strength on the 7th day while sample S‐2 achieved higher compressive strength on the 28th day. This 
Fibers 2019, 7, 8 4 of 8

28th day for the compressive strength test.

Fibers 2019, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 
Fibers 2019, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 
Sample S-3 achieved higher compressive strength on the 4  7th8 
4 of 
of 8 
day while sample S-2 achieved higher compressive strength on the 28th day. This phenomenon could
phenomenon could be due to the addition of fly ash in the concrete. Previously, researchers showed 
be due to the addition of fly ash in the concrete. Previously, researchers showed that the presence of fly
phenomenon could be due to the addition of fly ash in the concrete. Previously, researchers showed 
that the presence of fly ash in concrete delays the hydration process and the concrete has low strength 
ash in concrete delays the hydration process and the concrete has low strength in the early stages, and
that the presence of fly ash in concrete delays the hydration process and the concrete has low strength 
in the early stages, and the concrete improves in strength at a later stage (after 60 days) [32,33]. The 
the concrete improves in strength at a later stage (after 60 days) [32,33]. The variations in compressive
in the early stages, and the concrete improves in strength at a later stage (after 60 days) [32,33]. The 
variations in compressive strength are shown in Figure 3. 
strength are shown in Figure 3.
variations in compressive strength are shown in Figure 3. 

Compressive strength on 7th and 28th day
Compressive strength on 7th and 28th day
Compressive strength, MPa
Compressive strength, MPa

80
80 65.24 65.17
63.08
63.08 65.24 65.17 62.37
62.37
60 51.62
51.62 49.05
60 43.59 49.05
38.69
38.69 43.59
40
40
20
20
00
S‐1
S‐1 S‐2
S‐2 S‐3
S‐3 S‐4
S‐4
Type of concrete samples 
Type of concrete samples 

Compressive strength on 7th  day
Compressive strength on 7th  day Compressive strength on 28th day
Compressive strength on 28th day
  
Figure 3. Compressive strength of concrete samples on the 7th and 28th days.   
Figure 3. Compressive strength of concrete samples on the 7th and 28th days.
Figure 3.  Compressive strength of concrete samples on the 7th and 28th days.

Through the three‐point bending test method, CMOD analysis was performed on the 28th day 
Through the three-point bending test method, CMOD analysis was performed on the 28th day
Through the three‐point bending test method, CMOD analysis was performed on the 28th day 
of the curing process, satisfying the EN‐14651 + A1:2007 [34] standard. All the samples were tested 
of the curing process, satisfying the EN 14651 + A1:2007 [34] standard. All the samples were tested
of the curing process, satisfying the EN‐14651 + A1:2007 [34] standard. All the samples were tested 
until the concrete broke and large cracks were formed, although the concrete was not separated into 
until the concrete broke and large cracks were formed, although the concrete was not separated into
until the concrete broke and large cracks were formed, although the concrete was not separated into 
two parts. The concrete broke and cracks were formed, but the fibers were holding the concrete and 
two parts. The concrete broke and cracks were formed, but the fibers were holding the concrete and
two parts. The concrete broke and cracks were formed, but the fibers were holding the concrete and 
resisted the separation. Polyolefin fibers have good bonding properties, and its rough design helps 
resisted the separation. Polyolefin fibers have good bonding properties, and its rough design helps to
resisted the separation. Polyolefin fibers have good bonding properties, and its rough design helps 
to hold the concrete together after cracks have formed. Figure 4 shows the concrete cracks after the 
hold the concrete together after cracks have formed. Figure 4 shows the concrete cracks after the test.
to hold the concrete together after cracks have formed. Figure 4 shows the concrete cracks after the 
test. The peak force was taken as an indication of flexural strength. Sample S‐4 has higher bending 
The peak force was taken as an indication of flexural strength. Sample S-4 has higher bending strength
test. The peak force was taken as an indication of flexural strength. Sample S‐4 has higher bending 
strength 
which which  increased 
strength  which  with
increased with 
with  the 
the addition
increased  addition 
of fibers
the  in theof 
addition  fibers 
fibers  in 
concrete
of  in  the 
the  concrete 
mixture. mixture. 
In a previous
concrete  In 
In  a 
a  previous 
experimental
mixture.  study,
previous 
experimental study, it has been found that bending strength increases with the addition of polyolefin 
it has been found that bending strength increases with the addition of polyolefin macro fibers till a
experimental study, it has been found that bending strength increases with the addition of polyolefin 
macro fibers till a certain proportion in the concrete mixture, and then the strength started decreasing 
certain proportion in the concrete mixture, and then the strength started decreasing [35]. Figure 5
macro fibers till a certain proportion in the concrete mixture, and then the strength started decreasing 
[35]. Figure 5 shows the variations of flexural strength of concrete samples on the 28th day. 
shows the variations of flexural strength of concrete samples on the 28th day.
[35]. Figure 5 shows the variations of flexural strength of concrete samples on the 28th day. 

