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

net/publication/285897402

Mechanical behaviour of HPC and UHPC in direct tension at high temperature

and after cooling

Article · September 2000

CITATIONS READS

22 1,209

4 authors, including:

Roberto Felicetti Pietro G. Gambarova

Politecnico di Milano Politecnico di Milano
92 PUBLICATIONS   927 CITATIONS    86 PUBLICATIONS   1,861 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Severe spalling in concrete exposed to fire View project

Fire damage assessment in concrete structures View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Roberto Felicetti on 10 January 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Mechanical behaviour of HPC and UHPC in direct tension at high
temperature and after cooling
Roberto Felicetti, Pietro G.Gambarova and MariaPia Natali Sora
Milan University of Technology, Milan, Italy

Gabriel A.Khoury
Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, London, U.K.

Abstract

The mechanical behaviour in direct tension of one high-performance concrete (HPC, fc ≈

90 MPa) and two ultra high-performance concretes containing steel fibres (UHPC, fc ≈
160 MPa) is reported for different temperature levels up to 600°C. The properties
(tensile strength, strain at peak stress, Young’s modulus and fracture energy) were
determined “hot” at temperature (never previously undertaken in direct tension) and
“residual”, after cooling. The “hot” and “residual” tensile strengths were quite similar,
particularly for the HPC. The UHPCs with steel fibres were less sensitive to temperature
then the HPC, in terms of strength, but more sensitive in terms of stiffness and fracture
energy. The results were also influenced by the test method.

1. Introduction

The mechanical behaviour of HPC and UHPC subject to severe thermal loading is
generating interest, since the strength and durability of these materials make them
promising for such important and temperature-sensitive structures, as primary and
secondary containment shells (in nuclear power plants), waste burning plants and coal-
gasification reactors, not to speak of tunnel liners, runway slabs, bridge and high-rise
buildings, where fire situations cannot be ruled out.

While the high-temperature characteristics of ordinary and – to a lesser extent – high-

performance concrete are well known [1-6, 8-10], scant attention has been devoted so far
to UHPC, like CRC (Compact fibre-Reinforced Concrete), DSP (Densified with Small
Particles) and RPC (Reactive-Powder Cementitious mortar, see for instance [7, 11, 12]),

Felicetti R., Gambarova P.G., Natali Sora M.P. and Khoury G.A (2000),
"Mechanical behaviour of HPC and UHPC in direct tension at high temperature
and after cooling", Proc. 5th Symposium on Fibre-Reinforced Concrete BEFIB
2000, Lyon (France), September 13-15, p. 749-758.
in spite of the fact that the fibre reinforcement (either polymeric or metallic), often used
in these materials, favourably influences their high-temperature behaviour. The very few
data available in direct tension are for concrete tested after cooling [12], and until this
work no test results have been available on the behaviour of “hot” concrete in direct
tension.

The need for information on the high-temperature mechanical behaviour of UHPC

subject to direct tension, and the interest of a comparison with HPC was the driving
force behind this research project, which had also a third objective, namely, the
assessment of the effects that different test methods have on specimen behaviour and test
results. This is a crucial issue in the tests, since the constitutive behaviour of the material
is often intermingled with the structural behaviour of the specimens [14].

The properties in compression and in tension of 3 special cementitious composites were

studied simultaneously in two different laboratories, at high temperature (Imperial
College, London, UK) and after a cycle at high temperature (residual properties, Milan
University of Technology, Milan, Italy). The 3 materials are (Table 1): a High-Strength
Concrete (HSC, fc = 92 MPa), a Compact fibre-Reinforced Concrete (CRC, fc = 158
MPa) and a Reactive-Powder Cementitious mortar (RPC, fc = 165 MPa).

