ACI STRUCTURAL JOURNAL TECHNICAL PAPER

Title no. 86-S29

Strength Evaluation of Shotcrete·Repaired Beams

by Mohamed A. H. Abdei-Halim and H. Schorn

Twelve reinforced concrete beams were tested to failure. Two of the reinforcement corrosion, delamination, degradation of
beams were unrepaired original beams, jive beams were repaired by strength, and eventual failure of the member.
removing the bottom layer to a depth equal to 35 mm, and the last
jive were repaired by removing the cover concrete to 20 mm. Normal
The most widely used technique in repairing dam-
shotcrete and polymer-portland cement-shotcrete were used in re- aged concrete members is to remove the depth of the
pairing the beams. The repaired beams were compared to the original concrete affected by spalling and replace it with shot-
beams wiih respect to cracking, deflection, ultimate strength, and crete layers. Although numerous structures have been
mode of failure. Testing has shown that the shotcrete layers and par- repaired in this manner during the last decade, limited
ent concrete remained bonded and acted together throughout loading
until failure. The reduction in the strength of the repaired beams was
data are available on their performance under applied
8 percent when the concrete cover (20 mm) was replaced and /2.5 loads until failure.
percent when the 35-mm layer was replaced. The purpose of this investigation is to study the
overall behavior of shotcrete-repaired beams and to de-
termine whether the bond between the parent concrete
Keywords: beams (supports); cracking (fracturing); deflection; performance; and shotcrete layers is sufficient to develop full com-
reinforced concrete; repairs; shotcrete; strength; tests.
posite behavior under applied load. The repaired beams
are compared to the original ones with respect to
Bottom layers of concrete girders and slabs in bridges cracking, deflection, mode of failure, and ultimate
and other structures show cracking, heavy deteriora- strength.
tion, and reinforcing-bar corrosion. These problems
often occur in the tension zone, where cracking can oc-
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
cur due to static overload, impact and dynamic load,
Test beams
shrinkage, creep, or thermal gradients. Major cracks
To study the strength and behavior of shotcrete-re-
are aesthetically unpleasant and affect the durability of
paired beams, 12 beams were tested to failure. The de-
concrete. The provisions of ACI 318-83 are intended to
tails of the test beams are shown in Table 1 and Fig. l.
limit crack widths to 0.33 mm (0.013 in.) for exterior
The beams were divided into three groups. Group Bl
exposure. Wider cracks may lead to intrusion and salts,
consisted of two unrepaired beams; Group B2 con-
sisted of five beams - two were repaired using normal
Table 1 - Details of test beams shotcrete and the other three using polymer-portland
cement-shotcrete; and Group B3 consisted of five
Beam Beam Kind of Tension Compression
groups no. shotcrete reinforcement reinforcement beams - three were repaired using normal shotcrete
Bl.l 6-10 mm dia. 4-8 mm dia.
and the other two using polymer-portland cement-shot-
Bl -
B1.2 6-10 mm dia. 4-8 mm dia. crete. The thickness of the shotcrete was 35 mm in
B2.1 NC Normal 6-10 mm dia. 4-8 mm dia. Group B2 and 20 mm in Group B3, as shown in Fig. l.
B2NC B2.2 NC shotcrete 6-10 mm dia. 4-8 mm dia. All beams were designed so that a bending failure
B2.3 PPC 6-10 mm dia. 4-8 mm dia. would occur at ultimate due to the applied loads
B2 PPC B2.4 PPC Polymer-portland 6-10 mm dia. 4-8 mm dia.
B2.5 PPC
cement-shotcrete
6-10 mm dia. 4-8 mm dia. shown.
B3.1 NC Normal 6-10 mm dia. 4-8 mm dia.
B3 NC B3.2 NC 6-10 mm dia. 4-8 mm dia.
B3.3 NC shotcrete
6-10 mm dia. 4-8 mm dia. ACI Structural Journal, V. 86, No. 3, May-June 1989.
Received Dec. 29, 1987, and reviewed under Institute publication policies.
B3.4 PC Polymer-portland 6-10 mm dia. 4-8 mm dia. Copyright © 1989, American Concrete Institute. All rights reserved, including
B3 PPC B3.5 PPC cement-shotcrete the making of copies unless permission is obtained from the copyright propri-
6-10 mm dia. 4-8 mm dia.
etors. Pertinent discussion will be published in the March-April 1990 ACI
I mm ~ 25.4 in. Structural Journal if received by Nov. I, 1989.