  
Figure 4. Concrete cracks after the test.
Figure 4. Concrete cracks after the test. 
Figure 4. Concrete cracks after the test. 
Fibers 2019, 7, 8 5 of 8
Fibers 2019, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 
Fibers 2019, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW  5  of 
5  of  8 
8 

Flxetural strength on 28th day
Flxetural strength on 28th day
20
20 16.64
Flexural strength ,MPa

16.64
Flexural strength ,MPa

15
15 11.89
11.89
8.96
8.96 8.28
10
10 8.28

55

00
S‐1
S‐1 S‐2
S‐2 S‐3
S‐3 S‐4
S‐4
Type of concrete samples 
Type of concrete samples 

Flexural strength on 28th day
Flexural strength on 28th day
  
Figure 5. Flexural strength of concrete samples on the 28th day. 
Figure 5. Flexural strength of concrete samples on the 28th day. 
Figure 5. Flexural strength of concrete samples on the 28th day.

4. Post-Cracking Behavior Analysis

4. Post‐Cracking Behavior Analysis 
4. Post‐Cracking Behavior Analysis 
Before the CMOD analysis, all water-immersed prisms were taken from the climatic chamber
Before the CMOD analysis, all water‐immersed prisms were taken from the climatic chamber 
Before the CMOD analysis, all water‐immersed prisms were taken from the climatic chamber 
and dried for a few hours. After the drying process, all the prisms were given a cut 1 cm deep (down
and dried for a few hours. After the drying process, all the prisms were given a cut 1 cm deep (down 
and dried for a few hours. After the drying process, all the prisms were given a cut 1 cm deep (down 
the height of the prism) at the midpoint of their lengths. An extensometer apparatus was fixed to the
the height of the prism) at the midpoint of their lengths. An extensometer apparatus was fixed to the 
the height of the prism) at the midpoint of their lengths. An extensometer apparatus was fixed to the 
concrete surface by using a suitable glue. CMOD analysis was performed until the concrete breaks
concrete surface by using a suitable glue. CMOD analysis was performed until the concrete breaks 
concrete surface by using a suitable glue. CMOD analysis was performed until the concrete breaks 
reached a 4.5 mm displacement. The loading speed of the CMOD analysis was 0.6 mm/min. After the
reached a 4.5 mm displacement. The loading speed of the CMOD analysis was 0.6 mm/min. After the 
reached a 4.5 mm displacement. The loading speed of the CMOD analysis was 0.6 mm/min. After the 
4.5
4.5 mm
4.5  mm  displacement,
mm  displacement, 
displacement,  each sample
each 
each  remained
sample 
sample  in a single
remained 
remained  a piece
in  a 
in  because
single 
single  piece 
piece ofbecause 
the higher
because  of fiber
of  the concentration;
the  higher  fiber 
higher  fiber 
the fibers held the concrete and resisted the separation of the concrete into two pieces.
concentration; the fibers held the concrete and resisted the separation of the concrete into two pieces. 
concentration; the fibers held the concrete and resisted the separation of the concrete into two pieces.  Figure 6 shows
the prism setup for the CMOD analysis. According to the EN 14651 + A1:2007 [34] standard, concrete
Figure 6 shows the prism setup for the CMOD analysis. According to the EN 14651 + A1:2007 [34] 
Figure 6 shows the prism setup for the CMOD analysis. According to the EN 14651 + A1:2007 [34] 
should have
standard, 
standard,  a highershould 
concrete 
concrete  strength
should  than
have 
have  a 1.5
a  MPastrength 
higher 
higher  and 1 MPa
strength  at 0.5
than 
than  1.5 and
1.5  MPa 
MPa 3.5and 
mm1 
and  1 displacement,
MPa  at 
MPa  at  0.5  respectively.
0.5  and 
and  3.5  mm 
3.5  mm 
Figures 7 and 8 shows that sample S-1 had about 4 MPa of strength at 0.5 mm
displacement, respectively. Figures 7 and 8 shows that sample S‐1 had about 4 MPa of strength at 0.5 
displacement, respectively. Figures 7 and 8 shows that sample S‐1 had about 4 MPa of strength at 0.5 displacement, and at
3.5 mm displacement, it had 4.3 MPa of strength. It had the highest strength of 8.96
mm displacement, and at 3.5 mm displacement, it had 4.3 MPa of strength. It had the highest strength 
mm displacement, and at 3.5 mm displacement, it had 4.3 MPa of strength. It had the highest strength  MPa. Sample S-3
and
of  S-4 MPa. 
of  8.96 
8.96  showed better S‐3 
MPa.  Sample 
Sample  cracking
S‐3  behavior
and  S‐4 
and  S‐4  showed 
showed than S-1 and
better 
better  S-2. Previously,
cracking 
cracking  behavior researchers
behavior  than  S‐1 
than  found
S‐1  and 
and  S‐2. that
S‐2.  a higher
Previously, 
Previously, 
volume of fibers in the concrete mix significantly improves the post-cracking behavior
researchers found that a higher volume of fibers in the concrete mix significantly improves the post‐
researchers found that a higher volume of fibers in the concrete mix significantly improves the post‐ [36,37]. Sample
S-3 and S-4 showed higher strength at 3.5 mm displacement than at 0.5 mm displacement. Sample S-3
cracking behavior [36,37]. Sample S‐3 and S‐4 showed higher strength at 3.5 mm displacement than 
cracking behavior [36,37]. Sample S‐3 and S‐4 showed higher strength at 3.5 mm displacement than 
had
at  themm 
0.5 
at  0.5  highest
mm  strength atSample 
displacement. 
displacement.  0.25 mmS‐3 
Sample  displacement,
S‐3  had  the 
had  and S-4
the  highest 
highest  showed
strength 
strength  at the
at  highest
0.25 
0.25  strength performance
mm  displacement, 
mm  displacement,  and  S‐4 
and  S‐4 
at 2.30 mm displacement.
showed the highest strength performance at 2.30 mm displacement. 
showed the highest strength performance at 2.30 mm displacement. 