Table 1-Mix design of the cementitious composites

HSC – High-Strength Concrete (fc = 92 MPa) Content (kg/ m3)
Cement (C) - Silica fume (SF) 510 - 51 (10% C)
Hyposiliceous aggregate: 0-2 / 2-4 / 4-8 / 8-16 mm 173/ 346/ 259/ 951
Superplasticizer: naphthalene 14 (2.7 % C)
Water (W) - W/C – W / C+SF 163 - 0.32 - 0.29
CRC – Compact fibre-Reinforced Concrete (fc =158 MPa) Content (kg/ m3)
Cement (C) - Silica fume (SF) 720 - 220 (30% C)
Quartzitic sand: 0-0.25 / 0.25-1 / 1-4 mm 170/ 340/ 680
Water (W) – W / C+SF 150 - 0.16
Steel fibres l/φ =12/0.4 = 30 475 (6 % by vol.)
RPC – Reactive-Powder Cementitious mortar (fc =165 MPa) Content (kg/ m3)
Cement (C) - Silica fume (SF) 933 - 233 (25% C)
Quartzitic sand: φ < 2mm 1026
Water (W) – W / C+SF 168 - 0.14
Steel microfibres: l/φ = 16/0.16 = 100; Polymeric fibres (pp) 146 (2%); 20 (2%)

2. Thermal cycles and test set-up

The temperatures investigated in this study were limited to 600°C, since previous tests
on HPC/UHPC [7, 9, 10]) had shown that above 500-600°C a pronounced decline in
both strength and stiffness normally occurs.
T [°C] “Residual” Tests fcc
(1°C/min) CRC
600 Cooling [MPa]
in furnace 200
(-0.2°C/min) RPC
"HOT" Tests
(2°C/min)
400

100 HSC
Limit of controlled cooling
200
HSC*[9]
Room temperature
0 0
0 12 24 t [h] 36 20 105 250 400 T [°C] 600

Fig.1 – Thermal cycles. Fig.2 – Residual cubic strength.

Five temperature levels were adopted in the residual tests (20, 105, 250, 400 and 600°C)
and four in the tests at high temperature (20, 105, 300 and 500°C), as shown in Figs.1, 2.
The higher values were dictated by the dissociation of calcium hydroxide (at 450°C) and
by the shift from α-quartz to β-quartz (at 575°C). In order to limit possible thermal
stresses during the heating process, the temperature ramps were kept reasonably low
(1°C/min in Milan and 2°C/min in London). Also the cooling process was controlled
(down to 200°C at -0.2°C/min in Milan). After the heating process, the maximum
temperature of each cycle was kept constant for 2h in Milan and 1h in London. The
specimens were not dehydrated prior to being heated, and did not exhibit any spalling or
explosion during the thermal cycle.

As for the test set-up, an Instron Press fitted up with an electro-mechanical actuator
(max. load 100 kN) was used in Milan and a hydraulic press in London. All specimens
were basically notched cylinders, but those tested in Milan were simple cylinders
directly glued to the press platens (Fig.3). The tests at high temperature required the
design of special dumbbell-shaped specimens, provided with threaded formworks at the
extremities (Figs.4b and 5a). These threaded heads were then screwed into special
spherical joints (Fig. 4c), which had a threaded chuck screwed into the loading rods of
the press.

The tests carried out in Milan were fully displacement-controlled by means of 2 LVDTs
placed between the press platens at 180. The displacements astride the notch were
measured via 4 LVDTs placed at 90° (base-length 50mm), and the notch opening was
monitored via 4 clip gauges placed inside the notch (Fig.3b). The tests carried out in
London were displacement-controlled as well, and the displacement astride the notch
was transmitted by means of 3 pairs of rods at 120°, which were connected to two steel
rings embracing the specimen and placed at ± 25 mm from the notch mean plane. The
rods extended out from the bottom of the axisymmetric furnace (away from the influence
of heat), where they were connected to two other steel rings provided with 3 LVDTs at
120° for measuring the relative displacement of each couple of rods. Unfortunately, the
feedback signal in London proved unable to control the descending branch of response.
 (a) (b)
d

h t=7mm

φN

Fig.3 – “Residual” tests: (a) geometry of the cylindrical specimens; and (b) test set-up.
HSC: φN = 64 mm; CRC: φN = 64-52 mm; RPC: φN = 50 mm.