272 ACI Structural Journal I May-June 1989


AC! member Mohamed A. H. Abdei-Halim is an assistant professor of civil
engineering at Jordan University of Science & Technology, Jordan. Dr. Abdei-
Halim has been involved in research in polymers in concrete, segmental bridges,
and finite element analysis of concrete structures. He is Vice President of the
ACI Jordan Chapter. Dr. Abdei-Halim is a graduate of Pennsylvania State
University, University Park, Pennsylvania.
H. Schorn, Doktor-lngenieur, is a professor of materia/technology, Ruhr-Uni-
versity, Bochum, West Germany. Professor Schorn is specialized in fibrous and
polymer-modified concrete and in computer simulation of material behavior.
Material properties
All the beams were manufactured using the same
concrete mix. The water-cement ratio was 0.50, and the
aggregate was well graded and of maximum size [16
mm (Ys in.)]. Regular deformed bars with a yield
strength of 420 N/mm 2 (60,900 psi) were used in all the
test beams.
Concrete cylinders of 150 x 300 mm (6 x 12 in.) di-
ameter were taken from the concrete mix to measure
the ultimate compressive strength, the splitting tensile
strength, the modulus of elasticity, and Poisson's ratio
for the concrete. The cylinders were tested 1 to 2 days
before testing the beams. The average compressive
strength of concrete was 61.2 N/mm 2 (8870 psi), the
splitting tensile strength was 5 N/mm 2 (725 psi), the
modulus of elasticity was 38,900 N/mm 2 (5,642,000
psi), and the Poisson's ratio was 0.21.

Bl 12-8mm0
4-8mmi!l

~1
12-8mm0

c
I SOOmm I 7 SOmm
L 6-10mm0

lSOOmm
4000mm
'i
7500mm I SOOmm
~~~I I. G .I
I
~T
SOOmm
4-8mm0
6-10mm0

B2 ~ !2-Bmm0

~~~==~:::;;J~::J ~I~!t ~ 4-8mm0

6-10mm0

I SOOmm

B3 4 8 0 12-8mm0 12-8mm0

~iii¥_~~I:;;e=::::C::;;;-t=···!~I~~7>~ ~!+
~ Shotcrete ~
4-8mm0
6-10mm0

6 -lOmm\l SOOmm

Elevations Cross Sections

Fig. 1 -Details of test beams

'a) Tt?st1n~ Apparatus

Tlt:>vation Independent St.-t'l BP.A.ms I /

fh~am' ~~upport
Sid!! View

1, 7, .•. , 6 Strain r.agtos

7 .8. 9 ,10 Strain •rransducers

b) Bt<am !<cady 1 or

Teosting

Fig. 2 - Test setup of beams

ACI Structural Journal I May-June 1989 273
 100
Instrumentation and testing procedure
The test setup is shown in Fig. 2. The load was ap-
plied by a 300 kN hydraulic jack. The vertical deflec-
tions of the beams were measured by linear variable
differential transducers (L VDTs). The longitudinal
strains were measured using 150 mm, double grid, elec-
trical resistance strain gages. This was done using six
electrical resistance strain gages, three on every side of
the beam, as shown in Fig. 2. In addition, two strain
transducers (inductive system) were mounted on every
side of the beam to measure strains at ultimate. The
20 output of the L VDTs, electrical strain gages, and strain
10
transducers were processed using a data-acquisition
system and computer system with floppy disks. A line
l.O eo 120 160 200 21.0
printer was connected to the computer to obtain a hard
Defl€'ction (mm)
copy printout for all the measurement data.
The load was applied in increments. After each load
Fig. 3 - Load-midspan deflection curve for beams of
Group BJ (unrepaired beams) increment, development of cracks was marked, and the
widths of the major cracks were measured by a hand
microscope with an accuracy of ± 0.01 mm. Loading
was continued up to failure. Ultimate load was gov-
100
erned by crushing of the concrete after the tensile steel
90 had yielded and gone beyond into the strain hardening
range. There was no bond failure between the shotcrete
layer and the parent concrete in the repaired beams.

~ ~82 NC

PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF TEST

RESULTS
~
.3 40 Deflection behavior
The load versus maximum deflection curves of the
original and repaired beams are shown in Fig. 3
20 through 5. Each curve represents the average deflec-
10
tions of two or three test beams. To compare the de-
flection behavior of the different beams, all the curves
<.0 80 120 160 200 21.0 were plotted, as shown in Fig. 6. This figure shows that
Deflect ion (mm)
the repaired beams have the same deflections as the
original beams up to the first yielding of the steel. For
Fig. 4 - Load-midspan deflection curves for beams of
Group B2 NC and B2PPC loading stages higher than the first yielding, the re-
paired beams deflected more than the original ones. No
difference is noticed in the load-deflection curves of the
beams repaired by normal shotcrete and the similar
100
ones repaired by polymer-portland cement-shotcrete.
90

Ultimate strength, deflection, and compressive

70
strains
----<-o---o-- Bl NC The maximum observed loads, deflections, and com-
pressive strains for all the beams are shown in Table 2.
50 - - 6 - - --t.--- 83 PPC

40

30
Table 2 - Observed loads, deflections, and
strains at ultimate
20 Maximum
Cracking Maximum Maximum compressive Ratio of repaired
10 Age, load, load, deflection, strain, to original beams
Beam years kN kN mm mm/mm maximum load
Bl 3.75 21 94.7 182 0.00330 1.00
80 120 160 200 21.0 B2 NC 3.75 20 82.2 176 0.00358 0.87
B2 PPC 3.75 23.3 83.0 204 0.00424 0.88
Deflection (mm)
B3 NC 3.75 23.3 87.1 232 0.00385 0.92
B3 PPC 3.75 19.0 87.3 216 0.00367 0.92
Fig. 5 - Load-midspan deflection for beams of Group
BJ NC and BJPPC I kN = 0.225 k>p; I mm = 25.4 m.