 
Figure 6. Setup for the crack mouth opening displacement (CMOD) test.
Figure 6. Setup for the crack mouth opening displacement (CMOD) test. 
Figure 6. Setup for the crack mouth opening displacement (CMOD) test. 
Fibers 2019, 7, 8 6 of 8
Fibers 2019, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 
Fibers 2019, 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW  6  of 
6  of  8 
8 

 
Figure 7. Load‐CMOD curves of S‐1 and S‐2. 
Figure 7. Load‐CMOD curves of S‐1 and S‐2. 
Figure 7. Load-CMOD curves of S-1 and S-2.

 
Figure 8. Load-CMOD curves of S-3 and S-4.
Figure 8. Load‐CMOD curves of S‐3 and S‐4. 
Figure 8. Load‐CMOD curves of S‐3 and S‐4. 

5. 5. Conclusions 
Conclusions
5. Conclusions 
The study showed that samples S-1, S-2, and S-3 achieved better flowability than S-4 with no
The study showed that samples S‐1, S‐2, and S‐3 achieved better flowability than S‐4 with no 
The study showed that samples S‐1, S‐2, and S‐3 achieved better flowability than S‐4 with no 
segregation and bleeding. Meanwhile, for sample S-4, segregation and bleeding was not observed but
segregation and bleeding. Meanwhile, for sample S‐4, segregation and bleeding was not observed 
segregation and bleeding. Meanwhile, for sample S‐4, segregation and bleeding was not observed 
thebut the slump value was much lower because of the higher fiber concentration. Sample S‐4 also lost 
slump value was much lower because of the higher fiber concentration. Sample S-4 also lost the
but the slump value was much lower because of the higher fiber concentration. Sample S‐4 also lost 
self-compaction
the  properties.
the  self‐compaction 
self‐compaction  In terms
properties. 
properties.  In ofterms 
In  strength
terms  properties,
of  strength 
of  strength  sample S-2
properties, 
properties,  achieved
sample 
sample  S‐2 higher
S‐2  compressive
achieved 
achieved  higher 
higher 
compressive strength on the 28th day of the test, and thereafter strength started decreasing for S‐3 
strength on the 28th day of the test, and thereafter strength started decreasing for S-3 and S-4. Flexural
compressive strength on the 28th day of the test, and thereafter strength started decreasing for S‐3 
and  S‐4. 
strength
and  S‐4.  Flexural 
ofFlexural  strength 
the concrete of  the 
samples
strength  of  the increased
concrete  samples 
concrete  samples  increased fiber
with increasing
increased  with quantity
with  increasing 
increasing  fiber 
infiber  quantity  in 
the concrete
quantity  in  the 
mixture.
the 
concrete 
Sample
concrete  mixture. 
S-4mixture.  Sample 
achievedSample  S‐4 
higherS‐4  achieved 
bending higher 
strength
achieved  higher  bending 
among
bending  strength 
allstrength  among 
the samples.
among  all post-cracking
The
all  the  samples. 
the  samples.  The 
The  post‐ of
behavior
post‐
cracking behavior of the concrete samples were improved by the addition of fiber. Samples S‐3 and 
thecracking behavior of the concrete samples were improved by the addition of fiber. Samples S‐3 and 
concrete samples were improved by the addition of fiber. Samples S-3 and S-4 had better results