Fig.4 – “Hot” tests:

(a) (b) (c) formwork and loading
devices of dumbbell
specimens: (a, b) 1
and 2 = plexiglas
mould and pedestal; 3
= threaded steel heads;
4 and 5 = PVC sleeve
and ring-like mould
for the notch; 6 =
fastening screws; (c) 8
and 9= spherical joints
with threaded chucks;
and 7 = loading rods.
threaded
steel head
σc
fct
(I) notch

σc, εc t
Ec d (II) notch
(a) (b) (c)
εct εc
Fig.5 – (a) Side-view of a dumbbell specimen; (b) parameters of the ascending branch of
the stress strain-curve; and (c) stress-strain state at the tip of the notch, and idealised
notch shapes: (I) constant notch width, and (II) zero notch width, see section 4.
 15 HSC "hot"
3 HSC
σN I 250°C σNmax CRC "hot"

[MPa] RPC "hot"

[MPa] HSC "residual"
CRC "residual"
10
2 RPC "residual"

(a) (b)
II 5
1

0 0
0.0 0.2 w50 [mm] 0.4 0 100 200 300 400 T [°C] 600

Fig.6 – (a) Residual tests: stress-displacement curves for two different test specimen
types (I fixed-end cylinders, and II hinged dumbbell specimens); and (b) nominal direct
tensile strength (hot and residual) versus temperature (dumbbell specimens, strength
σNmax=Pmax/AN). w50=displacement measured over a 50mm base-length astride the notch.

3. Test methods
Whether fixed-end or clamped specimens are more suitable to the study of concrete
fracture in tension than hinged specimens is still a highly-debated issue, since the first
solution guarantees a more uniform strain distribution, while a more localized fracture
characterizes the second solution, which gives always lower strength-values. However,
since crack localization is usually forced by means of a notch, clamped specimens have
an edge over hinged specimens (less sensitivity to the structural behaviour of the test set-
up).

In this project, clamped specimens were adopted in Milan, with the press fitted up with 4
stiffening and adjustable rods (placed in parallel with the specimen and the load cell), in
order to guarantee the perfect parallelism of the sections astride the notch. Hinged
specimens provided with spherical joints at their extremities were tested in London, by
necessity, since the limited space inside the furnace and the relatively long rods
connecting the specimen to the press heads did not allow clamping of the specimens.

As already observed, the strength exhibited by the hinged specimens was always
markedly lower (Fig.6a), and processing their results was quite demanding, as briefly
shown later (section 4). On the other hand, the very few tests carried out in Milan on
hinged specimens (after a thermal cycle) were in very good agreement with those carried
out in London at high temperature (Fig.6b).

4. Test results and comments

The main results obtained in this project are shown in Figs.7-10. In Figs 7a, c, e the
tensile strength fct is plotted against temperature, for both the residual tests (Milan, light
symbols) and the hot-state tests (solid symbols). The full lines represent the average of
 HSC Ec HSC
12
[MPa] HOT
fct HOT
RESIDUAL 60000 RESIDUAL
[MPa]
AVERAGE AVERAGE
8
40000

4
20000
HOT
(a) (b)
0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
T [°C] T [°C]

CRC Ec CRC
12
[MPa] HOT
fct HOT
RESIDUAL 60000 RESIDUAL
[MPa]
AVERAGE AVERAGE
8
40000
HOT
HOT
4
20000

(c) (d)
0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
T [°C] T [°C]

12 RPC Ec RPC

fct HOT [MPa] HOT

HOT
RESIDUAL 60000 RESIDUAL
[MPa]
AVERAGE AVERAGE
8
40000
HOT

4
20000

(e) (f)
0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
T [°C] T [°C]
Fig.7 – Plots of the tensile strength (a, c, e) and of the secant elastic modulus (b, d, f).
Each symbol represents the average of 2-4 tests.
 HSC CRC RPC
6 12 12
σc 20°C σc 20°C σc 20°C

105°C 105°C 105°C

4 8 8
300°C
300°C 300°C
500°C
2 4 500°C 4
500°C
(a) (b) (c)
0 0 0
εc 0.001 εc 0.001 εc 0.001
Fig.8 – Stress-strain curves (ascending branches, hot state).

all tests, while the thin lines refer only to the hot-state tests (London). The residual and
hot tensile strengths of the HSC (Fig. 7a) are very similar for all test temperatures,
suggesting that the thermal damage at high temperature is mostly irreversible for that
material. However, the residual tensile strength of the CRC appears to be higher then the
hot strength (Fig. 7c), while the results for the RPC appears closer (Fig. 7e). The secant
Young’s modulus was generally some what higher in the residual tests than in the hot
tests (Fig. 7b, d, f). The modulus is even more affected by temperature than the tensile
strength, as already observed in previous tests in tension (residual) [9,10] and in
compression (hot and residual) [7]. The ascending branches of the σ - ε curves (hot state)
are shown in Fig.8. It is worth noting that the exposure to 500°C reduces dramatically
the strength of the HSC (- 80%, Fig.8a), while the metallic microfibres seem to limit the
loss of strength (- 60% in the CRC, Fig. 8b; - 55% in the RPC, Fig. 8c).