274 ACI Structural Journal I May-June 1989

 10 0

90
.... a) Beall! 3.1 NC
80

70
- - - Original beams Bl
60
-·· _ Repaired beams 83 PPC

so -· _ Repaired beams 81 Nc

- · - - - - - · · Repaired beams B2 NC and B2 PPC

40
II ( I I Ill Tr !l I )) ) [\ IJ ( {/ I I
30
.... I

b) Beam 3,2 NC

20 Fig. 7- Typical crack patterns

10
90

40 80 120 160 200 240

Deflection (mm) 80

Fig. 6 - Load-midspan deflection curves for all of the 70

beams
z 50 B2 PPC
:::
.,
~ 50

.
0

The repaired beams failed at a lower load than the .,

40
original beams. The percentage decrease ranges from 8 Q.
Q.

percent for Beams B3 to 12.5 percent for Beams B2. <

30
The maximum deflections of the repaired beams were
more than the maximum deflections of the original 20
ones. The percentage increase was 4 percent for Beams
10
B2 and 23 percent for Beams B3.
The maximum compression strains recorded for the
repaired beams were larger than the ones recorded for 0-04 008 0-12 0-16 0-20

the original beams. The average maximum compressive Crac-k width (tnm)

strains were 0.00330 for original beams, 0.00391 for

Fig. 8 - Crack width of beams
beams of Group B2, and 0.00376 for beams of Group
B3.

Cracking and modes of failure

The cracking patterns of the repaired beams were
similar to the original beams. A typical cracking pat-
tern at failure in one of the beams is shown in Fig. 7.
The load versus crack width curves of the beams are
shown in Fig. 8. It was observed that the cracks in the
repaired beams were wider than those in the original
beams at all stages of loading.
The shotcrete layers and the parent concrete re-
mained bonded throughout loading until failure. A
closeup for the mode of failure at ultimate for one of
the beams is shown in Fig. 9.

CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions can be drawn from this
experimental investigation:
1. Repair of cracked tension zones by removing the
depth of the concrete affected by cracking and replac-
ing it by shotcrete layers is a successful technique.
2. The reduction in the strength of the repaired
beams was 8 percent when the concrete cover (20 mm)
was replaced and 12.5 percent when the 35-mm layer
was replaced. Fig. 9 - Mode of failure for one of the beams
ACI Structural Journal I May-June 1989 275
 3. The maximum crack widths in the repaired beams CONVERSION FACTORS
were larger than those in the original beams at all stages lmm 0.03937 in.
of loading. lm 3.281 ft
I MN 224.8 X 10' Jbf
4. The cracking patterns and the modes of failure for I MN.m 736.6 X 103 ft-lb
the repaired beams were similar to those for the origi- I MPa 145.0 psi
nal beams.
5. Normal shotcrete as well as polymer-portland ce- REFERENCES
I. ACI Committee 318, "Building Code Requirements for Rein-
ment-concrete can be used for repairing such cracked
forced Concrete (ACI 318-83)," American Concrete Institute, De-
zones. No difference was noticed in the behavior of troit, 1983, Ill pp.
beams repaired by different types of shotcrete. 2. Abdel-Halim, Mohamed A. H., and McClure, Richard M.,
6. The shotcrete layers and the parent concrete re- "Flexural Behavior of Reinforced Polymer-Portland Cement Con-
mained bonded and acted compositely throughout crete Beams," Polymer Concrete: Uses, Materials, and Properties,
SP-89, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 1985, pp. 105-126.
loading until failure.
3. Mansur, M.A., and Ong, K. C. G., "Epoxy-Repaired Beams,"
Concrete International: Design & Construction, V. 7, No. 10, Oct.
1985, pp. 46-50.
4. ACI Committee 506, "Recommended Practice for Shotcreting
(ACI 506-66) (Reaffirmed 1978)," American Concrete Institute, De-
troit, 1966, 26 pp.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 5. Chung, H. W., "Epoxy-Repaired Reinforced Concrete Beams,"
The experimental work of this investigation was carried out in the ACI JOURNAL, Proceedings V. 72, No.5, May 1975, pp. 233-234.
structural laboratory of the Civil Engineering Department, Ruhr- 6. Chung, H. W., and Lui, L. M., "Epoxy-Repaired Concrete
Universitat Bochum, The Federal Republic of Germany. The assis- Joints," ACI JoURNAL, Proceedings V. 74, No. 6, June 1977, pp.
tance of Dip!.- Ing. Regina Stratmann and Messrs. Dreir Jurgen and 264-267.
Schulte Erhard in conducting the tests is gratefully acknowledged. 7. Chung, H. W., and Lui, L. M., "Epoxy-Repaired Concrete
Thanks are extended to the personnel of the Pressbau Company for Joints Under Dynamic Loads," ACI JoURNAL, Proceedings V. 75,
manufacturing the beams and shotcreting. No.7, July 1978, pp. 313-316.

276 ACI Structural Journal I May-June 1989