S‐4 had better results than S‐1 and S‐2 because of higher number of fibers in their cross‐sections. The 
S‐4 had better results than S‐1 and S‐2 because of higher number of fibers in their cross‐sections. The 
than S-1 and S-2 because of higher number of fibers in their cross-sections. The rough surface design
rough surface design of polyolefin fibers helps to increase the bending strength and post‐cracking 
rough surface design of polyolefin fibers helps to increase the bending strength and post‐cracking 
of polyolefin fibers helps to increase the bending strength and post-cracking behavior of concrete.
behavior of concrete. Samples S‐3 and S‐4 had higher fiber quantity than samples S‐1 and S‐2, and as 
behavior of concrete. Samples S‐3 and S‐4 had higher fiber quantity than samples S‐1 and S‐2, and as 
Samples S-3 and S-4 had higher fiber quantity than samples S-1 and S-2, and as a result, they showed
a result, they showed better post‐cracking behavior. 
a result, they showed better post‐cracking behavior. 
better post-cracking behavior.
In conclusion, polyolefin fibers have great influence on concrete strength and self‐compaction 
InIn conclusion, polyolefin fibers have great influence on concrete strength and self‐compaction 
conclusion, polyolefin fibers have great influence on concrete strength and self-compaction
properties.  Higher  doses 
properties.  Higher  doses  of 
of  polyolefin 
polyolefin  fibers 
fibers  provide 
provide  better 
better  flexural 
flexural  strength, 
strength,  and 
and  post‐cracking 
post‐cracking 
properties. Higher doses of polyolefin fibers provide better flexural strength, and post-cracking behavior
behavior  was 
behavior  was  also 
also  improved 
improved  by by  the 
the  addition 
addition  of 
of  fibers. 
fibers.  The 
The  compressive 
compressive  strength 
strength  of 
of  concrete 
concrete  also 
also 
was also improved by the addition of fibers. The compressive strength of concrete also decreases with the
decreases with the addition of fibers. On the other hand, the slump flow and self‐compaction factor 
decreases with the addition of fibers. On the other hand, the slump flow and self‐compaction factor 
addition of fibers. On the other hand, the slump flow and self-compaction factor of concrete decreases
with the addition of fibers. Concrete can also completely lose the self-compaction properties.
Fibers 2019, 7, 8 7 of 8

In this study, sample S-3 can be used in the construction sector where self-compacting properties,
higher bending, and compressing strength is needed. This sample showed the best results in terms of
higher bending strength and post-cracking behavior without compromising self-compaction properties.
In a previous experimental study, it was found that a 10 kg/m3 density of polyolefin fiber achieves
higher bending strength [35], and in this study, sample S-4, with the fiber density of 9 kg/m3 , achieved
higher bending strength while compromising self-compaction properties and a small amount of
compressive strength.