The full σ - ε curves, softening included, were measured in the residual tests (Milan
[12]), and the plots of the fracture energy are shown in Fig. 9. As observed in [12], the
fracture energy of the HSC is hardly affected by the temperature, while both the CRC
and RPC exhibit an energy increase up to 250°C and a decrease at higher temperatures.
A possible explanation of such a decrease may be found in the loss of bond between the
steel fibres and the cementitious matrix.

In order to remove the influence of the structural effects produced by the notch upon the
ascending branch of the stress-strain curves, the stress was evaluated at the tip of the
notch (Fig.5c), considering the concrete as an elastic-non linear material, and applying
the well-known Neuber’s approach [13], which is based on the concept of stress
concentration. The strain εct (which is associated with the stress fct) was evaluated at the
tip of the notch by assuming the strain distribution shown in the insert of Fig. 10a. This
distribution is intended to give a simplified representation of the strains in the zone
closest to the notch and having a length equal to the base-length of the LVDTs astride
the notch (50mm). In the case of dumbbell specimens, the rotations astride the notch
were not controlled and did not tend to zero (contrary to what occurs in a fixed-end
specimen).Therefore the contribution of these rotations to stress and strain concentration
 σc
20
Gf
[N/mm] Gf (CRC)
15

0 10
(b)
Gf (a) Gf (RPC)

5
10⋅ Gf (HSC)
Gf
0
w [mm] 20 105 250 400 T [°C] 600
Fig.9 – (a) Fracture energy (Gf) and energy dissipated in the solid concrete (G0f); and
(b) fracture energy after cooling down to room temperature (residual behaviour).

HSC CRC
2 2
εct εc
HOT

εct
HOT
RES
50mm

RES
5mm

[10 3] [10 3]

1 1

(a) (b)

0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
T [°C] T [°C]
RPC HOT-RESIDUAL
2 2 AVERAGE
εct εct
HOT
RES HSC

[10 3] [10 3] CRC

RPC

1 1
(c) (d)

0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
T [°C] T [°C]
Fig.10 – Plots of the strain corresponding to fct , for both hot-state and residual tests
(a,b,c); and average curves (d).
at the notch tip had to be calculated, in order to work out the σ-ε curves (Fig.8), and to
make comparisons with the results concerning the fixed-end specimens (Fig.7).

As for the Young’s modulus, in order to take into account the notch effects, two
idealized notch shapes were considered (Fig.5c, I and II), and the values plotted in
Figs.7b, d, f are the average of those obtained with the two idealizations. Finally, in Fig.
10 the strain at the stress peak is plotted versus the temperature: the 3 materials are softer
at high temperature than after cooling, but beyond 300°C both the CRC and RPC
roughly exhibit the same deformations at the peak stress, at high temperature and after a
thermal cycle.

5. Concluding remarks

This study involving two fibre-reinforced UHPCs (one CRC, vf = 6%, steel microfibres,
and one RPC, vf = 2+2%, steel and polypropylene fibres) and one reference HPC/HSC
shows that at high temperature and after cooling the direct tensile strengths are close,
particularly for the HSC and RPC but less so for the CRC, while the Young’s modulus
appears to be lower in the hot state for all three concretes. Furthermore, the steel fibres
enable both the CRC and RPC to retain up to 50% of their original strength even after
being exposed to 500-600°C, while the HSC loses 2/3 of its original strength.

The stress-strain relationship in tension tends to flatten-off at high temperature, with the
HSC and CRC exhibiting a definitely elastic-plastic behaviour (T ≥ 300°C). For T ≥
250÷300°C the strains at the peak stress are almost the same at high temperature and
after cooling, but at lower temperatures the hot-state behaviour tends to be softer.

As for the fracture energy (which was measured only in the residual tests), both the CRC
and RPC exhibit a more or less strong increase up to 250-300°C, followed by a decrease,
quite steep in the CRC (which contains more steel fibres). In contrast, the much lower
fracture energy of the HSC is hardly affected by the temperature.