Author Contributions: This paper consists of a combination of efforts from four authors: S.K.A., Z.R., A.B., and
V.J. Preparation of samples, experimental work, analysis of data, and drafting of the manuscript were done jointly.
Funding: This research and the APC was funded by Kaunas University of technology.
Acknowledgments: All the materials and support for tests were received from the Faculty of Civil Engineering
and Architecture, Kaunas University of Technology, Kaunas LT-44249, Lithuania. We are grateful to acknowledge
their support for their contribution and help.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References
1. Okamura, H.; Ouchi, M. Self-compacting concrete. J. Adv. Concr. Technol. 2003, 1, 5–15. [CrossRef]
2. D’aloia, L.; Schwartzentruber, R.; Roy, L.; Cordin, J. Rheological behaviour of fresh cement pastes formulated
from a self-compacting concrete (SCC). Cem. Concr. Res. 2006, 36, 1203–1213.
3. Nagamoto, N.; Ozawa, K. Mixture properties of self-compacting, high-performance Concrete. In Proceedings
of the Third CANMET/ACI International Conferences on Design and MATERIALS and Recent Advances in
Concrete Technology, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2–5 December 1997; pp. 623–637.
4. Davis, R.E. Pozzolanic Materials with Special Reference to Their Use in Concrete Pipe; Technical Memorandum;
American Concrete Pipe Association: Irving, TX, USA, 1954; pp. 14–15.
5. Goud, V.; Soni, N.; Varma, G.; Kushwah, K.; Chaurasia, S.; Sharma, V. Partial replacement of cement with fly
ash in concrete and its effect. IOSR J. Eng. 2016, 6, 69–75.
6. Banthia, N.; Gupta, R. Influence of polypropylene fiber geometry on plastic shrinkage cracking in concrete.
Cem. Concr. Res. 2006, 36, 1263–1267. [CrossRef]
7. Shah, S.; Rangan, B. Fiber reinforced concrete properties. J. Am. Concr. Inst. 1971, 68, 126–135.
8. Brandt, A.M. Fibre reinforced cement-based (FRC) composites after over 40 years of development in building
and civil engineering. Compos. Struct. 2008, 86, 3–9. [CrossRef]
9. Ivorra, S.; Garcés, P.; Catalá, G.; Andión, L.G.; Zornoza, E. Effect of silica fume particle size on mechanical
properties of short carbon fiber reinforced concrete. Mater. Des. 2010, 31, 1553–1558. [CrossRef]
10. Błaszczyński, T.; Przybylska-Fałek, M. Steel fibre reinforced concrete as a structural material. Procedia Eng.
2015, 122, 282–289. [CrossRef]
11. Nehme, S.G.; László, R.; El Mir, A. Mechanical performance of steel fiber reinforced self-compacting concrete
in panels. Procedia Eng. 2017, 196, 90–96. [CrossRef]
12. Nilforoush, R.; Nilsson, M.; Elfgren, L. Experimental evaluation of tensile behaviour of single cast-in-place
anchor bolts in plain and steel fibre-reinforced normal- and high-strength concrete. Eng. Struct. 2017, 147,
195–206. [CrossRef]
13. Pajaka,
˛ M.; Ponikiewski, T. Investigation on concrete reinforced with two types of hooked fibers under
flexure. Procedia Eng. 2017, 193, 128–135. [CrossRef]
14. Raczkiewicz, W. The effect of micro-reinforcement steel fibers addition on the size of the shrinkage of
concrete and corrosion process of the main reinforcement bars. Procedia Eng. 2017, 195, 155–162. [CrossRef]
15. Aylie, H.; Okiyarta, A.W. Experimental study of steel-fiber reinforced concrete beams with confinement.
Procedia Eng. 2015, 125, 1030–1035. [CrossRef]
16. Alizade, E.; Jandaghi, A.F.; Zabihi, S. Effect of steel fiber corrosion on mechanical properties of steel fiber
reinforced concrete. Asian J. Civ. Eng. 2016, 17, 147–158.
17. Berrocal, C.G.; Lundgren, K.; Löfgren, I. Influence of steel fibers on corrosion of reinforcement in concrete in
chloride environments: A review. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference Fibre Concrete 2013,
Prague, Czech Republic, 12–13 September 2013.
Fibers 2019, 7, 8 8 of 8

18. Anandan, S.; Manoharan, S.V.; Sengottian, T. Corrosion effects on the strength properties of steel fibre
reinforced concrete containing slag and corrosion inhibitor. Int. J. Corros. 2014, 2014, 595040. [CrossRef]
19. Granju, J.L.; Balouch, S.U. Corrosion of steel fiber reinforced concrete from the cracks. Cem. Concr. Res. 2005,
35, 572–577. [CrossRef]
20. Mihashi, H.; Ahmed, S.F.U.; Kobayakawa, A. Corrosion of reinforcement steel in steel fiber reinforced
concrete structures. J. Adv. Concr. Tech. 2011, 9, 159–167. [CrossRef]
21. Bagherzadeh, R.; Pakravan, H.R.; Sadeghi, A.; Latifi, M.; Merati, A.A. An investigation on adding polypropylene
fibers to reinforce lightweight cement composites. J. Eng. Fibers Fabr. 2012, 7, 13–19. [CrossRef]
22. Tagnit, A.; Vanhove, Y.; Petrov, N. Microstructural analysis of the bond mechanism between polyolefin fibers
and cement pastes. Cem. Concr. Res. 2005, 35, 364370.
23. Neeley, B.D.; O’Neil, E.F. Polyolefin fiber reinforced concrete. In Proceedings of the Materials Engineering
Conference: Materials for the New Millennium, Washington, DC, USA, 10–14 November 1996; Volume 1,
pp. 113–122.
24. Lin, W.; Cheng, A. Effect of polyolefin fibers and supplementary cementitious materials on corrosion behavior
of cement-based composites. J. Inorg. Organomet. Polym. 2013, 23, 888–896. [CrossRef]
25. Mindess, S.; Wang, N.; Rich, L.D.; Morgan, D.R. Impact resistance of polyolefin fiber reinforced precast units.
Cem. Concr. Compos. 1998, 20, 387–392. [CrossRef]
26. Wan Ibrahim, M.H.; Jamaludin, N.; Irwan, J.M.; Ramadhansyah, P.J.; Suraya Hani, A. Compressive and
flexural strength of foamed concrete containing polyolefin fibers. Adv. Mater. Res. 2014, 91, 489–493.
[CrossRef]
27. Maruthachalam, D.; Padmanaban, I.; Vishnuram, B.G. Influence of polyolefin macro-monofilament fibre on
mechanical properties of high-performance concrete. Ksce J. Civ. Eng. 2013, 17, 1682–1689. [CrossRef]
28. Cement. Composition, Specifications and Conformity Criteria for Common Cements; BS EN 197-1:2011; BSI: London,
UK, 2011.
29. MasterGlenium®SKY 8700, BASF New generation superplasticising admixture for extended slump retention.
Technical data sheet. Available online: https://assets.master-builders-solutions.basf.com/shared%20documents/
pdf/english%20(australia)/basf-masterglenium-sky-8700-tds.pdf (accessed on 20 November 2018).
30. Testing Fresh Concrete, Part 2: Slump-Test; BS EN 12350-2; BSI: London, UK, 2009.
31. Methods of Testing Cement. Part 1: Determination of Strength; BS EN 196-1:2016; BSI: London, UK, 2016;
ISBN 9780580845802.
32. Feng, J.; Sun, J.; Yan, P. The influence of ground fly ash on cement hydration and mechanical property of
mortar. Adv. Civ. Eng. 2018, 2018, 4023178. [CrossRef]
33. Saha, A.K. Effect of class F fly ash on the durability properties of concrete. Sustain. Environ. Res. 2018, 28,
25–31. [CrossRef]
34. Test Method for Metallic Fibre Concrete Measuring the Flexural Tensile Strength (Limit of Proportionality (LOP),
Residual); BS EN 14651:2005+A1:2007; BSI: London, UK, 2005.
35. Adhikary, S.K.; Rudzionis, Z. Behavior of concrete under the addition of high volume of polyolefin macro
fiber and fly ash. Fibers 2018, 6, 38. [CrossRef]
36. Rizzuti, L.; Bencardino, F. Effects of Fibre Volume Fraction on the Compressive and Flexural Experimental
Behaviour of SFRC. Contemp. Eng. Sci. 2014, 7, 379–390. [CrossRef]
37. Bencardino, F.; Rizzuti, L.; Spadea, G.; Swamy, R.N. Implications of test methodology on postcracking and
fracture behavior of Steel Fibre Reinforced Concrete. Composites Part B 2013, 46, 31–38. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).