Last but not least, the test methods play a significant role in the evaluation of the tensile
strength, since hinged specimens lead to an under-evaluation of the strength, which is
definitely higher in fixed-end specimens, owing to the much better control of crack
localization that the latter specimens guarantee in the notched section.

6. Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support of the European Communities
within the Project Brite-Euram HITECO III on the mechanical behaviour of HPC at high
temperature. The extension to the residual behaviour after a thermal cycle was financed
partly by ENEA-Italian Nat. Agency for Energy, New Technologies and Environmental
Issues, and partly by the Italian Ministry of Higher Education and Research-MURST
(Project “Safety of HPC Structures”, 1997-98).
 References
1. Schneider U. (Editor , 1985) , “Behaviour of Concrete at High Temperatures” ,
R I L E M Committee 44-PHT, Kassel University, Kassel (Germany), 122 pp.
2. Khoury G., Grainger B.N. and Sullivan P. (1985), “Transient thermal strain of
concrete: literature review, conditions within specimen and behaviour of individual
constituents”, Magazine of Concrete Research, Vol. 37, No. 132, pp. 131-144.
3. Diederichs U., Jumppanen U.M. and Penttala V. (1989), “Behaviour of HSC at High
Temperatures”, Rep.No.92, Helsinki Univ. of Technology, Helsinki (Finland), 76pp.
4. Jahren P.A. (1989), “Fire Resistance of High-Strength / Dense Concrete with
Particular Reference to the Use of Condensed Silica Fume”, Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. –
Trondheim (Norway), pp. 1013-1049.
5. Chan S.Y.N. , Peng G. and Chan J.K.W. (1996), “Comparison between high-
strength concrete and normal-strength concrete subjected to high temperature”,
Materials and Structures, V.29, No.12, pp. 616-619.
6. Bazant Z.P. and Kaplan M.F. (1996), “Concrete at High Temperatures”, Concrete
Design and Construction Series, Ed. by F.K. Kong and R.H. Evans, Longman Group
Ltd., 412 pp.
7. Khoury G. and Algar S. (1998), ”Advanced mechanical characterisation of HPC and
UHPC concretes at high temperatures”, Proc. Int. Workshop on “Durable Concrete
Structures”, Weimar (Germany), pp. 267-282.
8. Phan L.T. and Carino N.J. (1998), “Review of Mechanical Properties of HSC at
Elevated Temperature”, ASCE – Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, V.10,
No.1, pp. 58-64.
9. Felicetti R. and Gambarova P.G. (1998), “Effects of High Temperature on the
Residual Compressive Strength of High-Strength Siliceous Concretes”, ACI –
Materials Journal, V.95, No.4, pp. 395-406.
10. Felicetti R. and Gambarova P.G. (1998), “On the Residual Tensile Properties of
High-Performance Siliceous Concrete Exposed to High Temperature”, in
“Mechanics of Quasi-Brittle Materials and Structures” , Ed. by G. Pijaudier-Cabot,
Z. Bittnar and B. Gérard, Publ. by HERMES (Paris), pp. 167-186.
11. Khoury G.A., Majorana C., Schrefler B., Kalifa P., Aarup B., Giannuzzi G. and
Corsi F. (1999), “Scientific summary of the HITECO research BRITE programme”,
ACI Int. Conf. on “State-of-the-art in high-performance concrete”,Chicago, in press.
12. Felicetti R., Gambarova P.G., Natali Sora M.P., Corsi F. and Giannuzzi G. (1999),
“On Tension and Fracture in Thermally-Damaged High-Performance Concrete:
VHSC versus HSC”, Proc. of HPFRCC’99, Ed. by A. E. Naaman and H.W.
Reinhardt, Mainz (Germany), pp. 437-448.
13. Rosati G.P., Schumm C.E. and Ferrara G. (1994), “Evaluation of an Objective
Stress-C.O.D. Relationship for Cracked Concrete under Tension”, Proc. Europe-
U.S. Workshop on “Fracture and Damage in Quasi-Brittle Structures”, Ed. by Z.P.
Bazant et al., Publ. by E and Spoon, Noorwijk (The Netherlands), pp. 533-542.
14. Cattaneo S., Rosati G.P. (1999), “Effect of different boundary conditions in direct
tensile tests: experimental results”, Magazine of Concrete Research, V.51, No.5,
pp.365-374.

View publication stats